Conference Semifinals · 2010-11
6 games · Chicago Bulls advanced
Every game
Game 1May 2
ATL 103@
CHI 9528·23·21·31 / 18·32·21·2411%Game 2May 4ATL 73@CHI 8619·18·21·15 / 25·23·17·2185%Game 3May 6CHI 99@ATL 8229·27·24·19 / 23·20·20·1962%Game 4May 8CHI 88@ATL 10026·20·23·19 / 28·19·20·3335%Game 5May 10ATL 83@CHI 9521·21·26·15 / 32·16·21·2682%Game 6May 12CHI 93@ATL 7327·18·25·23 / 17·18·18·2062%
ATL 103@CHI 9528·23·21·31 / 18·32·21·2411%Game 2May 4ATL 73@CHI 8619·18·21·15 / 25·23·17·2185%Game 3May 6CHI 99@ATL 8229·27·24·19 / 23·20·20·1962%Game 4May 8CHI 88@ATL 10026·20·23·19 / 28·19·20·3335%Game 5May 10ATL 83@CHI 9521·21·26·15 / 32·16·21·2682%Game 6May 12CHI 93@ATL 7327·18·25·23 / 17·18·18·2062%Each game opens its own page with the period breakdown, the team totals and the full player box score.
What the model made of it
Games it favoured correctly
4 of 6
Mean probability on the winner
56.2%
Brier over the series
0.2597
A backtest, and a sample of 6. The model was refit on games strictly earlier than each of these, so it never saw the result — but a record over a handful of games is not evidence in either direction. The one that means something is on the accuracy page, over 25,749.