Here is an itemized list of the model results.  Obviously picking all these upsets in the first round is not a smart strategy.  Utah State has failed in this model for 3 years.  Clemson you have to question playing late Tuesday and then early on Thursday.

We wanted to get these out there so we can discuss them after the games.

Our First Round Statistical Upsets:

(12) Utah State over Kansas State

(12) Clemson over West Virginia

(11) Gonzaga over St. John’s

(11) Marquette over Xavier

(10) Michigan State over UCLA

(10) Florida State over Texas A&M

(9) Illinois over UNLV

(9) ODU over Butler

Our Conditional First Round Upsets:

(12) Richmond over Vanderbilt

(11) Gonzaga over St. John’s

(11) Missouri over Cincinnati

(10) Michigan State over UCLA

(9) Tennessee over Michigan

Note:  Conditions nullify the Illinois-UNLV upset

Our Second Round Statistical Upsets

NONE

 

Our Second Round Conditional Upsets

       (5) K State over Wisconsin

       Need 2 double digit seeds from Gonzaga, Marquette, Missouri, Clemson, and Michigan State

 

Our Third Round Statistical Upsets

(3) Syracuse over (2) North Carolina

(3) BYU over (2) Florida

Our Third Round Conditional Upsets

(3) UConn over San Diego State

(4) Wisconsin over (1) Pitt – realize this doesn’t correspond with 2^nd round conditional

 

Our Fourth Round Statistical Upsets

NONE

 

Our Fourth Round Conditional Upsets

(1)    Select at least 3 teams that have been to a Final 4 since 1985

(2)    Pick no team that gets more than 30.5% of their points from 3 (Louisville, ND, Wisconsin)

(3)    Pick Duke or two teams from one conference

(4)    Make sure the seeds add up to between 7 and 13

 

The model likes Ohio State over Kansas, but the Irving coming back to Duke, all of this could change.  Also, be aware of Purdue having some issues on their team.

Good luck!

 

 

 

The Seed Performance Table – Dazzle Your Friends

Tags: Bracketology, March Madness, 2011 Bracket

Here is a table of data on how each seed has done in the NCAA Tournament individually and collectively. I have also added the last time that all of the seeds won in the same year.



We have automated all of this in our Seed Evaluator, so all you have to do is point and click. Some of you may want to refer to this or dazzle your office colleagues with this information. It’s pretty interesting stuff.

This, to us, really highlights where and how often mis-seedings and team mis-behavior occurs.

A couple things that catch our eye. First, six seeds out performing five seeds. It makes sense that many teams would be mis-seeded in these games so they can avoid bracketing constraints. Really challenge the seed that each team gets and rationalize if the team was moved due to these constraints. Another thing that catches our eye is that 9 seeds are twice as likely to all win as 8 seeds, and 3 seven seeds is three times as likely to happen as 3 10’s. You can expect 2 10 seeds and 2 9 seeds to win, but if you have to adjust, take a third 9 and only one 10. Again, it really depends on the seeding.

We will be giving updates on Twitter and Facebook all day on Monday so please follow us (twitter @bracketanalytix).