THE POWER RANK

  • About
    • About The Power Rank
    • Start Here
    • Contact
  • Predictions
    • Games
    • March Madness
  • Content
    • Must Read
    • Blog
    • Podcast
    • March Madness Book
  • Rankings
    • College Basketball
    • NFL
    • College Football
    • World Soccer/Football
    • MLB
    • Cluster Luck
    • CFB yards per play
  • Members
    • My Account
    • Login
    • Become a member
  • Log in

Predicting March Madness upsets

By Dr. Ed Feng Leave a Comment

Upsets make March Madness special.

In 2018, Virginia was the top overall seed heading into the tournament. As a 21.5 point favorite, they lost to UMBC. This was the first and only time a 16 seed beat a 1 seed in the men’s NCAA tournament.

The only thing better than watching upsets is predicting upsets. How can we do that?

The easy answer is looking at predictive analytics. My member numbers have the following double digit seeds as favorites in the Round of 64:

  • Michigan (11) over Colorado State (6) by 3.2 points.
  • San Francisco (10) over Murray State (7) by 2.0 points.

In addition, my predictions also suggest that two 10 seeds with excellent shooting statistics on offense will keep the game close.

  • Michigan State (7) will beat Davidson (10) by 2.2. points.
  • Ohio State (7) will beat Loyola Chicago (10) by 2.1 points.

But that seems unsatisfying. How does one pick games in which a big underdog wins in the NCAA tournament?

To explore upsets, I looked at games in which an underdog of six or more points won. This gives a sample of over 400 games this season.

To get a feeling for this data, you can ask some simple questions. First, underdogs that win slow down the tempo. This strategy maximizes the variance, which is beneficial to the dog.

However, underdogs of six points or more do not slow down the game. This season, they average about a half possession more than their season average. Over the past three season, there is no evidence that the tempo slows down in these upset games.

A second hypothesis is that underdogs shoot more three pointers. However, this also turns out to be false. Underdogs of six or more points take 1.7% fewer of their field goal attempts from 3. I saw this decrease in each of the last three seasons as well.

So what happens in these upsets?

As I discussed on an episode of Bracket Wisdom, the biggest reason for upsets is three point shooting. Underdogs of six or more points that win make 5.5% more of their three point shots than their season average.

Let’s estimate how this impacts the scoreboard. This season, college basketball teams averaged 21.8 three point shots per game. An increase in 5.5% shooting implies 3.6 points more per game.

In addition, favorites of six or more points that lose shoot 5.5% worse from three than their season average. There is about a seven point swing from three point shooting in these games.

To predict big upsets, you need to predict three point shooting, an almost impossible task. As I discussed in an episode of Bracket Wisdom, a team’s three point field goal percentage on offense has almost no ability to predict the future.

While three point shooting is a skill, randomness plays a big role in three point shooting percentage. This makes predicting big upsets as difficult as keeping Tom Brady off the football field at 45 years old.

I’ve always preached going strictly by the numbers in the early rounds and spending your time analyzing which team to pick as champion. This research suggests you double down on that advice.

Data driven betting information

This article was sent to The Power Rank’s email newsletter. This is a free service that strives to be:

  • Valuable
  • Concise
  • Entertaining

You also get The Power Rank’s March Madness cheat sheet that makes it drop dead easy to fill out your bracket.

To get this free service delivered straight into your inbox, enter your best email address and click on “Sign up now!”








 

 
 

Filed Under: College Basketball, NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament

What is going on with Colgate, Ed?!

By Dr. Ed Feng Leave a Comment

In the coolest page at The Power Rank, an interactive visual provides access to my round by round probabilities for teams to advance in the NCAA tournament.

However, there have been a ton of questions about the predictions in 2021. Did you switch Arkansas and Colgate? Why does Colgate have the 3rd highest win probability behind Gonzaga and Baylor?

The Colgate prediction is way off due to small sample size. In my college basketball team rankings that drive these predictions, I only use data from the current season.

Colgate played a 12 game Patriot League schedule against 3 opponents. They lost to Army by 2, and then they have won their other 14 games by at least 7 points. With a limited sample size, Colgate is 3rd in my team rankings that only use data from this season.

The NET rankings used by the tournament selection committee also only uses data from the current season, and Colgate ranks an unrealistic 9th.

Data and analytics must be used with care. My public numbers are off on Colgate. My member numbers get it right.

Members of The Power Rank also have access to my best predictions and full bracket advice. To learn more, click here.

Filed Under: College Basketball, NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament

NCAA is meeting with quants to make tournament selection process better

By Dr. Ed Feng Leave a Comment

On Friday, January 20th, 2017, hell will freeze over, and the NCAA will meet with analytics guys like Ben Alamar, Jeff Sagarin and Ken Pomeroy. The conversation will revolve around making the tournament selection process better.

You can read about it here, but two points stand out for me.

First, they say the following about the RPI rankings the committee currently uses.

An even more powerful microscope to go with the time-honored RPI.

Time-honored my ass. The RPI is stupid for two reasons:

  • It lacks a solid mathematical basis (compare it with the least squares rankings that Pomeroy uses)
  • It uses wins and losses instead of margin of victory in its calculations

I discuss both of these issues in relation to college football here. Hence, RPI fails as a predictor for how teams fare in the tournament.

The NCAA should eliminate RPI from the selection process.

Second, Jim Schaus, the athletic director at Ohio State and committee member, said this:

I’m going to have to strap on in the meetings to stay up with all the calculus that’s going to be discussed, but I’m excited about it.

Calculus is so overrated in our society.

You want to hang with the quants, Schaus? Then let’s talk probability, or that no analytics ever says a team will beat another team with 100% certainty.

Want to get fancy, Schaus? Then let’s dig into linear algebra so you can understand the least squares method used in adjusting for strength of schedule.

I’m all for learning calculus. It’s just not as useful in sports analytics as probability and linear algebra.

Filed Under: March Madness, NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament, Sports Analytics

Data driven betting information

Valuable. Concise. Entertaining.

To sign up for The Power Rank's email newsletter, enter your best email and click on "Sign up now!"

Popular Articles

  • How to predict interceptions in the NFL
  • 5 insights from academic research on predicting world soccer/football matches
  • How to win your NCAA tournament pool
  • The ultimate guide to predictive college basketball analytics
  • Accurate football predictions with linear regression
  • The surprising truth about passing and rushing in the NFL
  • Football analytics resource guide
  • The Reason You Can’t Avoid The Curse of Small Sample Size
  • The essential guide to predictive CFB rankings
  • How computer rankings make you smarter about sports
  • How to win your college football bowl pool
  • Do you make these 3 mistakes with college football statistics?
  • The Top 10 Things to Know About The Power Rank’s Methods

Recent Articles

  • 7-Nugget Saturday, May 21, 2022
  • Podcast: Matt Metcalf on sports betting and bookmaking
  • PGA Championship
  • 7-Nugget Saturday, May 14, 2022
  • 7-Nugget Saturday, May 7, 2022

© 2022 The Power Rank Inc., All rights reserved.

About, Terms of Use, Privacy Policy

Data driven betting information

Valuable. Concise. Entertaining.


Get my March Madness cheat sheet that makes it drop dead easy to fill out your bracket.


To sign up for The Power Rank's free email newsletter, enter your best email and click on "Sign up now!"


No thanks, I'll make my predictions without data and analytics.

{"cookieName":"wBounce","isAggressive":false,"isSitewide":true,"hesitation":"","openAnimation":false,"exitAnimation":false,"timer":"","sensitivity":"","cookieExpire":"","cookieDomain":"","autoFire":"","isAnalyticsEnabled":true}
  • About
    • About The Power Rank
    • Start Here
    • Contact
  • Predictions
    • Games
    • March Madness
  • Content
    • Must Read
    • Blog
    • Podcast
    • March Madness Book
  • Rankings
    • College Basketball
    • NFL
    • College Football
    • World Soccer/Football
    • MLB
    • Cluster Luck
    • CFB yards per play
  • Members
    • My Account
    • Login
    • Become a member