THB Tournament: Carmichael Regional Results

Thb_countdown_tournament-carmichael-1st_medium

The Carmichael Regional is in the books with the top seeds all advancing. Here are the poll results and simulation results each match-up 20 times thanks to our friends SCACC Hoops' GameSim.

#1 2009 100% #8 2010 0%*

*2010 got two votes. In the interest of all that is sane and the fact we all live in the real world, I am declaring those two votes null and void.

GameSim Results

UNC (2009) has won 18 times (90.0%), won by 20+ pts 9 times (45.0%)
UNC (2010) has won 2 times (10.0%), won by 20+ pts 1 times (5.0%)
The average score is UNC (2009): 81.9 - UNC (2010): 66.7, decided by less than 5 pts 3 times (15.0%)
The game has gone into overtime 0 times (0.0%)

GameSim did come up with two wins for 2010 because it's basketball and anything could happen. The real meat here is 2009 won nine times by 20 or more points and outscored 2010 by an average of 15.2 points. As dominant as you would expect it to be.

#4 1986 71% #5 1989 29%

GameSim Results

UNC (1986) has won 14 times (70.0%), won by 20+ pts 1 times (5.0%)
UNC (1989) has won 6 times (30.0%), won by 20+ pts 1 times (5.0%)
The average score is UNC (1986): 84.8 - UNC (1989): 82.3, decided by less than 5 pts 8 times (40.0%)
The game has gone into overtime 1 times (5.0%)

The GameSim shows these two played 20 very lose games. The final margin was 2.5 points in favor of 1986 with eight games being decided by less than five points. The vote was not nearly as close with 1986 taking 71% of the vote. Chances are 1986 won't survive the next round against 2009.

#2 1995 94% #7 1999 6%

GameSim Results

UNC (1995) has won 12 times (60.0%), won by 20+ pts 2 times (10.0%)
UNC (1999) has won 8 times (40.0%), won by 20+ pts 0 times (0.0%)
The average score is UNC (1995): 77.1 - UNC (1999): 73.5, decided by less than 5 pts 8 times (40.0%)
The game has gone into overtime 1 times (5.0%)

The poll vote was not even close but the GameSim put it 12-8 in favor of 1995. That's probably a little surprising. Eight games with five points or less is probably the biggest reason why the overall record is a little closer than one would think.

#3 1997 61% #6 39%

GameSim Results

UNC (1997) has won 9 times (45.0%), won by 20+ pts 3 times (15.0%)
UNC (1992) has won 11 times (55.0%), won by 20+ pts 0 times (0.0%)
The average score is UNC (1997): 79.9 - UNC (1992): 77.8, decided by less than 5 pts 7 times (35.0%)
The game has gone into overtime 1 times (5.0%)

One of the closer votes so far and a little twist with 1992 taking 11 of 20 games. We can only assume the 1997 team started out 0-3. 1997 still got the best of three games via blowouts which skews the overall scoring average in its favor.

Next up: The Woollen Regional.

Thb_countdown_tournament-round1-cm_medium

X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot username?

We'll email it to you.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Try another email?

Forgot username?

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Tar Heel Blog

You must be a member of Tar Heel Blog to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Tar Heel Blog. You should read them.

Join Tar Heel Blog

You must be a member of Tar Heel Blog to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Tar Heel Blog. You should read them.

Spinner.vc97ec6e

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_9347_tracker