IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/amstat/v70y2016i4p342-349.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving the Big East Conference Basketball Tournament

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher Abdul-Chani
  • Jesse Frey

Abstract

The Big East Conference basketball tournament is a four-day, 10-team, knockout tournament that is used to decide which team receives the conference’s automatic bid to the NCAA basketball tournament. Through data-based modeling, we show that the current tournament format is not very effective in determining the true best team. Specifically, by considering a variety of alternate formats, we find that certain formats that exclude all but a handful of teams substantially outperform the current format in determining the true best team. We also find that among formats that involve all ten teams, a format in which the top two seeds each receive two byes is relatively effective. We show that our conclusions are robust to several key modeling choices. We also investigate the effectiveness of the tie-breaking scheme used by the Big East Conference, finding that it is little better than random and may even favor weaker teams.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher Abdul-Chani & Jesse Frey, 2016. "Improving the Big East Conference Basketball Tournament," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(4), pages 342-349, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:amstat:v:70:y:2016:i:4:p:342-349
    DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2015.1105153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00031305.2015.1105153
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00031305.2015.1105153?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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:amstat:v:70:y:2016:i:4:p:342-349. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UTAS20 .

    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.