pbfans.com NCAA Tournament Pool

• #30 Reply
  Posted by Wolfman on 19 Mar, 2004 23:49
• And since I\'m a long-time pool commissioner and numbers geek, I would like to break down and analyze Yahoo\'s scoring system.  The scoring system is 1-2-4-8-16-32 points per round.  
  
  Good side:
  -Nice balance between first 3 rounds and last 3 rounds.  Later games are generally worth appropriately more.    
  -Equal points available each round...consistancy.
  -You could argue that there is too much weight in the last 2 rounds.  Having one extra team sneak into the Final Four and/or the finals could nullify your opponent\'s consistent dominance in rounds 1-3.  However, I like the extra weight because it keeps everyone in it.  Nothing makes for a boring pool more than having people basically out of it after the first weekend.  Even if you have a bad first weekend, your big picks can still carry the mail.  
  
  Bad side:
  -Picking the champion is worth just as much as picking the ENTIRE FINAL FOUR?  Bad.  Picking the champion is just a matter of taking a 1 or 2 seed and writing them all the way in.  Last year was an exception, 1-3 seeds almost always win.  It\'s always a team that a lot of people have, and is thus not super hard.  Picking the entire Final Four is a major accomplishment in bracketeering.  I\'ve only had 1 person ever do it in the 5 pools I\'ve run out of about 500-600 total entrants.  
  - No upset points in round 1.  This is such an interesting aspect that can\'t be ignored.  There\'s nothing more boring than watching someone who picks nothing but favorites take the lead when there are almost no upsets.  It\'s the only round where you know the matchups from the start, so it\'s a perfect time to add this dynamic.
  -Too many multiples of 4...too many similar scores and possible ties.  
  
  My favorite system is 2-5-10-15-20-25 w/ 3 points for round 1 upsets, or, if I have some dynamic players on my hands, 3 points for upsets seeds 9-11 and 4 points for upsets seeds 12-16.  The weighting here is a little different, more emphasis on consistancy throughout the rounds rather than in the last 2 or 3 rounds.  It\'s better for most because middle-round games matter more, whereas in the Yahoo system the first 3 rounds mean little.  This system thus generates more games that are meaningful.  It\'s worse for a few because the most points in my system are scored in rounds 3 and 4, so there\'s always a few people who are more or less out before the Final Four.  The 2 points in round 1 throws the last digit of everyone\'s score off, then it stays consistent with the 5\'s and 0\'s, so you never have to worry about a tie, and you always know exactly how many more games you need than the other guy to take him over.  Picking the entire Final Four is worth slightly more than twice as much as picking the champ (60 vs 25.)  It\'s at least 3 times harder to pick the entire Final Four than just the champion, so this is a good point to be at while still having meaning to your championship game.
• 
  
• #31 Reply
  Posted by oldnewbie on 19 Mar, 2004 23:55
• i forgot to get in like a dumb ass....sorry...i do have an entry in on the moe board if you want to take it....my favorite pool wolfy, is a seed pool where you get points solely on the the seed of the team you pick to win, with a bonus for the national champ...theoretically, by picking some upsets,you could win without the national champ but it would be unlikely...it\'s fun and it encourages you to take some chances
• 
  
• #32 Reply
  Posted by Wolfman on 20 Mar, 2004 00:03
• That\'s an interesting idea.  I\'d need more detail, but thats ok, I can see where it is going.  However, I don\'t like systems where one virtually has to pick the champion to have a chance at winning.  Mot systems are like this, and I think the Yahoo! system is dangerously close...we\'ll see.  To me, later rounds obviously should be worth more, but at the same time pool victory should be based largely on consistently good picks throughout the difficult matchups in rounds 2-5.  Pools with such heavy weight on the champion might as well just ask people for their champion pick, with the other finalist as a tiebreaker, and to hell with the rest of the bracket.  That\'s not the way it should be.
  
  * * *
  On that note, my super-dirty tiebreaker that I\'ve never gotten to use is simply who made more correct picks.  (Or you could think of it as every round is worth 1 point.)  A lot of emphasis on round 1, I know, but hey, you knew the matchups from the start!  I find this tiebreaker compelling, but ties in the 2-5-10-15-20-25 system are pretty much impossible.
• 
  
• #33 Reply
  Posted by Drew_Kingsley on 20 Mar, 2004 00:17
• Not a bad start for my bracket.  I had a few gambles backfire (see: Western Michigan), but I\'ve got 15 of my Sweet 16 still alive.  Kentucky and North Carolina (my finalists) both scared me this weekend, hopefully they got that out of their system.
• 
  
• #34 Reply
  Posted by ChrisPitch on 20 Mar, 2004 00:31
• I went 24-8 for the first round, but more importantly, did not lose a Sweet 16 team. And though Wake Forest is one of my Sweet 16 teams, I\'m rooting for the Jaspers tomorrow, and wouldn\'t be shocked if they pulled off the upset.
  
  Pitch
• 
  
• #35 Reply
  Posted by oldnewbie on 20 Mar, 2004 00:44
• yeah but you know you cain\'t win......your a mets fan....course...i cain\'t win cause i\'m a dumb ass...but that won\'t keep me from pokin\' fun at you
• 
  
• #36 Reply
  Posted by ChrisPitch on 20 Mar, 2004 02:17
• I\'m starting to think that you\'re a ROYAL pain
  
  Hardy Har,
  
  Pitch
• 
  
• #37 Reply
  Posted by oldnewbie on 20 Mar, 2004 09:43
• chris....watch sports center this am for your royals spring training update with harold reynolds...not to be missed
• 
  
• #38 Reply
  Posted by antbach on 20 Mar, 2004 11:58
• after a 19/20 start I went 6/12 in the night games to end the 1st round at 25-7 with 3 sweet 16 teams out oh well, got my hopes high for nothing, wonder how im doing in the Breakfast Fans group. . .
• 
  
• #39 Reply
  Posted by Wolfman on 20 Mar, 2004 12:21
• OK, I\'m really letting the geekdom hang loose in this thread...
  
  Consider this when thinking about how much harder it is to pick the Final Four than the champion:
  
  Using only seeds 1-4 in each region, there are 256 possible Final Fours.  (4 to the 4th power.)  Using only seeds 1-5 in each region, there are 625 possible Final Fours. (5 to the 4th power.)  And 5 seeds have a funny habit of having one make it every year.  
  
  Most people only consider 1-2 seeds as their champion.  Using only 1-2 seeds in each region, there are 8 possible champions.  Using only 1-4 seeds, there are 16 possible champions.  
  
  Bottom line:  It is much, much, much harder to pick the Final Four than the champion.  A scoring system should reflect this.
  
  P.S.  There are 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 ways to fill out the bracket!!!!!  (2 to the 63rd power.)  
  
  In case you\'re writing that out on a check, that\'s nine thousand two hundred twenty three thousand trillion three hundred seventy two trillion thirty six billion eight hundred fifty four million seven hundred seventy five thousand eight hundred and eight dollars and zero cents.
  
  :chin: :hscratch: :holyshit: :huh:
• 
  
• #40 Reply
  Posted by antbach on 20 Mar, 2004 13:51
• :hscratch:
  
  If you say so, heh
• 
  
• #41 Reply
  Posted by realisthis on 20 Mar, 2004 16:04
• O man! sound it!
• 
  
• #42 Reply
  Posted by oldnewbie on 20 Mar, 2004 17:14
• did anyone else just skim that?
• 
  
• #43 Reply
  Posted by leith on 20 Mar, 2004 18:28
• There is some ser wiring going on in Wolf\'s skull.
• 
  
• #44 Reply
  Posted by Wolfman on 20 Mar, 2004 19:10
• Quote

  Originally posted by oldnewbie
  did anyone else just skim that?

  
  
  That\'s OK Duane, not everyone can keep up with me  These posts are for the Chris Pitches of the world.
•