Tuesday, March 17, 2015

Metabracketology 2015

This is my annual post about metabracketology, or bracketology-ology.

The College Women's Hoops S-Factor correctly predicted 62 of the 64 teams in the tournament this year, missing on the inclusion of Tulane and Arkansas.  The S-Factor predicted the seeds of the field within one seed of the result for 51 of the 64 teams, far better than the next nearest numeric ranking algorithm (Omni Rankings, only 43 of 64).

I looked at all 33 of the prediction methodologies included in the Who Got Screwed? post, plus the ranking method of WayneBearCal on rebkell.net, which is a composite of the Massey Rating, Massey Power Rating, RPI, and Sagarin PurePoints Predictor.

 

Table 1: Selection of entire field

Rank
Overall selection
No.
Pct.
Borda count pts.
Paymon pts.
1
Creme's bracket
64
100%
34
192
1
Creme, no bumps
64
100%
34
192
3
SpaceJunkie
63
98%
32
189
3
Matt5762 bracket
63
98%
32
189
3
CSM bracket
63
98%
32
189
6
S-Factor (2015 formula)
62
97%
29
186
6
My bracket
62
97%
29
186
6
WayneBearCal "Proper"
62
97%
29
186
6
S-Factor (old blend)
62
97%
29
186
6
RealtimeRPI RPI
62
97%
29
186
6
RealtimeRPI bracket
62
97%
29
186
6
Pilight's Field of 64
62
97%
29
186
6
Massey Rating
62
97%
29
186
6
Adjusted Stats EWP
62
97%
29
186
15
Warren Nolan RPI
61
95%
20
183
15
Sagarin Rating
61
95%
20
183
15
Sagarin ELO
61
95%
20
183
15
NCAA RPI
61
95%
20
183
15
Massey Power
61
95%
20
183
15
GaTech LRMC(0)
61
95%
20
183
15
BennettRank
61
95%
20
183
22
Sonny Moore
60
94%
13
180
22
Sagarin PURE_POINTS
60
94%
13
180
22
RealtimeRPI Power
60
94%
13
180
22
Omni Rankings
60
94%
13
180
26
Omni bracket
59
92%
9
177
26
GaTech LRMC Classic
59
92%
9
177
26
GaTech LRMC Bayesian
59
92%
9
177
29
Sagarin GoldenMean
58
91%
6
174
30
Warren Nolan NPI
55
86%
5
165
31
NCAA W-L %
51
80%
4
153
32
D1SN "poll"
46
72%
3
138
33
AP poll
36
56%
2
108
34
Coaches poll
35
55%
1
105




Table 2: Predicted exact seeds, entire field of 64

Rank
Exact seeds –
entire field
No.
Pct.
Borda count pts.
Paymon pts.
1
SpaceJunkie
30
46.9%
34
60
1
Matt5762 bracket
30
46.9%
34
60
1
Creme's bracket
30
46.9%
34
60
4
CSM bracket
29
45.3%
31
58
4
Creme, no bumps
29
45.3%
31
58
6
Omni Rankings
28
43.8%
29
56
7
My bracket
25
39.1%
28
50
7
Sagarin PURE_POINTS
25
39.1%
28
50
7
GaTech LRMC Classic
25
39.1%
28
50
7
BennettRank
25
39.1%
28
50
11
Adjusted Stats EWP
24
37.5%
24
48
12
WayneBearCal "Proper"
23
35.9%
23
46
12
Massey Power
23
35.9%
23
46
14
S-Factor (2015 formula)
22
34.4%
21
44
14
Sonny Moore
22
34.4%
21
44
14
Sagarin Rating
22
34.4%
21
44
14
Omni bracket
22
34.4%
21
44
18
S-Factor (old blend)
21
32.8%
17
42
18
Massey Rating
21
32.8%
17
42
20
RealtimeRPI bracket
20
31.3%
15
40
20
GaTech LRMC Bayesian
20
31.3%
15
40
22
Sagarin ELO
17
26.6%
13
34
22
Pilight's Field of 64
17
26.6%
13
34
24
Sagarin GoldenMean
16
25.0%
11
32
24
RealtimeRPI Power
16
25.0%
11
32
24
D1SN "poll"
16
25.0%
11
32
27
RealtimeRPI RPI
13
20.3%
8
26
27
GaTech LRMC(0)
13
20.3%
8
26
27
AP poll
13
20.3%
8
26
30
Coaches poll
12
18.8%
5
24
31
NCAA RPI
10
15.6%
4
20
32
Warren Nolan RPI
9
14.1%
3
18
33
Warren Nolan NPI
8
12.5%
2
16
34
NCAA W-L %
7
10.9%
1
14



The S-Factor and the RPI calculations predicted exact seeds shockingly poorly this year. Last year, RPI correctly predicted the seeds of 29 teams, second only to Charlie Creme. This year, RPI only predicted the seeds of 9 teams, good for 31st place. The S-Factor was better, having predicted the seeds of 22 teams correctly, but this was a middle-of-the-pack result.

Table 3: Predicted seeds within 1 seed of actual result, entire field

Rank
Seeds within 1 -
entire field
No.
Pct.
Borda count pts.
1
SpaceJunkie
57
89.1%
34
2
Creme, no bumps
55
85.9%
33
3
Matt5762 bracket
54
84.4%
32
3
Creme's bracket
54
84.4%
32
5
S-Factor (2015 formula)
51
79.7%
30
5
RealtimeRPI bracket
51
79.7%
30
7
CSM bracket
50
78.1%
28
8
Omni Rankings
43
67.2%
27
8
Omni bracket
43
67.2%
27
8
BennettRank
43
67.2%
27
11
WayneBearCal "Proper"
42
65.6%
24
11
Sagarin Rating
42
65.6%
24
11
Sagarin PURE_POINTS
42
65.6%
24
14
My bracket
41
64.1%
21
15
S-Factor (old blend)
40
62.5%
20
15
Sagarin GoldenMean
40
62.5%
20
15
Massey Power
40
62.5%
20
18
Sagarin ELO
39
60.9%
17
18
RealtimeRPI Power
39
60.9%
17
18
Pilight's Field of 64
39
60.9%
17
18
Massey Rating
39
60.9%
17
18
GaTech LRMC(0)
39
60.9%
17
23
Warren Nolan RPI
38
59.4%
12
23
NCAA RPI
38
59.4%
12
23
GaTech LRMC Classic
38
59.4%
12
23
Adjusted Stats EWP
38
59.4%
12
27
Sonny Moore
37
57.8%
8
27
GaTech LRMC Bayesian
37
57.8%
8
29
RealtimeRPI RPI
36
56.3%
6
30
D1SN "poll"
28
43.8%
5
31
Coaches poll
24
37.5%
4
32
AP poll
22
34.4%
3
33
Warren Nolan NPI
20
31.3%
2
34
NCAA W-L %
16
25.0%
1



The S-Factor was a much better predictor of teams once the window was widened to include seeds plus or minus one from predicted.  80% of teams were seeded nearly correctly by the S-Factor.  Of course, we were all eating SpaceJunkie's dust this year.

Table 4: Predicted exact seeds, top 12 seeds only

Rank
Exact seeds -
Top 12 seeds only
No.
Pct.
Borda count pts.
1
SpaceJunkie
27
56.3%
34
1
Matt5762 bracket
27
56.3%
34
3
Creme's bracket
26
54.2%
32
4
Creme, no bumps
25
52.1%
31
5
CSM bracket
23
47.9%
30
6
BennettRank
20
41.7%
29
7
My bracket
19
39.6%
28
7
Omni Rankings
19
39.6%
28
7
Adjusted Stats EWP
19
39.6%
28
10
GaTech LRMC Classic
18
37.5%
25
11
S-Factor (2015 formula)
17
35.4%
24
11
Sagarin PURE_POINTS
17
35.4%
24
13
WayneBearCal "Proper"
16
33.3%
22
13
S-Factor (old blend)
16
33.3%
22
13
Massey Rating
16
33.3%
22
13
Massey Power
16
33.3%
22
13
D1SN "poll"
16
33.3%
22
18
Sonny Moore
15
31.3%
17
18
Sagarin Rating
15
31.3%
17
18
Omni bracket
15
31.3%
17
18
GaTech LRMC Bayesian
15
31.3%
17
22
Sagarin ELO
14
29.2%
13
22
RealtimeRPI bracket
14
29.2%
13
24
RealtimeRPI Power
13
27.1%
11
24
AP poll
13
27.1%
11
26
Pilight's Field of 64
12
25.0%
9
26
Coaches poll
12
25.0%
9
28
Sagarin GoldenMean
11
22.9%
7
28
GaTech LRMC(0)
11
22.9%
7
30
RealtimeRPI RPI
10
20.8%
5
31
Warren Nolan RPI
7
14.6%
4
31
NCAA RPI
7
14.6%
4
33
Warren Nolan NPI
5
10.4%
2
34
NCAA W-L %
4
8.3%
1



These tables show predictions for the top 12 seeds only, since these are the seeds of the at-large bids.

Table 5: Predicted seeds within 1 seed of actual result, top 12 seeds only

Rank
Seeds within one -
Top 12 seeds only
No.
Pct.
Borda count pts.
1
SpaceJunkie
41
85.4%
34
1
Matt5762 bracket
41
85.4%
34
3
Creme's bracket
40
83.3%
32
4
Creme, no bumps
39
81.3%
31
5
S-Factor (2015 formula)
38
79.2%
30
5
My bracket
38
79.2%
30
5
RealtimeRPI bracket
38
79.2%
30
8
CSM bracket
36
75.0%
27
9
WayneBearCal "Proper"
30
62.5%
26
9
Omni Rankings
30
62.5%
26
9
BennettRank
30
62.5%
26
12
S-Factor (old blend)
29
60.4%
23
12
Omni bracket
29
60.4%
23
14
Sagarin Rating
28
58.3%
21
14
Sagarin PURE_POINTS
28
58.3%
21
14
Massey Power
28
58.3%
21
14
D1SN "poll"
28
58.3%
21
18
Pilight's Field of 64
27
56.3%
17
18
Massey Rating
27
56.3%
17
20
Sagarin GoldenMean
26
54.2%
15
20
Sagarin ELO
26
54.2%
15
20
RealtimeRPI Power
26
54.2%
15
23
GaTech LRMC(0)
25
52.1%
12
23
GaTech LRMC Bayesian
25
52.1%
12
23
Adjusted Stats EWP
25
52.1%
12
26
Warren Nolan RPI
24
50.0%
9
26
Sonny Moore
24
50.0%
9
26
RealtimeRPI RPI
24
50.0%
9
26
NCAA RPI
24
50.0%
9
26
GaTech LRMC Classic
24
50.0%
9
26
Coaches poll
24
50.0%
9
32
AP poll
22
45.8%
3
33
Warren Nolan NPI
11
22.9%
2
34
NCAA W-L %
8
16.7%
1




Table 6: predicted exact seeds, top 6 seeds only

Rank
Exact seeds -
Top 6 seeds only
No.
Pct.
Borda count pts.
1
CSM bracket
18
75.0%
34
2
Creme's bracket
16
66.7%
33
2
Creme, no bumps
16
66.7%
33
4
Adjusted Stats EWP
15
62.5%
31
5
SpaceJunkie
14
58.3%
30
5
Massey Power
14
58.3%
30
7
GaTech LRMC Classic
13
54.2%
28
7
D1SN "poll"
13
54.2%
28
7
BennettRank
13
54.2%
28
7
AP poll
13
54.2%
28
11
My bracket
12
50.0%
24
11
WayneBearCal "Proper"
12
50.0%
24
11
Sagarin Rating
12
50.0%
24
11
Sagarin PURE_POINTS
12
50.0%
24
11
RealtimeRPI Power
12
50.0%
24
11
Omni Rankings
12
50.0%
24
11
Matt5762 bracket
12
50.0%
24
11
GaTech LRMC Bayesian
12
50.0%
24
19
S-Factor (old blend)
11
45.8%
16
19
RealtimeRPI bracket
11
45.8%
16
19
Massey Rating
11
45.8%
16
22
Sonny Moore
10
41.7%
13
22
Omni bracket
10
41.7%
13
22
Coaches poll
10
41.7%
13
25
Sagarin GoldenMean
9
37.5%
10
25
Sagarin ELO
9
37.5%
10
27
S-Factor (2015 formula)
8
33.3%
8
27
Pilight's Field of 64
8
33.3%
8
27
GaTech LRMC(0)
8
33.3%
8
30
Warren Nolan RPI
6
25.0%
5
30
RealtimeRPI RPI
6
25.0%
5
30
NCAA RPI
6
25.0%
5
33
Warren Nolan NPI
5
20.8%
2
34
NCAA W-L %
4
16.7%
1



These two tables exist to accurately compare ranked lists to the AP and Coaches' polls. The AP poll predicted more exact seeds, but the Coaches' poll predicted more seeds within 1.

Table 7: predicted seeds within 1 seed of actual result, top 6 seeds only

Rank
Seeds within 1 -
Top 6 seeds only
No.
Pct.
Borda count pts.
1
Matt5762 bracket
23
95.8%
34
1
CSM bracket
23
95.8%
34
3
Creme's bracket
22
91.7%
32
4
S-Factor (2015 formula)
21
87.5%
31
4
My bracket
21
87.5%
31
4
SpaceJunkie
21
87.5%
31
4
Creme, no bumps
21
87.5%
31
8
GaTech LRMC(0)
20
83.3%
27
8
Coaches poll
20
83.3%
27
10
S-Factor (old blend)
19
79.2%
25
10
RealtimeRPI Power
19
79.2%
25
10
RealtimeRPI bracket
19
79.2%
25
10
D1SN "poll"
19
79.2%
25
14
Sagarin Rating
18
75.0%
21
14
Omni Rankings
18
75.0%
21
14
Omni bracket
18
75.0%
21
14
BennettRank
18
75.0%
21
14
AP poll
18
75.0%
21
19
WayneBearCal "Proper"
17
70.8%
16
19
Sagarin PURE_POINTS
17
70.8%
16
19
Sagarin GoldenMean
17
70.8%
16
19
GaTech LRMC Bayesian
17
70.8%
16
19
Adjusted Stats EWP
17
70.8%
16
24
Warren Nolan RPI
16
66.7%
11
24
RealtimeRPI RPI
16
66.7%
11
24
Pilight's Field of 64
16
66.7%
11
24
NCAA RPI
16
66.7%
11
24
Massey Rating
16
66.7%
11
24
Massey Power
16
66.7%
11
24
GaTech LRMC Classic
16
66.7%
11
31
Sonny Moore
15
62.5%
4
32
Sagarin ELO
14
58.3%
3
33
Warren Nolan NPI
9
37.5%
2
34
NCAA W-L %
7
29.2%
1




We had some excellent predictions this year over on the old rebkell.net boards. Though Charlie Creme of ESPN.com correctly picked all 64 teams this year as usual, the winner by all three scoring metrics (tied with Creme in the Borda and Paymon methods for 1st, outright winner on the Sum of Points method) was a user submitted bracket from SpaceJunkie.

BennettRank edged out the S-Factor for best numeric only method by the Borda count method (the way AP tallies its rankings).

Borda count method

Borda count points
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Sum
1
SpaceJunkie
32
34
34
34
34
30
31
229
1
Creme's bracket
34
34
32
32
32
33
32
229
3
Matt5762 bracket
32
34
32
34
34
24
34
224
3
Creme, no bumps
34
31
33
31
31
33
31
224
5
CSM bracket
32
31
28
30
27
34
34
216
6
My bracket
29
28
21
28
30
24
31
191
7
BennettRank
20
28
27
29
26
28
21
179
8
S-Factor (2015 formula)
29
21
30
24
30
8
31
173
9
Omni Rankings
13
29
27
28
26
24
21
168
10
WayneBearCal "Proper"
29
23
24
22
26
24
16
164
11
RealtimeRPI bracket
29
15
30
13
30
16
25
158
12
S-Factor (old blend)
29
17
20
22
23
16
25
152
12
Adjusted Stats EWP
29
24
12
28
12
31
16
152
14
Sagarin PURE_POINTS
13
28
24
24
21
24
16
150
15
Sagarin Rating
20
21
24
17
21
24
21
148
16
Massey Power
20
23
20
22
21
30
11
147
17
Omni bracket
9
21
27
17
23
13
21
131
18
Massey Rating
29
17
17
22
17
16
11
129
19
GaTech LRMC Classic
9
28
12
25
9
28
11
122
20
RealtimeRPI Power
13
11
17
11
15
24
25
116
21
D1SN "poll"
3
11
5
22
21
28
25
115
22
Pilight's Field of 64
29
13
17
9
17
8
11
104
23
GaTech LRMC Bayesian
9
15
8
17
12
24
16
101
24
GaTech LRMC(0)
20
8
17
7
12
8
27
99
25
Sagarin ELO
20
13
17
13
15
10
3
91
26
Sonny Moore
13
21
8
17
9
13
4
85
26
Sagarin GoldenMean
6
11
20
7
15
10
16
85
28
AP poll
2
8
3
11
3
28
21
76
29
RealtimeRPI RPI
29
8
6
5
9
5
11
73
30
Coaches poll
1
5
4
9
9
13
27
68
31
NCAA RPI
20
4
12
4
9
5
11
65
32
Warren Nolan RPI
20
3
12
4
9
5
11
64
33
Warren Nolan NPI
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
17
34
NCAA W-L %
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
10




The S-Factor was the best numeric only method by the Sum of Points method. I described the Sum of Points method this way in 2013.

Another way of expressing this method, in formula format:



Where
  • xi  is 2 if predicted team i’s seed matches actual team i’s seed, 1 if predicted team i is seeded within 1, and 0 if predicted team i is two or more seeds off;
  • y is 3 if actual team i’s seed is 1 through 6, 2 if actual team i’s seed is 7 through 12, and 1 if actual team i’s seed is 13 through 16;
  • zi is 1 if actual team i was predicted in the tournament, 0 otherwise.

Baylor was generally believed to be the 1st place team that year and Prairie View A&M the 64th place team, so the sum is over all teams in the NCAA tournament.

Sum of points

Sum of points
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Sum
1
SpaceJunkie
63
30
57
27
41
14
21
253
2
Creme's bracket
64
30
54
26
40
16
22
252
3
Matt5762 bracket
63
30
54
27
41
12
23
250
4
Creme, no bumps
64
29
55
25
39
16
21
249
5
CSM bracket
63
29
50
23
36
18
23
242
6
S-Factor (2015 formula)
62
22
51
17
38
8
21
219
7
My bracket
62
25
41
19
38
12
21
218
8
RealtimeRPI bracket
62
20
51
14
38
11
19
215
9
Omni Rankings
60
28
43
19
30
12
18
210
9
BennettRank
61
25
43
20
30
13
18
210
11
WayneBearCal "Proper"
62
23
42
16
30
12
17
202
12
Sagarin PURE_POINTS
60
25
42
17
28
12
17
201
13
Adjusted Stats EWP
62
24
38
19
25
15
17
200
14
S-Factor (old blend)
62
21
40
16
29
11
19
198
14
Sagarin Rating
61
22
42
15
28
12
18
198
14
Massey Power
61
23
40
16
28
14
16
198
17
Omni bracket
59
22
43
15
29
10
18
196
18
GaTech LRMC Classic
59
25
38
18
24
13
16
193
19
Massey Rating
62
21
39
16
27
11
16
192
20
RealtimeRPI Power
60
16
39
13
26
12
19
185
20
GaTech LRMC Bayesian
59
20
37
15
25
12
17
185
22
Sonny Moore
60
22
37
15
24
10
15
183
23
Pilight's Field of 64
62
17
39
12
27
8
16
181
24
Sagarin ELO
61
17
39
14
26
9
14
180
25
Sagarin GoldenMean
58
16
40
11
26
9
17
177
25
GaTech LRMC(0)
61
13
39
11
25
8
20
177
27
RealtimeRPI RPI
62
13
36
10
24
6
16
167
28
D1SN "poll"
46
16
28
16
28
13
19
166
29
NCAA RPI
61
10
38
7
24
6
16
162
30
Warren Nolan RPI
61
9
38
7
24
6
16
161
31
Coaches poll
35
12
24
12
24
10
20
137
31
AP poll
36
13
22
13
22
13
18
137
33
Warren Nolan NPI
55
8
20
5
11
5
9
113
34
NCAA W-L %
51
7
16
4
8
4
7
97




The Bracket Matrix project analyzes bracket predictions for the men's game based on the Paymon method, which gives three points to every team selected in the field, two bonus points to every team with a correctly predicted seed, and one bonus point for every team predicted to be within 1 seed of the final selection.

SpaceJunkie and Charlie Creme tie for the best bracket prediction by this method. The S-Factor is the best numeric-only ranking algorithm by the Paymon method.

Paymon method

Paymon method
1
2
3
Sum
1
SpaceJunkie
189
60
57
306
1
Creme's bracket
192
60
54
306
3
Creme, no bumps
192
58
55
305
4
Matt5762 bracket
189
60
54
303
5
CSM bracket
189
58
50
297
6
S-Factor (2015 formula)
186
44
51
281
7
Omni Rankings
180
56
43
279
8
RealtimeRPI bracket
186
40
51
277
8
My bracket
186
50
41
277
10
BennettRank
183
50
43
276
11
WayneBearCal "Proper"
186
46
42
274
12
Sagarin PURE_POINTS
180
50
42
272
12
Adjusted Stats EWP
186
48
38
272
14
Sagarin Rating
183
44
42
269
14
Massey Power
183
46
40
269
16
S-Factor (old blend)
186
42
40
268
17
Massey Rating
186
42
39
267
18
GaTech LRMC Classic
177
50
38
265
19
Omni bracket
177
44
43
264
20
Sonny Moore
180
44
37
261
21
Pilight's Field of 64
186
34
39
259
22
Sagarin ELO
183
34
39
256
23
GaTech LRMC Bayesian
177
40
37
254
24
RealtimeRPI Power
180
32
39
251
25
RealtimeRPI RPI
186
26
36
248
25
GaTech LRMC(0)
183
26
39
248
27
Sagarin GoldenMean
174
32
40
246
28
NCAA RPI
183
20
38
241
29
Warren Nolan RPI
183
18
38
239
30
Warren Nolan NPI
165
16
20
201
31
D1SN "poll"
138
32
28
198
32
NCAA W-L %
153
14
16
183
33
AP poll
108
26
22
156
34
Coaches poll
105
24
24
153




No comments:

Post a Comment