I have observed over many years of watching sports that the team ahead at the half time break is not necessarily a safe bet to be ahead at the end of competition.
Down by a touchdown or more, the losing team comes back with a vengeance to win at the final buzzer. Losing at half time a basketball team will outscore the opposition in the first 5 minutes of the second half and roll to a rousing win.
In general, if you allow your opponent to open too large a lead at half time, you simply won't have enough time to overtake your adversary.
Looking for examples where teams were behind at the half and came back to win the contest, I performed a google of "teams down at the half eventually winning" and got an interesting result collection.
I thought there would be some anecdotal evidence to support my observations that a losing effort at the half would result in a win at the competitions conclusion and the singing of the proverbial "fat lady."
My reason for providing evidence that a competition is not over until the "fat lady" sings is of course a response to the results of the Massachusetts Senatorial election on Tuesday.
This will be a wake up call to Democrats. Much like Pearl Harbor. Republicans have awakened a "sleeping giant."
Back to my Google search.
I discovered that there is more than anecdotal evidence to support my observations.
Jonah A. Berger and Devin G. Pope at the University of Pennsylvania - Marketing Department and The Wharton School of business provide the following:
Abstract:
Can losing during a competitive task motivate individuals and teams to exert greater effort and perform better overall? Analysis of over 45,000 collegiate and 18,000 professional basketball games illustrates that being slightly behind at halftime leads to a discontinuous increase in winning percentage. Teams that are losing by a small amount win approximately 2 (NCAA) and 6 (NBA) percentage points more often than expected. In the NBA, this psychological effect is roughly half the size of the proverbial home-team advantage. Additional experimental evidence corroborates the field test and casts doubt on alternative explanations.
And from the Wall Street Journal:
In their new study, "When Losing Leads to Winning" Jonah Berger and Devin Pope, assistant professors at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, came to a conclusion that could cause some coaches to change their mindsets before halftime -- not to mention the way thousands of bettors approach making halftime bets at Las Vegas sports books.
NY Times:
...teams that are behind by one point at halftime are actually more likely to win than teams that are one point ahead. This striking finding comes courtesy of a terrific new paper by my Wharton colleagues, Jonah Berger and Devin Pope.
Berger and Pope conclude:
Ancillary results underscore the motivational effects of being slightly behind. Most of the scoring boost for teams slightly behind occurs right away. An experiment further demonstrates that being slightly behind increases effort, while also casting doubt on the alternative explanation that being slightly ahead induces complacency. Taken together, these results illustrate that losing can sometimes lead to winning.
Our results are consistent with the notion that teams down by one point at halftime are psychologically motivated due to loss aversion. Being in the loss domain can cause teams to get "fired up" and exert greater effort in the second half.
Encouraging individuals or teams to take stock of their performance when they are slightly behind should help focus them on the deficit, leading to stronger performance and eventual triumph.
President Obama and his administration have obviously made a few political mistakes. But, it is only half time and second half awaits!