Bracketology Update
Not many people predicted to 12-13 matchups in the second round, but if they had, they would have runup some nice points given our upset-bonus in the scoring system. Here are the standings to date, which I reproduce only because, well, I am in them:
Bracket Rank Points Correct Games Upset Risk % Possible Games Jeff Charleston 1 74 37 16.7 52 hopeful 2 71 34 23.4 44 Keith Ehlers 3 70 36 16.7 48 Warren Meyer #2 4 70 33 21.4 46 Ron Gallagher 5 69 36 10.8 47 Nicholas Stergion ii 6 69 32 35.3 43 Dawn Werner 7 69 31 29.2 40 Stan Brown 8 69 30 32.0 43 Wade Condict #2 9 67 35 25.0 44 Craig 10 67 35 10.3 47 Paul Noonan 11 66 31 26.3 42 Warren Meyer 12 65 34 14.3 47
The good news is that both my brackets are in the top 12. The bad news is that I do a good job every year of picking early upsets and racking up early round points, and then I fall by the wayside in later rounds. We will see if I can hang in there. By the way, my loud-mouthed, smack-dealing son is in 76th place. The leader has 14 of his sweet-16 still intact, while my brackets have 11 and 9 respectively, which are pretty good leading indicators for future problems for yours truly.
One of the reason I like pickhoops.com is that they have some cool analysis tools. Here is my favorite, analyzing who has the best chances to win:
| 15 games remaining | Must wins for best finish | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current rank (score) |
Player (125 total) |
Best finish (chance) |
Worst finish (chance) |
Super Sixteen | Exciting Eight | Final Few | Champion |
| 1 (74) | 1 (29.6%) | 47 (<1%) | |||||
| 2 (71) | 1 (7.1%) | 90 (<1%) | Wiscon | ||||
| 3 (70) | 1 (4%) | 85 (<1%) | Memphs | ||||
| 4 (70) | 1 (7.2%) | 83 (<1%) | Xavier | ||||
| 5 (69) | 1 (<1%) | 67 (<1%) | |||||
| 6 (69) | 1 (4.3%) | 100 (<1%) | |||||
| 7 (69) | 1 (<1%) | 95 (<1%) | Memphs Xavier | Memphs | |||
| 8 (69) | 1 (19.5%) | 92 (<1%) | |||||
| 9 (67) | 1 (<1%) | 95 (<1%) | Memphs Xavier | Memphs | |||
| 10 (67) | 1 (1.5%) | 68 (<1%) | |||||
| 11 (66) | 1 (3.1%) | 101 (<1%) | |||||
| 12 (65) | 1 (2.9%) | 89 (<1%) | |||||
| 13 (64) | 1 (<1%) | 64 (<1%) | UNC | UNC | UNC | ||
| 14 (63) | 1 (<1%) | 66 (<1%) | |||||
| 15 (63) | 1 (<1%) | 62 (<1%) | Kansas Memphs | Kansas | |||
| 16 (62) | 1 (<1%) | 74 (<1%) | Memphs | Memphs | |||
| 17 (62) | 1 (1.6%) | 85 (<1%) | |||||
| 18 (62) | 1 (1.6%) | 104 (<1%) | Tenn | Tenn | |||
| 19 (61) | 1 (<1%) | 93 (<1%) | Davdsn Stanfd UCLA Xavier | UCLA | UCLA | UCLA | |
| 20 (60) | 1 (1.2%) | 112 (<1%) | Texas | Texas | Texas | Texas | |
See the whole analysis here.
