Contributing author Ron James runs Monte Carlo simulations to examine the risks involved in sports betting. Think you’re guaranteed to make millions if you can pick winners at a 60% rate? Think again.

Carl Bialik, “The Numbers Guy” at the Wall Street Journal, invited a number of basketball number crunchers and assorted “experts” to compete in a bracket picking competition. The competition covered the first two rounds of the 2008 tournament and the results are in.

A number of BracketBrains users have asked how to use SmartStats and BracketBrains’ “main” predictions together, and where they each provide value. Both are quite useful in deciding how to fill out your NCAA Tournament bracket, but the numbers we give come from very different places. Let me explain.
BracketBrains is completely empirical. […]

Just because they’re NCAA men’s basketball coaches doesn’t mean that they don’t make some downright silly decisions. Contributing author Daniel Novinson uses a calculator to highlight some questionable coaching strategy.

What is the difference between a gamble and an investment, and where does sports betting lie on that spectrum? Contributing author Ron James runs some interesting numbers. (Part 1 of 2)

We’ve updated our 2008 NCAA men’s basketball conference tournament brackets, seeds, and odds, and wouldn’t you know…Memphis has less than a 75% chance to win?

You hear it all the time: Streaking teams that can handle high-pressure game endings have what it takes to go deep in the March Madness bracket. Right?

After working on TeamRankings.com for more than seven years, first as a hobby, and now as more than a hobby, we are doing our best to expand the site. We put the following press release across the wire today…

Finally, our favorite time of year, March Madness, is back. This year, one of our goals is to blog consistently (dare I say daily?) about the NCAA conference and national championship tournaments…

Florida won’t win by 26 again…