Contrarian strategies for NCAA tournament pools: A cure for march madness?

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Further Reading

  1. Breiter, D.J. and Carlin, B.P. (1997). “How To Play Office Pools if You Must.” CHANCE, 10: 324–345.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Carlin, B.P. (1996), “Improved NCAA Basketball Tournament Modeling via Point Spread and Team Strength Information.” The American Statistician, 50:39–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Clair, B. and Letscher, D. (2005). “Optimal Strategies for Sports Betting Pools.” Department of Mathematics, Saint Louis University.

  4. Kaplan, E.H. and Garstka, S.J. (2001). “March Madness and the Office Pool.” Management Science, 47:369–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Metrick, A. (1996). “March Madness? Strategic Behavior in NCAA Basketball Tournament Betting Pools.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 96:159–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Niemi, J.B. (2005). “Identifying and Evaluating Contrarian Strategies for NCAA Tournament Pools.” Master’s thesis, Division of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota.

  7. Schwertman, N.C.; McCready, T.A.; and Howard, L. (1991). “Probability Models for the NCAA Regional Basketball Tournaments.” The American Statistician, 45:35–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Schwertman, N.C.; Schenk, K.L.; and Holbrook, B.C. (1996). “More Probability Models for the NCAA Regional Basketball Tournaments.” The American Statistician, 50:34–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Stern, H. (1991). “On the Probability of Winning a Football Game,” The American Statistician, 45:179–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

About this article

Cite this article

Niemi, J.B., Carlin, B.P. & Alexander, J.M. Contrarian strategies for NCAA tournament pools: A cure for march madness?. CHANCE 21, 35–42 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00144-008-0009-3

Download citation