IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/jqsprt/v4y2008i2n8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Simple and Flexible Rating Method for Predicting Success in the NCAA Basketball Tournament: Updated Results from 2007

Author

Listed:
  • West Brady T.

    (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor)

Abstract

This paper first presents a brief review of potential rating tools and methods for predicting success in the NCAA basketball tournament, including those methods (such as the Ratings Percentage Index, or RPI) that receive a great deal of weight in selecting and seeding teams for the tournament. The paper then proposes a simple and flexible rating method based on ordinal logistic regression and expectation (the OLRE method) that is designed to predict success for those teams selected to participate in the NCAA tournament. A simulation based on the parametric Bradley-Terry model for paired comparisons is used to demonstrate the ability of the computationally simple OLRE method to predict success in the tournament, using actual NCAA tournament data from 2006 and 2007. Given that the proposed method can incorporate several different predictors of success in the NCAA tournament when calculating a rating, and is shown to have better predictive power than a model-based approach, it should be considered as an alternative to other rating methods currently used to assign seeds and regions to the teams selected to play in the tournament. The predictive power of the model-based simulation approach is also discussed, given the success of this approach in 2007. The paper concludes with limitations and directions for future work in this area.

Suggested Citation

  • West Brady T., 2008. "A Simple and Flexible Rating Method for Predicting Success in the NCAA Basketball Tournament: Updated Results from 2007," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:4:y:2008:i:2:n:8
    DOI: 10.2202/1559-0410.1099
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1559-0410.1099
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1559-0410.1099?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Coleman Jay & Lynch Allen K, 2009. "NCAA Tournament Games: The Real Nitty-Gritty," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 5(3), pages 1-27, July.
    2. Ludden Ian G. & Khatibi Arash & King Douglas M. & Jacobson Sheldon H., 2020. "Models for generating NCAA men’s basketball tournament bracket pools," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Grimshaw Scott D. & Sabin R. Paul & Willes Keith M., 2013. "Analysis of the NCAA Men’s Final Four TV audience," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 115-126, June.
    4. Gray Kathy L. & Schwertman Neil C., 2012. "Comparing Team Selection and Seeding for the 2011 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-13, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:4:y:2008:i:2:n:8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.