Revenge in Conference Tourney Games

We are in a unique part of the college basketball season – conference tournament time. The motivation of teams can vary at this time of the year. Teams "on the bubble" for an NCAA tournament bid are usually very focused, and so are teams with good chemistry that have no chance to make the NCAA field unless they win their conference tournament.

Such is not always the case for the best of the best teams, for whom a spot in the NCAA tourney is a foregone conclusion. Coaches of some of those teams often view the conference tourney as a nuisance, whose major purpose is to generate more money for the league (and, of course, they're right). Those coaches might not place a great imperative on their league tourney games. Many might use them primarily as dry runs to gain experience for their players in preparation for the upcoming pressure of the NCAA tournament. Some coaches of also-ran teams use the conference postseason affairs to develop experience for their young teams for next year. And there are always a few downtrodden, bottom-of-the-barrel teams who are just happy to have the season over, especially if they have internal chemistry problems.

Moreover, there has been a recent change in many conference regular-season schedules, especially for the several mega-leagues, whose great number of teams does not permit the traditional round-robin schedule that was long familiar in leagues with six to 10 teams. Many leagues no longer have the home-and-home regular-season series between each team as they did in years past. The result is that the conference tournament meeting between two teams might be the first, or only the second, meeting between two teams in the same league that season.

"So what?" you might ask. And that's a fair question at this stage.

The "what" is this:

Revenge is always a motivating factor to be considered in sports wagering. So, let's take a look at revenge in conference tournament games. Over the last three years, teams seeking revenge for a regular-season loss to an opponent were 217-213-10 versus the pointspread in subsequent conference tourney games at the end of the season. That's not much of an edge, if any.

Maybe it's not on the face of it, but – as usual in sports betting – handicappers must dig a little beneath the surface to find the advantage against the oddsmakers. And, once again, that is true with revenge games in conference tourney play.

Conference tourney underdogs that lost both regular-season meetings to a foe were 77-81-3 versus the spread in the tourney revenge game the last three years – no edge.

Conference tourney underdogs that lost the only regular-season meeting were 71-86-5 versus the spread (the last three years) – a slight tendency for the favorite to cover the tourney rematch.

Conference tourney favorites that lost both regular-season meetings (these are rare) were 8-8-1 versus the spread when the third meeting occurred in the conference tourney.

Lastly, conference tourney favorites that lost the only regular-season meeting were 61-38-1 (61.2 percent) versus the spread in the conference tourney rematch. And that's where the percentages lie. Losing that lone regular-season meeting seems to leave an impression on the superior tourney team – that is – the favorite, when the only rematch is in the conference tourney. And why shouldn't it? Many times, that single-meeting loss was on the road at the other team's building. Players tend to remember that.

Many of the teams that lost the single contest never got a chance for a rematch on their home floor. They're eager for a little revenge, and the conference tourney meeting is going to be the only chance they get for it (unless the two teams happen to meet again in the NCAA or NIT tournament).

As is the case in all revenge situations, in order for the avenging team to cover the pointspread, it's usually "got to have the guns" – that is, the ability, coaching, defense, firepower, and so on to get the job done. If a team merely had to have the desire to win, Clemson and Virginia would have a lot more victories over Duke, instead of extended losing skeins. That's why I generally tend to like favorites a little more in revenge situations than revenge underdogs, because the favorites usually have the guns, as demonstrated by the pointspread breakdown spelled out in this column.

Tourney revenge underdogs should not be ruled out, of course, especially if the underdog is an improving, ascending team, or if the favorite is "flawed" or has injury problems, or if the underdog has a great track record for springing upsets or playing close games, or is a terrific defensive team.

Good luck in the postseason!

Chuck Sippl is the senior editor of The Gold Sheet, the first word in sports handicapping for 47 years. The amazingly compact Gold Sheet features analysis of every football and basketball game, exclusive insider reports, widely followed Power Ratings, and a Special Ticker of key injuries and team chemistry. Look for it at your local newsstand. If you haven't seen it and would like to peruse a complimentary copy, call The Gold Sheet at (800) 798-GOLD (4653) and be sure to mention you read about it in Card Player. You can look up The Gold Sheet on the web at www.goldsheet.com .