How Does the March Madness Tournament Work? NCAA March Madness is a single-elimination tournament featuring the best teams in college basketball. The one-and-done format makes it one of the most popular sporting events in the world, rivaling even the Super Bowl. MARCH MADNESS, Does seeding really matter? Name: The Men’s National College Basketball Tournament is played each March and the tourney is often referred to as “March Madness.” The field of 64 is broken into four regional tournaments with teams seeded 1 through 16. There are four number one seeds, one for each region. March Madness expanded in 1951 to 16 teams, doubled again in 1975 to 32 teams, and once again to the size it is today with 64 teams in 1985. The term March Madness itself was coined by Henry V Porter who was an Illinois School official in regards to the madness of the tournament. By Joe Lunardi Updated: 3/4/2021 at 11:31 p.m. The NCAA tournament we lost last season has been found - and will be different than any previous such event. The realities of the coronavirus. How does March Madness work? March Madness is the name that has been bestowed on the annual NCAA Men’s Division I Basketball Tournament. The March part of the name comes from when the tournament takes place, over a few wild weeks during that month, while Madness refers to the wildness of wall-to-wall hoops action in which anything can happen.
Let's pick apart NCAA tournament seeding. No, I'm not talking about the selection committee and its choices ... there is nothing tangible you can do in your bracket about that once it's released, so why argue about it? What we can do, however, is evaluate which teams got a historic bump as a result of the seed line they landed on.
All of the attention is paid to that top line and I expect this season to be no different given the vulnerability of top-5 teams all season long, so let's start there. In the history of the bracket, 120 No. 1 seeds have advanced to the Sweet 16 compared to 89 No. 2 seeds. To put that difference of 31 appearances into context: The difference between 2-seeds and 4-seeds is 23. If you take it a few steps further, No. 1 seeds have 66 Final Four appearances, nearly as many as No. 2, 3 and 4 seeds combined (67). So there may not be much difference in skill between the top-eight teams in this tournament, but it's tough to deny that seeds matter, and it's not just the battle for the top seeds.
Understanding that not all score differentials are created equal, I'm using a six-point final difference as my threshold for a 'coin toss' game. In general, a bounce here or there could swing the result in two-possession games, so I'm going to throw them out. Is that fair? Not exactly, as it stands to reason that good teams find a way to win those games. But I don't want to look at 'coin toss' games for teams that I'm picking to win into (and beyond) the second weekend, and I assume you're with me.
As expected, the number of clear wins (defined as a game decided by at least seven points, a non-'coin toss' victory) is almost perfectly correlated with each of the 'favored' seeds (seeds 1-8) when evaluating the first week of the tournament during the past decade. The intrigue comes as we break down the differential in such wins by seed over that stretch as we try to get a feel for which seemingly minor seeding decisions have the greatest bracket impact:
1-seed vs 2-seed: 13 more clear victories
2-seed vs 3-seed: 12 more clear victories
3-seed vs 4-seed: 2 more clear victories
>>> 4-seed vs 5-seed: 17 more clear victories
5-seed vs 6-seed: 4 more clear victories
6-seed vs 7-seed: 1 fewer clear victory
7-seed vs 8-seed: 6 more clear victories
As you can see, the difference between the 1-seed and 2-seed is significant, but so is the difference between the 2-seed and the 3-seed, and the spread between No. 4 and No. 5 is even greater! There will be no shortage of coverage when it comes to trying to label 12-seeds poised to knock off 5-seeds, but what is often missing from that analysis is what it means moving beyond that upset. The all-time difference in number of 4-seeds making the Sweet 16 compared to 5-seeds (+19) is nearly the same difference that exists between No. 2 and No. 4 seeds (+23), and yet there is rarely any fanfare over which team ends up No. 4 and not No. 5. Don't make that mistake. There is so little talent separation among of the top 30 or so teams in the country that the draw is going to be as important this year as any ... watch out for the 4-seeds!
In other news, the committee released its top 16 seeds Saturday afternoon. Some teams that were not listed that I like to make a move and do damage when the official bracket is released:
LSU (rebounding)
Creighton (edge on the free throw line)
Iowa (offensive efficiency)
BYU (passing)
Welcome to March Mammal Madness! This library guide is your official location for MMM tournament info and resources to help you fill out your bracket. March Mammal Madness originated at Mammals Suck...Milk, Dr. Katie Hinde's blog, where she founded MMM in 2013. Each year, the tournament has become more popular, elaborate, educational, and fun.
Inspired by (but in no way affiliated with or representing) the NCAA College Basketball March Madness Championship Tournament, March Mammal Madness is an annual tournament of *simulated* combat competition among animals. Scientific literature is cited to substantiate likely outcomes as a probabilistic function of the two species' attributes within the battle environment. Attributes considered in calculating battle outcome include temperament, weaponry, armor, body mass, running speed, fight style, physiology, and motivation.
Through the scientific information embedded in the bout descriptions, participants are educated about inter-species interactions, the importance of ecological context, how natural selection has shaped adaptations, and conservation management of endangered species.
For a comprehensive overview of the design, public engagement, and reach of the tournament, view our new article in the journal eLife! March Mammal Madness and the power of narrative in science outreach. eLife 2021;10:e65066doi: 10.7554/eLife.65066