The Volokh Conspiracy
[Jim Lindgren, March 30, 2008 at 10:02pm] Trackbacks
Update on VC March Madness Contest.

Because all four favorites made the NCAA Final Four and because more points are awarded for the last few games, the winner of the Volokh Conspiracy’s March Madness contest will likely be determined by whoever correctly chooses the winner and loser of the Championship game. Most people currently leading the contest chose either UCLA or NC to beat the other team in the Finals.

I may be wrong, but from looking through the choices online, it appears that in 7 of the 8 scenarios for the Final Game, the contest winners would be the following:

a. NC over UCLA: I Can Haz Bobblehead? (in 1st place overall)

b. NC over Memphis: Nonunique (currently 9th)

c. UCLA over NC: Scass (currently 2d)

d. UCLA over Kansas: Which is what? (currently 18th)

e. Kansas over UCLA: Circ230 (currently 6th)

f. Kansas over Memphis: Jim Lindgren (currently 3d)

g. Memphis over NC: Baclaw (currently 18th)

As for the 8th scenario — Memphis over Kansas in the title game — I don’t know who would win, but it might well be Baclaw (who would definitely win if Memphis defeated NC in the title game).

Random comments:

1. Participating in a March Madness pool is fun; it increases my interest in the games. I have been in only 2 such pools before this year, one of which I was lucky enough to win.

2. At least this year, on average, picking favorites works better than picking underdogs. Ilya Somin, who picked only favorites, is tied for 6th place among 252 entries, an extremely impressive showing for just picking the higher seed to win every game. He cannot win the contest, however, because if he wins the rest of the way, he will be edged out by I Can Haz Bobblehead?, who is currently leading all participants. This suggests to me that, in a small contest, picking all favorites is likely to be the optimal strategy, but with 200 contestants, it might or might not be. Perhaps those with more experience with these pools in prior years can enlighten me on the efficacy of this strategy.

3. Besides Ilya tied for 6th place, among other VC bloggers Todd Zywicki is currently tied for 9th place and I am in 3d place. Given Kansas’s struggles today, I’m not feeling very good about my picking Kansas to beat Memphis in the finals. If most of our leading contestants are correct and the Championship game is between NC and UCLA, I won’t be anywhere near the lead in the final standings because these contestants would earn at least an additional 32 points for picking the semi-final games correctly. If I should be lucky enough win it all, I will decline the extremely valuable prize in favor of whoever takes 2d place.

4. In the comments, feel free to comment on strategies for March Madness pools based on this or past years.

Related Posts (on one page):

  1. Our First NCAA March Madness Contest is Over.--
  2. Volokh March Madness Finals.--
  3. Final Four:
  4. Update on VC March Madness Contest.
  5. VC March Madess Pool:
  6. VC March Madness:
  7. VC March Madness Pool:
Brett Marston:
Don't feel too blue about Kansas. Kansas is a good team - they appeared to struggle only because Davidson was under-appreciated. Davidson made UNC "struggle" in a similar fashion earlier this year.

Can you guess where I went to college?
3.30.2008 11:59pm
Displaced Midwesterner (mail):
A close game against Davidson is definitely not a sign of weakness. They were arguably the hottest team in the country, certainly on the longest winning streak. And I think a close game can serve as a much needed shot of reality to get them going. NC, on the other hand, hasn't had to face a real test since the tournament started. So in the end, I applaud your wisdom. Pyscho T will be crying soon.

Just sayin'
3.31.2008 1:41am
gwinje:
After WKU and Davidson, UCLA and Kansas are in the best shape for the final four. Kansas because Davidson is a tough game, UCLA becuase they had the wake the f*$! up after WKU
3.31.2008 2:10am
gwinje:
And more to the point of the post, since this is the first time all four number one seeds have reached the final four, the challenge in the past was to pick the number one(s) that wouldn't be in the final four. This year threw a wrench into the machinery of that strategy and I expect a lot of people used to winning their pools are looking at serious disappointment.

That said, in my 17 years of following college basketball close enough to have noticed, I've seen several almost prescient brackets, so I think a good understanding of the game and the field can give you a significant advantage over picking the favorites, even in a year like this one.

Conversely, I read that four people (and one of them thought they'd picked Georgetown) out of a couple million had George Mason in ESPN's pool last year, so. . . ?
3.31.2008 2:25am
jfalk:
While going with the favorites is a pretty good strategy ex post this year, in general it is not, and it is a terrible strategy as the number of participants increases. In essence, the optimal strategy (depending on the scoring scheme) is to carve out a unique space for yourself and hope the tournament evolves that way. It's actually the exact reverse of the "winner's curse" in game theory, which makes it interesting. For an academic study, see this paper
(Full disclosure: I had Louisville winning, which is a great strategy for this kind of pool, which I think gives way too many points for picking the winner. And it still looked like a pretty good strategy with about 10 minutes to go in the NC-Louisville game.)
3.31.2008 8:51am
Rhode Island Lawyer:
I didn't enter the VC pool but I am in another pool (gramlingpool.com) which, I think, has an interesting scoring system that gives greater weight for correctly picking upsets. The scoring system is as follows: for each correct pick you are credited with a score equal to the square root of the winner's seeding times the round. Thus, if you correctly picked a 16th seeded team to win a second round game you would be credited with 8 points. Conversely, picking the number 1 seeded team to win that same game nets you 2 points. It's a fun pool and rewards upset picks.
3.31.2008 9:28am
Zywicki (mail):
In my other pool, there was a bonus for picking upsets--round times seed. So one guy actually picked Davidson for the Elite Eight and vaulted from last to first this past weekend. For the VC pool, the Armchair GM site didn't provide for upsets, so I went with the scoring system that placed higher weight on getting the Final Four and eventual champion correct.
3.31.2008 2:31pm
Just a thought:
Have to agree with jfalk, and his link: I think the best strategy is to pick an "unexpected" winner. Obviously, because so many points come from the final rounds, it is imperative that you pick the ultimate winner. However, if you pick an "expected" winner that a lot of other people picked, your bracket will still probably lose by a couple of points to someone who happened to be a little luckier when it came to choosing first round 9-over-8-seed upsets. (See Ilya's bracket as an example.) So you should gamble on a potential winner that fewer people have chosen, (in my opinion, a #2 or #3 seed), as it is not unusual for a non-#1 seed to win. Of course, the strategy didn't work this year, but I won my pool a few years ago with #3 Syracuse.
3.31.2008 4:57pm

PicoSearch
Help