In honor of “drebola,” who said the following over on Reddit…
I love Paulsen’s analyses, but in practice they’re actually useless. I replicated his bracket for one of my pools and it faillled. (Notice you don’t see any coverage of “how well is my bracket doing” on his site… or do you? I don’t know, I don’t see it.)
Particularly because he relies a lot on Sagarin ratings. I keep meaning to come up with a figure for how well Sagarin ratings performed so far in this tournament but haven’t gotten around to coming up with a solid methodology.
…I am going to provide some coverage of how well my bracket is doing. (I thought I did this in my Sweet Sixteen preview intro and in Part III of my March Madness diary, but I’ll summarize here for anyone who thinks I’m dodging my past.)
The first round was rough, and I only got 22 of 32 games correct (but my worst loss was an Elite Eight team, so it’s not like it killed my bracket). Of those 10 losses, six were by four points or less; Ohio State, Utah State, Clemson, Illinois, Butler and Florida State lost by an average of 2.7 points, so these are games that could have gone either way. Conversely, I only won two games — UCLA and Oklahoma State — by four points or less.
West Virginia lost by eight, but the game was close the whole way, and even Utah kept its game close deep into the second half before giving up a late run that made the score look worse than it actually was. There were two bad picks — BYU and Wake Forest, and I’m betting a lot of people got that the last one wrong. They were the #1-ranked team at one point this season — who’s expecting them to lose to Cleveland State?




