College Tournament Handicapping Guide

[Ricky Tan]

Ran across this at another site and found it quite interesting. Hope it is OK to post it here.




Most fans would agree that the #1 thing that makes the NCAA tournament exciting is the possibility of the upset, the little guy taking down the bully, the Cinderella story, and so on. However, the analysis thus far has proven one thing …that there is no foolproof method for determining where the upsets will come from on a yearly basis. There are some general concepts that have produced successful results in the last several years though, both in terms of bracket contests and wagering.
One key point of note before digging into the key points is that the 2007 NCAA Tournament was highly unusual in that the favorites won and covered the pointspread at previously unseen rates. In fact, 2007 was the first year in the last decade in which more than 80% of better seeded teams won their games outright. It was also the first year when these same teams reached the 60% mark against the pointspread. Here’s a look at those results in more detail:

Year: Better Seed Straight Up Record, ATS Record
1998: 45-18(71.4%) SU, 29-32-1 (47.5%) ATS
1999: 38-23(62.3%) SU, 25-34-2 (42.4%) ATS
2000: 44-19(69.8%) SU, 26-23 (53.1%) ATS
2001: 42-21(66.7%) SU, 33-29-1 (53.2%) ATS
2002: 46-16(74.2%) SU, 30-29-3 (50.8%) ATS
2003: 42-21(66.7%) SU, 25-36-2 (41.0%) ATS
2004: 47-16(74.6%) SU, 36-27 (57.1%) ATS
2005: 43-19(69.4%) SU, 27-35 (43.5%) ATS
2006: 42-21(66.7%) SU, 25-36-2 (41.0%) ATS
2007: 50-12(80.6%) SU, 36-24-2 (60.0%) ATS

There are hundreds of other trends and stats that I go through each year and those can again be found in the ******* College Tournament Handicapping Guide, but for purposes of helping you win this year’s office pool or at the betting window, here are 15 quick tips that I uncovered in my research this year. Make sure to refer to these when projecting your tournament bracket or placing that wager at the betting window.

1) Most often, the upsets come when least expected. If too many experts are projecting an upset, I’ve found it doesn’t happen. Take last year’s tournament for instance. Some of the most popular upset picks were teams George Washington (over Vanderbilt), Long Beach State (over Tennessee), Davidson (vs. Maryland), and Old Dominion (vs. Butler). Not only were those teams beaten, they were beaten soundly, all four by double-digit margins. Meanwhile, overlooked clubs like Virginia Commonwealth and Purdue were two of the four teams that actually won outright as pointspread underdogs. The common thread those teams shared: Taking on a foe that played its best basketball earlier in the season.


2) History says the team facing the Ivy League representative will not be upset, despite the publicity Princeton still receives for having beat Georgetown many years ago. There are five other conferences, including the Sun Belt, that have also failed to win a tournament game since ’98. There are still five more conferences that have only won once in 10 years.


3) The most lethal “mid-major” conferences in terms of upsets have been the Colonial Athletic, Missouri Valley, Mid-American, and Horizon League. These have produced the most “Cinderellas” to reach the Sweet 16 and beyond, each accumulating a winning of at least 39% SU since ’98.


4) Sunday of Round 2 has had the most upsets of any typical day in the tournament schedule. Lower seeds on that day win outright at a 44% rate, and cover the spread 55.0% of the time.


5) More from Round 2, underdogs of 5-points or less are an incredible 39-25 SU & 42-22 ATS, for 65.6%!


6) In the Sweet 16 round, watch for seeds #7, 8, & 9, as these teams are on a nice run of 7-3 SU & ATS.


7) Worse seeds have held a large advantage in the Elite 8 round since 1998, going 26-12-2 ATS (68.4%). Those playing as underdogs of less than 7-points are a startling 12-7 SU & 15-4 ATS (78.9%)!


8) Favorites are the way to go in the Semifinal and Championship games. Since the turn of the century, the “Chalk” is 17-7 SU & 16-8 ATS for 66.7%. Those of 4-6 points on Final Four weekend are a sizzling 16-5 ATS since ’98.


9) Stay away from the Mountain West Conference teams. As good as these teams have looked on paper heading into tournaments; they are only 7-18 SU & 8-14 ATS in the last 10 years.


10) Take note that the ACC has had a tendency to be overrated by oddsmakers. Most of the double-digit lines in recent years have belonged to this league and though the ACC SU win % is still the best, the pointspread win rate is 23% less.


11) In years that the higher seeds won more than 70% of their games, the following season they went on to win less than 70%, in each case dropping at least 5% in win rate. The 2008 tournament could see a return of the Cinderella.

12) Beware of the #10 seed. This team has taken over for the #12 where upsets are concerned. In the second round they are particularly dangerous of late. Overall, the #10 has won over 44% of its games, despite being a lower seed in all but one. In fact, against the #2 seed in the second round, the #10 actually owns a winning record at 10-7 SU & 12-5 ATS.


13) Don’t be afraid to ride the #3, 5, 6, or 8 seeds as they advance deeper into the tournament. While the SU win percentage is just below .500, all four of these spots have produced very well in terms of ATS success.


14) Watch for game totals at 125 or below and bet them to go UNDER. In games with totals set at less than 125 points, the UNDER owns a stellar 30-14 mark, for 68.2%, including 6-1 in 2007.


15) The UNDER in the first round games of the top three seeds is 65-42 (60.7%) since ’98.

[Dr. Jack]

Thanks Ricky

[mikkii10]

ricky tan that f!!! awsome to know wow and a good write up thanks

[revnecro1273]

i don't believe princeton actually beat georgetown..would have been 1989 i believe...i think they lost by 1 point

[Ricky Tan]

Originally Posted by revnecro1273

i don't believe princeton actually beat georgetown..would have been 1989 i believe...i think they lost by 1 point

Number one seeded Georgetown almost gets upset by 16th seeded Princeton as they narrowly escape with a 50-49 victory. Princeton considered a 20-point underdog had a chance for a shot to win the game, but Georgetown's Freshman Alonzo Mourning blocked the shot.

[revnecro1273]

yeah i know...but your article claims princeton beat georgetown