IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/buc/jgbeco/v10y2016i3p1-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chalk, Seeds, and Entropy in the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament

Author

Listed:
  • Horrowitz, Ira

Abstract

Based on the results of the 63 games played in each of the 32 NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournaments held from 1985 through 2016 it is shown that the information content of the seeding of the 64 teams invited to participate as to the seed of the eventual winner, varies from year to year, but not in any consistent fashion. The paper thus concludes that the Selection Committee’s seeding process has not improved over time, notwithstanding the availability of more sophisticated metrics for evaluating the teams’ regular-season performance. The fact that a 1-seed wins some 60 percent of the time and a top-three-seed wins 88 percent of the time only reflects the fact that the committee is not seeding the teams at random, but rather is exercising a modicum of judgment, aided and abetted by the tournament’s design.

Suggested Citation

  • Horrowitz, Ira, 2016. "Chalk, Seeds, and Entropy in the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 10(3), pages 1-12.
    • Handle: RePEc:buc:jgbeco:v:10:y:2016:i:3:p:1-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ubplj.org/index.php/jgbe/article/view/1221
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    NCAA Basketball Tournament; Chalk; Seeds; Entropy; Information and Uncertainty; Selection Committee;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L83 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Sports; Gambling; Restaurants; Recreation; Tourism

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:buc:jgbeco:v:10:y:2016:i:3:p:1-12. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Dominic Cortis, University of Malta (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ubpl.co.uk/ .

    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.