Posted by paland on 3/25/2013 12:28:00 PM (view original):
I think the NCAA has a real problem in that their results this weekend werent realistic.  In the second round (the first round w/o the extra's) We had a 2-3-4 and three 5 seeds lose.  And the next round, Gonzaga fell.

So we have a 13 seed, a 15th seed, a 9th seed and a 6th seed in the sweet 16. And an elite 8 that will include either a 9th seed or a 13th seed.

The NCAA has to tell their basketball programs that their results should be more realistic.

the only thing ill say is, i dont really agree that this is significantly outside the norm, and IMO is not a very good example of how severely "randomness" can come into play in RL.  the 15 seed is pretty big i guess but to lose a 1, 2, 3 and 4 by the s16 is only 1 in 4 of the top 16 seeded teams out, when if all games were 50/50, youd only get 1 in 4 in, not 1 in 4 out. seems decently consistent to me, especially when the 1 who lost is a mid major.

Posted by gillispie on 3/26/2013 5:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by paland on 3/25/2013 12:28:00 PM (view original):
I think the NCAA has a real problem in that their results this weekend werent realistic.  In the second round (the first round w/o the extra's) We had a 2-3-4 and three 5 seeds lose.  And the next round, Gonzaga fell.

So we have a 13 seed, a 15th seed, a 9th seed and a 6th seed in the sweet 16. And an elite 8 that will include either a 9th seed or a 13th seed.

The NCAA has to tell their basketball programs that their results should be more realistic.

the only thing ill say is, i dont really agree that this is significantly outside the norm, and IMO is not a very good example of how severely "randomness" can come into play in RL.  the 15 seed is pretty big i guess but to lose a 1, 2, 3 and 4 by the s16 is only 1 in 4 of the top 16 seeded teams out, when if all games were 50/50, youd only get 1 in 4 in, not 1 in 4 out. seems decently consistent to me, especially when the 1 who lost is a mid major.

I agree with you.  In fact, this season is no stranger than any other season. Statistically I mean.

This was exactly what bow2dacowz said it was.  Satire about those who trash WIS season after season when their NT doesnt follow exactly by seeding.  Most people dont realize just how crazy variance is in any statistical sequence.  It never follows how people think it will be.  That's why, in the ESPN contest, with over 8 million entries, the best entry will have no more than 80% correct (and I doubt it will be that high).

I cant believe some of you think I was serious.  Next time, I will put a  /snark  after it.