NCAA Tournament First Two Rounds

Here’s a look at how seeds have performed during the first two rounds of the NCAA Basketball Tournament.
Seed…….Round One……Round Two
#1……………96-0……………84-12
#2……………92-4……………60-32
#3……………81-15………….48-33
#4……………76-20………….41-35
#5……………65-31………….35-30
#6……………66-30………….35-31
#7……………60-36………….18-42
#8……………44-52……………9-35
#9……………52-44……………3-49
#10………….36-60………….18-18
#11………….30-66………….11-19
#12………….31-65………….16-15
#13………….20-76……………4-16
#14………….15-81……………2-13
#15……………4-92…………….0-4
#16……………0-96
Here are a few thoughts.
I’m guessing the distribution of teams is a high peek with a long downward slope. In other words, the difference between a #1 and a #3 is probably about the same as between a #5 and a #12. Since many brackets use points by seed—geometric scoring for a non-geometric—this makes some lower seeds much better bets.
I hate to admit this but for a very high likelihood, it’s really a 12 team tournament. I know we all like the Cinderella aspect of the tournament, but the odds are very much against the underdogs.
In the 24 years since the field was expanded, 21 of the finals winners and 20 of the losers were ranked #1, #2 or #3. I’m not advocating a change. I’m just pointing out that the dividing line seems to begin at #3.
You’ll also notice that some seeds are pretty choice locations. For example, #12 has a decent record against #5—even better than #11 against #5, and close to #10 against #7. Whenever a #12 wins, it’s often reported as a big upset, but it’s really not. On average, more than one #12 wins each year.
After that, #12 plays the winner of #4 versus #13. They actually have a winning record in the second round. A total of 16 #12 seeds have made it to the Sweet Sixteen.
Compare that with #8 or #9 who have always had to play #1 in the second round. The lesson is that the longer you avoid a top three team, the better. Of course in the tournament, you’ll eventually meet one.
Finally, #1 seeds have a very good chance to make it a perfect 100-0 this year.

Posted by on March 18th, 2009 at 11:26 pm


The information in this blog post represents my own opinions and does not contain a recommendation for any particular security or investment. I or my affiliates may hold positions or other interests in securities mentioned in the Blog, please see my Disclaimer page for my full disclaimer.