Money Lines in NCAA Tourney First Round
After two different posts on money lines, we have some background on money lines and determining whether it's a good bet or not. Next, let's take a look at upsets in the NCAA basketball tournament first round.
Since the tournament expanded in 1985 to 64 teams, the games have been broken up into four regions. In each region, a #1 seed plays a #16 seed, #2 plays #15, and so on. Coincidentally, there have been 25 years (1985-2009) with 4 games each year (1 per region), so we have exactly 100 games to work with - it makes it easy to figure out percentages.
Note that 100 games is not a good sample size. There are too many variables (a team might have been seeded higher/lower than it should have been, only 4 games/year, and so on). But it's all we have to go on.
A #16 has never beat a #1, so that isn't considered here.
A #15 seed has beaten a #2 seed 4 times (4%). Based on the money line formula (found in this post), if the #15 seed has a money line of +2400 or higher, that would seem like a good bet for the money.
#14 seeds have won 15% of the time, so money lines above +567 should be looked at as good.
#13 seeds have won 21% of the time, so money lines above +376 should be looked at as good.
#12 seeds have won 34% of the time, so money lines above +194 should be looked at as good.
#11 seeds have won 31% of the time (actually less often than #12 seeds). Money lines above +223 should be looked at as good.
Finally, #10 seeds have won 39% of the time, so money lines above +156 should be looked at as good.
Obviously, just looking at the seeds shouldn't be the only factor. You should really make an estimate as to the probably of the lower-seeded team winning the game. For example, for a #12 seed, does the individual team have a 34% chance of winning, or is it higher or lower than that? All these pieces should fit together to come up with YOUR money line, which should be compared to the actual money line so you can figure out how good of a bet it is.
Since the tournament expanded in 1985 to 64 teams, the games have been broken up into four regions. In each region, a #1 seed plays a #16 seed, #2 plays #15, and so on. Coincidentally, there have been 25 years (1985-2009) with 4 games each year (1 per region), so we have exactly 100 games to work with - it makes it easy to figure out percentages.
Note that 100 games is not a good sample size. There are too many variables (a team might have been seeded higher/lower than it should have been, only 4 games/year, and so on). But it's all we have to go on.
A #16 has never beat a #1, so that isn't considered here.
A #15 seed has beaten a #2 seed 4 times (4%). Based on the money line formula (found in this post), if the #15 seed has a money line of +2400 or higher, that would seem like a good bet for the money.
#14 seeds have won 15% of the time, so money lines above +567 should be looked at as good.
#13 seeds have won 21% of the time, so money lines above +376 should be looked at as good.
#12 seeds have won 34% of the time, so money lines above +194 should be looked at as good.
#11 seeds have won 31% of the time (actually less often than #12 seeds). Money lines above +223 should be looked at as good.
Finally, #10 seeds have won 39% of the time, so money lines above +156 should be looked at as good.
Obviously, just looking at the seeds shouldn't be the only factor. You should really make an estimate as to the probably of the lower-seeded team winning the game. For example, for a #12 seed, does the individual team have a 34% chance of winning, or is it higher or lower than that? All these pieces should fit together to come up with YOUR money line, which should be compared to the actual money line so you can figure out how good of a bet it is.
Comments
Post a Comment