Affiliation:
1. University of Iowa , Iowa City , USA
Abstract
Abstract
Previously published statistical analyses of NCAA Division I Men’s Tournament (“March Madness”) game outcomes have revealed that the relationship between tournament seed and the time-aggregated number of third-round (“Sweet 16”) appearances for the middle half of the seeds exhibits a statistically and practically significant departure from monotonicity. In particular, the 8- and 9-seeds combined appear less often than any one of seeds 10–12. In this article, we show that a similar “middle-seed anomaly” also occurs in the NCAA Division I Women’s Tournament but does not occur in two other major sports tournaments that are similar in structure to March Madness. We offer explanations for the presence of a middle-seed anomaly in the NCAA basketball tournaments, and its absence in the others, that are based on the combined effects of the functional form of the relationship between team strength and seed specific to each tournament, the degree of parity among teams, and certain elements of tournament structure. Although these explanations account for the existence of middle-seed anomalies in the NCAA basketball tournaments, their larger-than-expected magnitudes, which arise mainly from the overperformance of seeds 10–12 in the second round, remain enigmatic.
Subject
Decision Sciences (miscellaneous),Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
Reference15 articles.
1. Baumann, R., V. A. Matheson, and C. A. Howe. 2010. “Anomalies in Tournament Design: The Madness of March Madness.” Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports 6: 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2202/1559-0410.1233.
2. Bradley, R. A., and M. E. Terry. 1952. “Rank Analysis of Incomplete Block Designs: I. The Method of Paired Comparisons.” Biometrika 39: 324–45. https://doi.org/10.2307/2334029.
3. Clay, D. C., A. S. Bro, and N. J. Clay. 2015. “Geospatial Determinants of Game Outcomes in NCAA Men’s Basketball.” The International Journal of Sport and Society 4: 71–81. https://doi.org/10.18848/2152-7857/cgp/v04i04/64015.
4. Doyel, G. 2009. Eight, Nine, Futility Time: Cowboys, Saints will Learn Sunday. Also available at http://www.cbssports.com/print/collegebasketball/story/11533417/rss.
5. Dykstra, R., and H. El Barmi. 2006. “Chi-bar-square Distributions.” In Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences, edited by S. Kotz, C. B. Read, N. Balakrishnan, B. Vidakovic, and N. L. Johnson, 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.