## Poll

4 votes (57.14%) | |||

1 vote (14.28%) | |||

2 votes (28.57%) | |||

1 vote (14.28%) | |||

2 votes (28.57%) | |||

1 vote (14.28%) | |||

2 votes (28.57%) | |||

1 vote (14.28%) | |||

3 votes (42.85%) | |||

1 vote (14.28%) |

**7 members have voted**

Total #1 seeds to make Final Four

Over 1.5 +120

Under 1.5 -110

In the 36 years since the tournament's inception, any given #1 seed team has made it to the Final Four with 40.97% probability.

Thus, the expected number of #1 seeds to make the final four is 4*0.4097 = 1.639.

This would seem to make the over a great bet. Using the Poisson distribution, I estimate the probability of 0 to 4 #1 seeds to make the Final Four as follows:

#1 Seeds | Probability |
---|---|

4 | 0.028181 |

3 | 0.162400 |

2 | 0.350948 |

1 | 0.337069 |

0 | 0.121402 |

Total | 1.000000 |

Taking the sum of 2 to 4 wins, we get a probability of 54.15%.

Getting +120 on a bet with a 54.15% chance of winning has a player advantage of 19.14%.

Next, I looked at the specific teams in the Final Four. Here they are, with the futures odds at Draft Kings and the probability of winning, after squeezing out the juice.

Team | Pays | Probability |
---|---|---|

Arizona | 650 | 0.096345 |

Baylor | 1200 | 0.055584 |

Gonzaga | 300 | 0.180647 |

Kansas | 850 | 0.076062 |

Total | 0.408637 |

The lower right cell shows a probability of a #1 seed winning of 40.86%. Historically, a #1 seed wins with probability 63.89%.

I conclude that this year the #1 seeds are simply not as good as previous tournaments? I welcome all thoughts on that.

I have analyzed lots of other props, but let's get the discussion started with this one.

The question for the poll is which team do you want to win?

Quote:Wizard

I conclude that this year the #1 seeds are simply not as good as previous tournaments? I welcome all thoughts on that.

first, I would like to say, this was a really great post on your part

I don't think I've ever before seen a post on sports betting as interesting or informative as this one

a couple of things which I'm sure are obvious to you but may not be obvious to others

1.______concluding that the #1 seeds are not as good as other years calls for accepting DraftKing's odds as highly accurate. I doubt that very much

I believe that a bet such as this in sports betting - the various factors are so complex - that it is all but impossible to come up with true odds

2.______DraftKings is taking extra vig. - it's going to be obvious to a great many sports bettors when one side is priced at -110 the other side is typically also priced at -110, not -120. don't know why they're doing this - is there collusion amongst all the popular sportsbooks re this_____? or does DraftKings just think they are so powerful in the marketplace that they can do whatever they want and all of the sports bettors will follow along like sheep

my conclusion____________the bet is not a good one

why__? I am comparing the bet to the most common type of over/under bet which just about always requires paying less vig and has a great deal less complexity to analyze.

I have zero interest in making a bet like this unless it was just for fun with some friends. I believe it is possible to get an edge on some over/under bets while I don't believe I could figure out how to get an edge on this one

.

Quote:lilredroosterfirst, I would like to say, this was a really great post on your part.

link to original post

Thank you!

Here is another bet with a perceived big player advantage. Over/under total wins by #11 seed teams.

Number | Pays | Probability | EV |
---|---|---|---|

Over 3.5 | 100 | 0.242424 | -0.515152 |

Under 3.5 | -130 | 0.757576 | 0.340327 |

In the 36 seasons of the tournament thus far, 11 seeds have won 90 games, for an average of exactly 2.5 per year.

Using the Poisson function, the probability of 0 to 3 wins, assuming a mean of 2.5, is 75.76%. That makes laying -130 a great bet, with a 34.03% player advantage.

In case you're wondering, the 11 seeds are Virginia Tech, Michigan, Iowa State, and Notre Dame.

My question -- Is this a good bet or are the 11 seeds this year stronger than usual?

Quote:Wizard

In case you're wondering, the 11 seeds are Virginia Tech, Michigan, Iowa State, and Notre Dame.

My question -- Is this a good bet or are the 11 seeds this year stronger than usual?

link to original post

My opinion is that the 11 seeds may be a little bit stronger than average but also in general I believe there is more parity in the field this year.

Quote:Wizard

In case you're wondering, the 11 seeds are Virginia Tech, Michigan, Iowa State, and Notre Dame.

You forgot Rutgers - and Rutgers and Notre Dame play each other in Dayton two days before the winner plays Alabama in San Diego.

Quote:ThatDonGuyYou forgot Rutgers - and Rutgers and Notre Dame play each other in Dayton two days before the winner plays Alabama in San Diego.

link to original post

Thanks. That was more of a typo than forgetting.

I just came from the Rampart, which uses South Point lines. The only prop that wasn't some kind of futures bet was on the seed to win the whole enchilada. Here they those bets. The probabilities are based on the 36 previous seasons.

Seed | Pays | Probability | EV |
---|---|---|---|

1 | -150 | 0.638889 | 0.064815 |

2 | 200 | 0.138889 | -0.583333 |

3 | 375 | 0.111111 | -0.472222 |

4 | 900 | 0.027778 | -0.722222 |

5 | 1200 | 0.000000 | -1.000000 |

6 to 16 | 1000 | 0.083333 | -0.083333 |

Only perceived advantage is on a #1 seed to win, but we've already covered that the #1 seeds are softer than usual this year.

Quote:Monkmister1Just saying the #1 seeds are weaker does not make it so.

link to original post

I think if you ask any CBB expert, they would tell you the difference between the top four teams and the next eight is much smaller than most years.

I’m guessing <5 seeds 11 and higher win in the round of 64, and <2 make it to the sweet 16. I’m betting the chalk this year! Exceptions are San Francisco and Alabama.