IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/jqsprt/v16y2020i1p1-15n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Models for generating NCAA men’s basketball tournament bracket pools

Author

Listed:
  • Ludden Ian G.
  • Jacobson Sheldon H.

    (University of Illinois, Computer Science, Urbana, IL, USA)

  • Khatibi Arash
  • King Douglas M.

    (University of Illinois, Industrial and Enterprise Systems Engineering, Urbana, IL, USA)

Abstract

Each year, the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Tournament attracts popular attention, including bracket challenges where fans seek to pick the winners of the tournament’s games. However, the quantity and unpredictable nature of games suggest a single bracket will likely select some winning teams incorrectly even if created with insightful and sophisticated methods. Hence, rather than focusing on creating a single bracket to perform well, a challenge participant may wish to create a pool of brackets that likely contains at least one high-scoring bracket. This paper proposes a power model to estimate tournament outcome probabilities based on past tournament data. Bracket pools are generated for the 2013–2019 tournaments using six generators, five using the power model and one using the Bradley-Terry model. The generated brackets are assessed by the ESPN scoring system and compared to those produced by a traditional pick favorite approach as well as the highest scoring brackets in the ESPN Tournament Challenge for each year.

Suggested Citation

  • Ludden Ian G. & Jacobson Sheldon H. & Khatibi Arash & King Douglas M., 2020. "Models for generating NCAA men’s basketball tournament bracket pools," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 1-15, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:16:y:2020:i:1:p:1-15:n:2
    DOI: 10.1515/jqas-2019-0022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/jqas-2019-0022
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/jqas-2019-0022?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lopez Michael J. & Matthews Gregory J., 2015. "Building an NCAA men’s basketball predictive model and quantifying its success," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 5-12, March.
    2. Yuan Lo-Hua & Liu Anthony & Yeh Alec & Franks Alex & Wang Sherrie & Illushin Dmitri & Bornn Luke & Kaufman Aaron & Reece Andrew & Bull Peter, 2015. "A mixture-of-modelers approach to forecasting NCAA tournament outcomes," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 13-27, March.
    3. West Brady T, 2006. "A Simple and Flexible Rating Method for Predicting Success in the NCAA Basketball Tournament," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 2(3), pages 1-16, July.
    4. West Brady T., 2008. "A Simple and Flexible Rating Method for Predicting Success in the NCAA Basketball Tournament: Updated Results from 2007," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1-18, April.
    5. Koenker, Roger & Bassett Jr., Gilbert W., 2010. "March Madness, Quantile Regression Bracketology, and the Hayek Hypothesis," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 28(1), pages 26-35.
    6. Ruiz Francisco J. R. & Perez-Cruz Fernando, 2015. "A generative model for predicting outcomes in college basketball," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 39-52, March.
    7. Boulier, Bryan L. & Stekler, H. O., 1999. "Are sports seedings good predictors?: an evaluation," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 83-91, February.
    8. Edward H. Kaplan & Stanley J. Garstka, 2001. "March Madness and the Office Pool," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(3), pages 369-382, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Coleman Jay & Lynch Allen K, 2009. "NCAA Tournament Games: The Real Nitty-Gritty," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 5(3), pages 1-27, July.
    2. Stekler Herman O. & Klein Andrew, 2012. "Predicting the Outcomes of NCAA Basketball Championship Games," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, March.
    3. Stekler, H.O. & Sendor, David & Verlander, Richard, 2010. "Issues in sports forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 606-621, July.
      • Herman O. Stekler & David Sendor & Richard Verlander, 2009. "Issues in Sports Forecasting," Working Papers 2009-002, The George Washington University, Department of Economics, H. O. Stekler Research Program on Forecasting.
    4. Nicholas G. Hall & Chris N. Potts, 2012. "A Proposal for Redesign of the FedEx Cup Playoff Series on the PGA TOUR," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 42(2), pages 166-179, April.
    5. Bryan Clair & David Letscher, 2007. "Optimal Strategies for Sports Betting Pools," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(6), pages 1163-1177, December.
    6. Gupta Ajay Andrew, 2015. "A new approach to bracket prediction in the NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament based on a dual-proportion likelihood," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 53-67, March.
    7. Paul Kvam & Joel S. Sokol, 2006. "A logistic regression/Markov chain model for NCAA basketball," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(8), pages 788-803, December.
    8. Kovalchik, Stephanie & Reid, Machar, 2019. "A calibration method with dynamic updates for within-match forecasting of wins in tennis," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 756-766.
    9. B. Jay Coleman & J. Michael DuMond & Allen K. Lynch, 2010. "Evidence of bias in NCAA tournament selection and seeding," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(7), pages 431-452.
    10. Daniel C. Hickman & Andrew G. Meyer, 2017. "Does Athletic Success Influence Persistence At Higher Education Institutions? New Evidence Using Panel Data," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 35(4), pages 658-676, October.
    11. Vaughan Williams, Leighton & Stekler, Herman O., 2010. "Sports forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 445-447, July.
      • Herman O. Stekler, 2007. "Sports Forecasting," Working Papers 2007-001, The George Washington University, Department of Economics, H. O. Stekler Research Program on Forecasting, revised Jan 2007.
    12. David Bergman & Carlos Cardonha & Jason Imbrogno & Leonardo Lozano, 2023. "Optimizing the Expected Maximum of Two Linear Functions Defined on a Multivariate Gaussian Distribution," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 35(2), pages 304-317, March.
    13. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2007:i:34:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Grimshaw Scott D. & Sabin R. Paul & Willes Keith M., 2013. "Analysis of the NCAA Men’s Final Four TV audience," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 115-126, June.
    15. Angelini, Giovanni & Candila, Vincenzo & De Angelis, Luca, 2022. "Weighted Elo rating for tennis match predictions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(1), pages 120-132.
    16. Andrew J. Leach, 2003. "SubGame, set and match. Identifying Incentive Response in a Tournament," Cahiers de recherche 04-02, HEC Montréal, Institut d'économie appliquée.
    17. Caudill, Steven B., 2003. "Predicting discrete outcomes with the maximum score estimator: the case of the NCAA men's basketball tournament," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 313-317.
    18. Michael Cary & Heather Stephens, 2023. "Gendered Consequences of COVID-19 Among Professional Tennis Players," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 24(2), pages 241-266, February.
    19. Kovalchik Stephanie Ann, 2016. "Searching for the GOAT of tennis win prediction," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 127-138, September.
    20. Ferda Halicioglu, 2005. "Can We Predict The Outcome Of The International Football Tournaments : The Case Of Euro 2000?," Microeconomics 0503008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Karl Andrew T., 2012. "The Sensitivity of College Football Rankings to Several Modeling Choices," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 8(3), pages 1-44, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:16:y:2020:i:1:p:1-15:n:2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.