IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/mgtdec/v44y2023i4p2223-2236.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

March Madness prediction: Different machine learning approaches with non‐box score statistics

Author

Listed:
  • Jun Woo Kim
  • Mar Magnusen
  • Seunghoon Jeong

Abstract

The popularity of analytical research specializing in forecasting of March Madness saw an increase in the past decades. While the influence of nongame statistics on the game outcome has become a great interest in sports analytics, little research has focused on situational factors in predicting sports tournament outcomes. Therefore, this study is to examine the use of different machine learning algorithms, including artificial neural network (ANN), k‐nearest neighbors (kNN), support vector machine (SVM), logistic regression, and random forest (RF), to forecast the winning in a matchup between any two given teams during the March Madness tournaments. Our data include 1370 observations with 685 tournament games from 2006 to 2007 to 2016 to 2017 seasons. The results show that neural networks outperformed all other classifiers (67% of accuracy), followed by SVM (65%), kNN (63%), logistic regression (63%), and RF (61%).

Suggested Citation

  • Jun Woo Kim & Mar Magnusen & Seunghoon Jeong, 2023. "March Madness prediction: Different machine learning approaches with non‐box score statistics," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(4), pages 2223-2236, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:44:y:2023:i:4:p:2223-2236
    DOI: 10.1002/mde.3814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3814
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/mde.3814?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kubatko Justin & Oliver Dean & Pelton Kevin & Rosenbaum Dan T, 2007. "A Starting Point for Analyzing Basketball Statistics," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-24, July.
    2. Vincenzo Candila & Lucio Palazzo, 2020. "Neural Networks and Betting Strategies for Tennis," Risks, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Fadi Thabtah & Li Zhang & Neda Abdelhamid, 2019. "NBA Game Result Prediction Using Feature Analysis and Machine Learning," Annals of Data Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 103-116, March.
    4. Todd Kuethe & Timothy Zimmer, 2008. "Major Conference Bias and the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(17), pages 1-6.
    5. Delen, Dursun & Cogdell, Douglas & Kasap, Nihat, 2012. "A comparative analysis of data mining methods in predicting NCAA bowl outcomes," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 543-552.
    6. Kelly E. Carter, 2017. "Relative Home‐Court Advantage: The Impact of Travel on Team Production When One Team is Closer than its Opponent to a Neutral Game Site," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(1), pages 76-91, January.
    7. Gang Shen & Di Gao & Qian Wen & Rhonda Magel, 2016. "Predicting Results of March Madness Using Three Different Methods," Journal of Sports Research, Conscientia Beam, vol. 3(1), pages 10-17, 01-2016.
    8. 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.
    9. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2008:i:17:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Gang Shen & Di Gao & Qian Wen & Rhonda Magel, 2016. "Predicting Results of March Madness Using Three Different Methods," Journal of Sports Research, Conscientia Beam, vol. 3(1), pages 10-17.
    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. Alessandro Chessa & Pierpaolo D’Urso & Livia Giovanni & Vincenzina Vitale & Alfonso Gebbia, 2023. "Complex networks for community detection of basketball players," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(1), pages 363-389, June.
    2. Paola Zuccolotto & Marco Sandri & Marica Manisera, 2023. "Spatial performance analysis in basketball with CART, random forest and extremely randomized trees," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(1), pages 495-519, June.
    3. Manlio Migliorati & Marica Manisera & Paola Zuccolotto, 2023. "Integration of model-based recursive partitioning with bias reduction estimation: a case study assessing the impact of Oliver’s four factors on the probability of winning a basketball game," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 107(1), pages 271-293, March.
    4. Rodolfo Metulini & Giorgio Gnecco, 2023. "Measuring players’ importance in basketball using the generalized Shapley value," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(1), pages 441-465, June.
    5. Mustafa Pamuk & Matthias Schumann, 2023. "Opening a New Era with Machine Learning in Financial Services? Forecasting Corporate Credit Ratings Based on Annual Financial Statements," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, July.
    6. Joseph Price & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Racial Discrimination Among NBA Referees," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(4), pages 1859-1887.
    7. 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.
    8. Serrano-Cinca, Carlos & Gutiérrez-Nieto, Begoña & Bernate-Valbuena, Martha, 2019. "The use of accounting anomalies indicators to predict business failure," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 353-375.
    9. Gabel Alan & Redner Sidney, 2012. "Random Walk Picture of Basketball Scoring," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-20, March.
    10. Carlos Serrano-Cinca & Yolanda Fuertes-Call鮠 & Bego uti鲲ez-Nieto & Beatriz Cuellar-Fernᮤez, 2014. "Path modelling to bankruptcy: causes and symptoms of the banking crisis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(31), pages 3798-3811, November.
    11. Keller, Jonas & von der Gracht, Heiko A., 2014. "The influence of information and communication technology (ICT) on future foresight processes — Results from a Delphi survey," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 81-92.
    12. Shah Hussain & Muhammad Qasim Khan, 2023. "Student-Performulator: Predicting Students’ Academic Performance at Secondary and Intermediate Level Using Machine Learning," Annals of Data Science, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 637-655, June.
    13. 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.
    14. Philip W. S. Newall & Dominic Cortis, 2021. "Are Sports Bettors Biased toward Longshots, Favorites, or Both? A Literature Review," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, January.
    15. Jack C Yue & Elizabeth P Chou & Ming-Hui Hsieh & Li-Chen Hsiao, 2022. "A study of forecasting tennis matches via the Glicko model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-12, April.
    16. ben Jabeur, Sami & Mefteh-Wali, Salma & Carmona, Pedro, 2021. "The impact of institutional and macroeconomic conditions on aggregate business bankruptcy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 108-119.
    17. Yu Zhao & Shaopeng Wei & Yu Guo & Qing Yang & Xingyan Chen & Qing Li & Fuzhen Zhuang & Ji Liu & Gang Kou, 2022. "Combining Intra-Risk and Contagion Risk for Enterprise Bankruptcy Prediction Using Graph Neural Networks," Papers 2202.03874, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2022.
    18. Kotchen, Matthew J. & Potoski, Matthew, 2014. "Conflicts of interest distort public evaluations: Evidence from NCAA football coaches," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 51-63.
    19. Jiang, Cuiqing & Lyu, Ximei & Yuan, Yufei & Wang, Zhao & Ding, Yong, 2022. "Mining semantic features in current reports for financial distress prediction: Empirical evidence from unlisted public firms in China," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1086-1099.
    20. Leonardo Lamas & José Vitor Senatore & Gilbert Fellingham, 2020. "Two steps for scoring a point: Creating and converting opportunities in invasion team sports," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-16, October.

    More about this item

    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:wly:mgtdec:v:44:y:2023:i:4:p:2223-2236. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976 .

    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.