Math gurus- NCAA tourney question Topic

jamier2003
Posts: 206 (0)
Hall of Famer
14 172 34 185 2
Prospect

I posted this on the HD forums but figured HBD might have more math wizards.  

I'm in a pool that give the following points:
round of 64: 2 points per win
Round of 32: 5 points per pick
16: 9 pts
8: 14 pts
4: 20
Championship game: 36

Plus you get bonus points by seed difference in picking the upset.  So if you took the #16 seed over a #1 seed in the opening round you'd get 2 points for the correct pick plus 15 bonus points for the seed difference.  

I took stats in college and know a little about it and can project points per round based on the probability of winning using NYT's calculations.  Here is my question- why wouldn't you pick all upsets in the 1st round with projected higher point totals?  For example-  #7Florida vs #10 UVA.  Florida has a 64.1% chance of winning resulting in 1.282 projected points (.641 X 2) but UVA has a projected point total of 1.795 ((.359 * 2) + ((10-7) * .359)).  There are additional statistical probability questions as you move on rounds but this is a simplistic view.  

Is it me or does this just seem like an upset special bracket?  In the round of 64 there are only 2 lower seeded teams in the West that have fewer projected points than the favorite- the #15 and #16 seeds, simply because their probability of winning is so small.  It just seems like if I were to pick all upsets, or at least focus on what produces the highest point probability I could win pretty easily because of the seed difference point.  

Does that seem like a fair assumption or is there another way to look at this?

3/14/2012 2:03 PM
jtrinsey
Posts: 237 (0)
All Star
1 4 2 30
Rookie
That is a fair assessment, and I have played in brackets like that. Three or four years ago I won easily by picking an upset-heavy bracket. The next year (the famous "Obama Chalk" bracket), I was crushed when the favorites cruised.

The main reason not to pick upsets is the cumulative points going forward. The power of squaring small numbers reduces those probabilities of making it to the Sweet 16 (where the round points start getting bigger than the seed differences), which means if you go all upsets you will probably be winning after the first two rounds and then get crushed when you miss out on those 20-point Final Four picks.
3/14/2012 2:19 PM
AlCheez
Posts: 3375 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 59 54
Pro
How high up in the seeds would you be planning to go with the "all-upset" picks?  I could certainly see picking a bunch of 9s,10s,11s, and 12s - but if you start picking 13s and 14s on that math, you're knocking out 3's and 4's who would be expected to win more than one game.

To me, in a pool like that, it would make sense to always pick the upset in the first round if you think the favorite would lose in the 2nd round regardless.
3/14/2012 2:22 PM
jamier2003
Posts: 206 (0)
Hall of Famer
14 172 34 185 2
Prospect
That is the way I'm leaning AlCheez.  I've done the math for the West only so far and Mizzouri gets the most points followed by MSU and surprisingly Memphis third.  
3/14/2012 2:30 PM
gjello10
Posts: 164 (0)
All Star
6 26
Prospect
I would probably start by picking the Elite Eight I thought would actually happen, and make my best guesses for Final Four, Chamionship Game, and Champion. Then pick everything else as an upset. Elite Eight looks like the point in the proceedings where the bonus points for upsets is probably outweighed by the points for winning the round.
3/14/2012 2:40 PM
topoftheworl
Posts: 547 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 8 255
Prospect
It doesn't matter.  Any tourney where winner of a major conference doesn't make it in can't be considered legitimate.
3/14/2012 3:01 PM
AlCheez
Posts: 3375 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 59 54
Pro
Calling the Pac-12 a "major" basketball conference these days seems to be a stretch.
3/14/2012 4:09 PM
soursurfer
Posts: 371 (0)
Hall of Famer
72
Prospect
Posted by topoftheworl on 3/14/2012 3:01:00 PM (view original):
It doesn't matter.  Any tourney where winner of a major conference doesn't make it in can't be considered legitimate.
What a delightful non-sequitur.  I lol'd.
3/14/2012 5:41 PM
jamier2003
Posts: 206 (0)
Hall of Famer
14 172 34 185 2
Prospect
Posted by gjello10 on 3/14/2012 2:40:00 PM (view original):
I would probably start by picking the Elite Eight I thought would actually happen, and make my best guesses for Final Four, Chamionship Game, and Champion. Then pick everything else as an upset. Elite Eight looks like the point in the proceedings where the bonus points for upsets is probably outweighed by the points for winning the round.
I basically put all 1's and 2's in the elite 8. Basically looking to win in the first 2 rounds with upsets and holding the lead with chalk. The thinking is that I can't win in those rounds but they are also the most unpredictable. You have more control and more upside in the first round.
3/14/2012 7:55 PM
topoftheworl
Posts: 547 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 8 255
Prospect
Posted by soursurfer on 3/14/2012 5:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by topoftheworl on 3/14/2012 3:01:00 PM (view original):
It doesn't matter.  Any tourney where winner of a major conference doesn't make it in can't be considered legitimate.
What a delightful non-sequitur.  I lol'd.
I'm the sour one these days.
3/14/2012 9:17 PM
Math gurus- NCAA tourney question Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.