NCAA Wrap-Up

Baracketer-in-Chief Obama and I correctly picked UNC.

Kudos to the President for picking UNC to win right at the start of the tournament. I just went along round-by-round backing UNC against the points except when they were heavily favoured in round 1. But, I am proud of finishing 5-3 against the President giving him the points in games when I disagreed with his straight-up bracket selections.

Overall, I finished 34-29-1 or 54%. Over two years of following my system in March madness match-ups, I have picked 56% winners against the spread (ATS).

Before falling in love with my genius, note that a plain-vanilla, all-overdogs strategy is 60% ATS over the last two NCAA tournaments.

NBA Update

I am now 51-45-2 or 53% following the Gibbs system of taking all "heavy" underdogs.

Baseball

I won't be active on this site until inter-league baseball starts. I have a very simple system to advise participants in season-long, non-profit pools with points based on posted odds.

Farewell to my friends at http://www.faniq.com/. I'm not happy with the changes at this site and won't be wasting my time there anymore. But, I am still a member of the http://www.crowdpicks.com/ community.

Lady G 1-on-1 vs. Baracketer-in-Chief

I'm glad to see that President Obama managed to find time to fill out his Barackets this year.

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2009/0317/obamasbracket09.jpg

http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/03/a_bracket_you_can_believe_in.php

He's picking winners straight up and I'm picking winners against the spread. But, when he is picking underdogs to win outright, we can delineate clear differences between his prognostications and mine. Just for fun, I will be keeping track of who's got the better system – Veronica Gipp (aka Lady Godiva) from Coventry, England with no knowledge or interest in basketball or the Baracketer-in-Chief. And, I am willing to give the President the benefit of the points even when he is picking upset winners straight up.

Lady G Pick:	Obama Pick:
Arizona	Utah
USC -2	BCU +2
Cal -1	Maryland +1
UCLA -7	VCU +7
LSU -2.5	Butler +2.5
ASU -4.5	Temple +4.5

I won't count the fact that I started correctly picking Morehead State -3.5, while the President opted for Bama State +3.5 in the play-in game.

March Madness

I myself take no interest whatsoever in American college basketball, but toy boy Archibald can't get enough roundball. Every year he organizes a friendly, non-profit office pool for the NCAA men's tourney. Instead of picking bracket winners, the object of his pool is to pick winners against the point spread each and every day as the tournament unfolds. The winner of his winner-take-all pool is the contestant who picks the most winners against the spread over 64 matches. All matches are weighted equally starting with tonight's play-in match to determine the 64^th team through the 6 April championship.

To humour Archibald, I participate by relying on economists' studies showing that "heavy" underdogs win more than their fair share of college basketball games against the point spread, while "non-heavy" overdogs win slightly more than 50% (although this particular result is not statistically significant).

http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/print/179073423.html

Last year, I followed this approach and finished 2nd with a 37-27 record or 57.8%. The "non-heavy" overdogs part of my strategy worked like a dream at 33-19 or 63.5%. But, "heavy" underdogs let me down at 4-8 or 33%. Last year's winner followed a plain-vanilla, all-overdogs approach that took home the prize with a 41-23 record or 64%.

It was very unusual to see overdogs win 64% against the points over 64 games. It has occurred to me that the "science" pointing to "heavy" underdogs in basketball may apply only to regular season matches. Playoffs may be different with teams going all out to bury opponents in elimination games. There is some evidence, albeit inconclusive in a statistical sense, that this may be true in NFL football.

In any case, just for fun I am sticking to the same strategy this year. So, in tonight's play-in match I recommend

Morehead State -3.5 over Alabama State

Thursday games:
Pick	Spread	Against
Bing	+22	Duke
Texas	-4	Minnie
Radford	+26.5	UNC
LSU	-2.5	Butler
Chatt	+20.5	UConn
BYU	-2	Texas A&M
American	+17	Villanova
UCLA	-7	Virginia Comm
CS Northridge	+19.5	Memphis
Cal	-1	Maryland
Morgan	+16.5	Oke
Clemson	-5	Michigan
Purdue	-8.5	N Iowa
Wash	-5	Missie State
Illini	-4.5	WKU
Akron	+12.5	Gonzo
Friday games:
Arizona	0	Utah
Wake	-7.5	Cleve State
Syracuse	-12	SF Austin
ASU	-4.5	Temple
Morehead St.	+21	Louisville
OSU	-3	Siena
ETSU	+20	Pitt
Tennie	-2	Oke State
Bob Morris	+17	Mich State
USC	-2	BCU
Kansas	-10	NDS
WVU	-8.5	Dayton
Cornell	+13	Missouri
Marquette	-4	Utah State
FSU	-2.5	Wisconsin
Xavier	-11	Port State

 

NBA Update

 

So far this year, heavy NBA underdogs are 45-38-2 or 54% against the spread.

 

Friday night take:

 

Minnie +12.5 over HOUSTON

Wash +14.5 over DENVER

 

Archibald refers you roundball fans to a New York Times article by Moneyball author Michael Lewis on the quantitative approach to picking players taken by the management team in charge of the Houston Rockets. We can predict that the Rockets will be a top team for years to come as long as they stick to this plan.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/magazine/15Battier-t.html

Super Bowl Wrap-Up

Through 43 Super Bowls to date, favourites are now 21-20-2 against the point spread and 29-14 even-up.

Lady G's final playoff results:

Picks	Win	Lose
All	5	6
Home Faves	2	3
Home Dogs	3	2
Super Bowl		1
Readers' Choice	3	1
Last Week	Cards +7

 

Underdogs did the playoff barking for the 3^rd consecutive year going 7-4 against the points in 2009.

From 1992 through this year, overdogs boast a 51% winning rate against the points in 187 playoff games. But, this is based entirely on overdogs' 60% run over 7 years from 1992 through the 1999 Super Bowl. Over the past 10 seasons, underdogs have won 55% of playoff games.

187 playoff games since 1992 is too small a sample to say whether playoff games differ from regular season games. If anyone out there has data on NFL playoff results with and without point spreads going back beyond 1992, please feel free to reply and give our readers the benefit of your knowledge.

While I know enough about sports betting to have recorded a 52% record against the points over the past 8 NFL seasons, I don't know anything about the sport itself. I spent most of yesterday's game in the kitchen preparing delicacies for toy boy Archibald. I did see Bruce Springsteen's halftime show. Maybe it's the fact that I came of age musically in England during the 1990s, but I fail to hear what you Yanks hear in that old man's dull drudge. And, what was he thinking opening with Tenth Avenue Freeze-Out – one of his most forgettable tunes? At least Glory Days had something to do with gridiron.

NBA Underdogs

35-26-1 or 57% against the spread for underdogs of 12.5 points or more. The results so far are proving Stanford undergrad whiz kid Gibbs (see 1 November post) correct with his analysis showing that we can expect to see heavy NBA underdogs finish above 50% by a statistically significant margin over at least one full season. I will track this trend for the rest of the year for players in non-profit NBA pools.

Tonight, I recommend taking Sacramento +14 against Phoenix. I'm going with my head over my heart with this one. I agree with fellow Anglobabes Ginger Spice and Elizabeth Hurley that Steve Nash is the cutest man alive (even if he needs to cut his hair).

I may not be as active with this blog for the next little while. T.S. Eliot was clearly no NFL fan. He moved from America to England trading gridiron for rugby and baseball for cricket – losing bets on both counts. And, he wrote that April is the cruellest month. For NFL fans, February is definitely the longest month even without leap day.

But, I will be back every now and then with NBA updates. And, look for me at the end of March when I will be testing Mr. Gibbs' system against the points in the NCAA basketball tournament.