better maneuvering ability the first night and better shooting abil-
ity the second night, but the margin of superiority for the two games
remained constant.

Gane 6 revealed a margin of superiority in team A that was
greater than either the score or the number of baskets indicated.
Paradoxically enough, both teams had the same number of shots, but, in
addition to being well outweighed, B shot for but .091 against a "hot"
564. Games 7 and 8 were played between the same two teams, with A
winning the first game, an overtime contest, by two points, being high
in weight (148-121) but low in percentage (.195-.241). The correlated
efficiency, however, shows that the losing team had a shade the better
of it (29.1-28.8). On the second night (Game 8) the weights were even
at 118, but B sowed an overwhelming superiority (.315-.115) in shoot-
ing.

Game 9 was won by team B, who not only excelled in weight
(128-116), but proceeded to set a season's record of 23 baskets out of
58 shots, for a percentage of .397. Games 10 and 11 were Played be-
tween the same two teams and were both won by B, whose shooting sup-
eriority more than overcame the fact that they were outweighed in both
games. B's consistency in the series is shown by the offensive effic-
tency of 25 for both nights. Game 12 was won by B through clear sup-
eriority in both percentage and weight, its marging in Zone 1 shots
(18-8) being especially notewrothy.

The full value of the foregoing data may verhaps be gath-
ered from the summarization given below which shows the result in
games won and lost of the various elements we have been discussing:

Won Lost Tied

High percentage and weight 5 QO 0
High percentage 9 3 0
High weight 8 3 1
High percentage - low weight 3 3 0
High weight - low percentage 3 3 0
Most shots 5 6 iL
Most Zone 1 shots 8 4 0
Most Zone 2 shots 8 4 0
Most Zone 3 shots 2 10 0

The following data may also be of interest:

Game

No.
Highest offensive efficiency 54 6
Lowest winning offensive efficiency 24 L
Highest losing offensive efficiency 29 7
Highest shooting percentage 2-597 9
Lowest winning percentage 173 4
Highest losing percentage 262 12
Highest weight 180 3
Lowest winning weight 100 x
Highest losing weight 130 10

The foregoing method of ascertaining offensive efficiency
does not pretent to be any more than exceedingly simple in its nature.
This is largely due to the primary fact that the weights assigned to
the various zones are purely arbitrary, rather than being based upon
actual statistics. At the same time it is believed that the foregoing
data reveals taht the method does give a reasonably accurate correla-
tion of maneuvering and shooting ability.