Best March Madness / NCAA bracket scoring system?

Question

I'm always looking to figure out the most fair scoring system when it comes to my tournament bracket game. Usually I go straight points per round, and try and balance it so that each round is worth approximately the same amount of points (for example, last year I used 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 as my scoring system; other years I have used 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32). Other years I have toyed with these values along with a multiplier. Given that most of the online options are either round * seed or round + seed, what are scoring systems that you have used that tend to be the most balanced and what are the points you assign to each round? This question is geared specifically at people who have run tournaments; I can get feedback from those who are mere participants by picking up the phone.

I did use a system that had round * (round + seed) and that probably was the most balanced formula, but obviously Yahoo / CBS/ etc. do not offer this as an option. Thanks!

These are good suggestions so far. Right now I'm thinking 1, 2, 4, 6, 10, 15. I don't like the idea of overly heavy later rounds (e.g., doubling each round) because it has the effect of rendering the first round totally useless. Making it low scoring has the effect of making it a pure guessing game, but would result in practically the same outcome as in any other scoring system.

1, 2, 4, 6, 10, 15, I think, is a little better than 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 15 because under 2-4-6-8-10-15, the Final Four is only four times a first round game. I like to put a little more weight to getting a correct Final Four team. Also under that system, picking the final team would be worth only 5x a first round game. I think the 1, 2, 4, 6, 10, 15 solves most of those problems (and makes picking a final team 10x the worth of a first round game).

I'm curious if there are better ways that work, but each organizer kind of has their own preferences so it's good to hear about what works and what doesn't

Answer 1

I have analyzed this over and over again from a mathematical / statistical point of view for quite a few years now. For the past few years I have used per-round scoring of 2-3-5-8-13-21 by round, plus a seed score of seed# x round#. It works out really well for my pool and the point balances seem to be very fair. Let me explain why I chose this system...

First, the standard round scoring of 2-3-5-8-13-21. For those of you who are mathematically inclined (or are big DaVinci Code fans), you will recognize these scores as Fibonacci numbers. This type of progression just happens to fit well with a bracket elimination type of structure, and the weighting of games in progressive rounds seems to make sense. With the more traditional 1-2-4-8-16-32 system, the championship game is worth 32X as much as any first round game, which in effect makes the first round games almost useless. With "Fibonacci" scoring, the championship game is worth 10.5X as much as each first round game, which is much more reasonable. It's not much different than your 1-2-4-6-8-12 system in that regard.

Now, for the seed# x round# part, I will admit that I was initially opposed to any kind of weighted scoring based on seeds. However, my pool participants repeatedly asked for some kind of reward for picking underdogs, so I eventually caved in. After a bunch of number crunching, I decided that seed# x round# fit in very nicely with the Fibonacci number scoring. Let's look at a couple of scenarios. Consider the 2006 tourney where George Mason went to the Final Four as an 11 seed, and Florida, a #1 seed, won the national championship. Anyone who picked Florida to go all the way would have been rewarded with 73 total points. Naturally, lots of people picked them as a champion since they were a top seed. Now, for George Mason....if you had picked them to go to the Final Four, you would have been rewarded with 128 points which is 1.75X the points you would have received for picking Florida as the champ. Considering that few 11 seeds make it to the Final Four, George Mason was a risky pick, and if you had made that pick it would have paid off accordingly.

Now let's say someone picked all four 14 seeds just to try to rack up points early, and let's say that 2 of them win. That player would get 32 points - 16 for each team (2 standard + 14 seed). However, that person would lose 10 of those points right off the bat from the two 3 seeds that won, so his net gain is only 22 points. If either of those 3 seeds wins a second round game, he's out another 14 points for each. So, it clearly does not pay to go heavy on the low seeds to get the early points.

Bottom line is you still have to pick winners, regardless of the scoring system that is in place.

Answer 2

I like the 1-2-4-6-12-18 (or something close) but with a modification. In the case of an upset I give the differential between the seeds as a bonus. So, a 16 upsets a 1, it's worth 16 points. An 8 upsets a 9 it's only 2. This gives real advantage to players who take a chance and allows early round games chosen correctly to have a significant impact on the winner.

Answer 3

I like the idea of weighting the 1st round games based on seed # - #s 1-9 = 1 pt, #10 = 2, #11 = 3, #12 = 4, #13 = 5, etc. thru # 16 in increments of 1. Seems if you take the gamble on a 12 - 16 seed, and they win, you ought to get comped for it. For ex - a #12 wins every year - trick is to pick the right one and get the 4 pts.

I've been doing it for over 10 yrs, and after the 1st round have gone with 2, 4, 8, 12, 16. All 8 Elite 8 = 10 bonus pts, all 4 Final 4 = 5 bonus pts. Nice incentive - tho nobody has ever gotten either of these bonuses.

Answer 4

Personally I like leaving all the point values in single digits to keep the scoring low and tight. This also allows a person to win the bracket pool even if they didn't pick the right champion. The scoring I go with is:

1st Round Games: 1 Point

2nd Round Games: 2 Points

Sweet 16 Games: 3 Points

Elite 8 Games: 4 Points

Final 4 Games: 6 Points

Championship Game: 8 Points

Answer 5

I agree with 1-2-4-8-16-32 because if you had a perfect bracket (obviously extremely rare) you would have the same score each round. In my opinion, the idea of a pool is to pick the winning team. Here are some facts though: the average seed to make the Final Four is 2.8, but at least one #1 seed has made it to the Final Four all but two times (last year and 1980). The bottom line is that many scoring systems work... find one that you and your friends agree with and adjust your picks based on that system.

Answer 6

March Madness Bracket Scoring

Answer 7

Fibonacci scoring is excellent. As you know it is related to Lucas numbers or Lukester the famous chemical engineer from Lafayette, LA. The value of these is that you get a better system to score your bracket and it is much more competitive. It helps the underdog more and Americans love the underdog especially in the NCAA men's basketball tournament. It adds a lot of fun and excitement to picking your bracket and trash talking and horsing around with friends. Unfortunately the tournament usually takes place during lent and most people give up watching TV for lent so you miss a lot of the tournament and have to check your bracket in the newspaper so you have to wait for the next day to see what is happening.

Anyway, just pick a bracket scoring system and stick with it throughout the tournament. If you change in mid-tournament you will really tick a few people off because they will never be able to figure out what is going through your mind and they will think you are changing the system for your own benefit which will create a LOT of animosity between you and your compadres and they will likely not want to play in your bracket in the future. Not to mention if there is money involved (and I'm not sure about the legality of that) they will really get angry. It just seems better to keep everything on the up-and-up and pick a scoring system BEFORE the tournament starts, stick with the scoring system THROUGHOUT the tournament and just have fun.

Good luck!!! Hope this helps.

Answer 8

This Site Might Help You.

RE:
Best March Madness / NCAA bracket scoring system?
I'm always looking to figure out the most fair scoring system when it comes to my tournament bracket game. Usually I go straight points per round, and try and balance it so that each round is worth approximately the same amount of points (for example, last year I used 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 as my...

Answer 9

Has anyone considered reducing the value of the championship game? I remember back in my wrestling days, team scores in tournaments were weighted so that winning your semi-final match carried the heaviest point load. I seem to remember 16 person brackets being team-scored 2-4-8-4 so if your team had a lot of guys at least make it to the finals, it didn't matter team-wise as much if they won or lost. I'm not exactly sure of the reasoning, but I thought I'd float the idea out there to see if others have seen similar.

Answer 10

5 - 8- 12 - 18 - 24 - 32 and add the seed of the winner. Ex. If you pick a 12 in round one, you get 17 (5+12) as opposed to 10 if you pick the 5 seed (5+5). If you choose a 12 seed to go deep, you keep getting the extra 12 points (as opposed to only getting an extra 1 from choosing a top seed. The standard system basically names the winner by who picks the National Champion - even if their bracket was terrible overall.