Contrarian View On The NCAA Tournament 1st Round
I’m a big believer in looking at the past in order to predict the future, so I decided to take a look at last year’s 1st round games. One surprising trend was that favorites went 21-10 against the spread and #1 and #2 seeds were 5-3 against the spread as well. One game had a spread with a pick ‘em spread, which is why there are only 31 games being looked at here.My theory is that the betting public lines up on underdogs during the 1st round of the NCAA tournament. Oddsmakers know this and release lines that present excellent value with favorites. Let’s take a closer look at this idea to see if it was an anomaly last year or something worth looking at in this year’s tournament.
VIEW EVAN ALTEMUS’ DAILY SPORTS PICKS PAGES —->
First and foremost, the topic which generates the most interest during March Madness is which team is going to be this year’s George Mason or Davidson. In addition, the average person is trying to figure out which underdogs will pull off the upset this year in the 1st round. So much talk is about these potential “Cinderella” teams, that most of the seeds around the #3-#7 range are ignored.
The betting public is also fixated on these Cinderella teams as well. The average bettor focuses on which 1st round underdogs to take, instead of looking for value with under-rated favorites. The oddsmakers know this as well, which is why they don’t give most of the favorites enough points in the 1st round.
Last season teams like Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Butler, Marquette, Michigan State, Xavier, Pittsburgh, and Louisville were put on supposed upset alert, as they all faced teams which the supposed experts on television and betting public thought were capable of pulling the upset. However, the previous list of favorites all got dominating wins over their opponents, and most of their wins from a point spread perspective were never in doubt.
Let’s also take a look at last year’s 1st round games involving the following seeds where the public is fixated on picking upsets: 3rd seed vs. 14th seed, 4th vs. 13th, 5th vs. 12th, 6th vs. 11th and 7th vs. 10th. Let’s remove the St. Mary’s vs. Miami game from our discussion, as that game had a pick ’em point spread. That leaves 19 match-up to take a look at. The favorites in those games went an astonishing 14-5 against the spread! Siena, Kansas State, Villanova, San Diego, and Western Kentucky were the only teams to cover against the spread, and they all won outright. Essentially, these games involving teams on supposed upset alert had favorites go 74%. The few underdogs which did cover won outright. However, I don’t consider Kansas State or Western Kentucky true bracket buster underdog winners, as they were very evenly matched talent wise with their opponents. In fact, the argument could be made that they shouldn’t have been underdogs. Kansas State had Michael Beasley and Bill Walker, while Western Kentucky had Courtney Lee.
Bottom line, from a betting perspective, try to look at undervalued favorites in the 1st round, as the betting public will be lining up on the underdogs. This time of the year is one of the rare occasions where the value is on the favorite, as the public will be looking for upset shockers. Oddsmakers know this and have adjusted the lines accordingly. Picking and betting on favorites is not as exciting but making money is.
Although, I’d rather be boring, pick the favorites, and have a profitable 1st round.
————————————————————
One reply on “1st Round Tournament Picks Analysis”
There will be some big upsets this year because there always is. Trying to predict who they will be is a whole other story. There may be some that you can rationalize with statistics, but it still at best an educated guess. My theory is to play mostly favorites from the 5th seed down, and then look for a couple 10 or 11 seed upsets.