When it comes to March Madness, witnessing favored teams fall can be even more exhilarating with stakes on the underdog. Given historical outcomes, we delve into shared characteristics among NCAA Tournament upsets, offering insights that could enhance your betting strategies. 

As the echoes of UMBC’s monumental victory over Virginia still resonate, let’s explore trends that could provide a competitive edge in the chaos of college basketball’s grand spectacle.

Top-Five Seeds Overshadow Mid-Majors

Over the past six years, an unsettling pattern has emerged, highlighting the vulnerability of mid-major teams that secure top-five seeds. The spotlight shines on non-Gonzaga mid-majors that have faltered under the pressure of high expectations. 

A remarkable 12 out of 15 such teams suffered opening-round losses, with another six falling in the subsequent round. These upsets, often accompanied by ATS losses, underscore the unpredictability of the tournament and the potential value of betting against heavily favored mid-majors.

 

Year	Mid-Major	Seed	Result	Score	Spread
2021	#2 Houston	Lost	78-59	+5.0
2019	#3 Houston	Lost	62-58	+2.0
2018	#2 Cincinnati	Lost	75-73	-4.5
2018	#4 Wichita State	Lost	81-75	-13.0
2015	#5 Northern Iowa	Lost	66-53	+2.0
2014	#5 VCU	Lost	77-75 OT	-5.5
2014	#5 Cincinnati	Lost	61-57	-3.5
2014	#4 San Diego State	Lost	70-64	+6.5
2014	#5 St. Louis	Lost	66-51	+9.0
2013	#5 VCU	Lost	78-53	+3.0
2013	#5 UNLV	Lost	64-61	-3.0
2013	#4 St. Louis	Lost	74-57	-3.5
2012	#5 Temple	Lost	58-44	-2.0
2012	#5 Wichita State	Lost	62-59	-8.5
2012	#5 New Mexico	Lost	59-56	+1.5

Seven-Year Pattern Emerges: Alert for #11 Seeds

The NCAA Tournament has traditionally rewarded higher-seeded teams with safer passage through the early rounds. However, a compelling seven-year trend has emerged, where #11 seeds have defied historical norms and achieved remarkable success. With a notable win rate surpassing #12 seeds, #11 seeds have significantly impacted. 

Their exceptional performance over the last seven years, including multiple advancements to the Round of 32 and a consistent win rate of 60%, challenges conventional wisdom and beckons bettors to consider their upset potential.

 

Year	Team	Opponent	Result
2021	#11 UCLA	#6 BYU	Win
2021	#11 Syracuse	#6 San Diego State	Win
2019	#11 Ohio State	#6 Iowa State	Win
2018	#11 Loyola-Chicago	#6 Miami	Win
2018	#11 Syracuse	#6 TCU	Win
2017	#11 Xavier	#6 Maryland	Win
2017	#11 Rhode Island	#6 Creighton	Win
2017	#11 USC	#6 SMU	Win
2016	#11 Wichita State	#6 Arizona	Win
2016	#11 Northern Iowa	#6 Texas	Win
2016	#11 Gonzaga	#6 Seton Hall	Win
2015	#11 UCLA	#6 SMU	Win
2015	#11 Dayton	#6 Providence	Win
2014	#11 Tennessee	#6 UMass	Win
2014	#11 Dayton	#6 Ohio State	Win

 

Favor KenPom.com Rankings Over Selection Committee Picks for Betting

In strategic betting, disparities between the Selection Committee’s seedings and analytics-driven rankings provide a unique opportunity. Examining the performance of teams ranked within KenPom.com’s top-35 that received #11 seeds or worse reveals a compelling trend. These teams have demonstrated a commendable 22-15 straight-up record (including First Four play-in games) and an 18-15 record excluding the First Four. 

The alignment of KenPom.com rankings with on-court outcomes offers a statistical advantage, empowering bettors to make informed decisions when considering potential upsets.

 

Year	Team	Seed	KP Rank	Result
2019	Saint Mary’s	#11	31st	First Round (0-1)
2018	Loyola-Chicago	#11	31st	Final Four (4-1)
2017	Rhode Island	#11	34th	Second Round (1-1)
2017	Xavier	#11	31st	Elite 8 (3-1)
2017	Kansas St.	#11	30th	First Round (1-1 incl. First Four)
2016	Gonzaga	#11	21st	Sweet 16 (2-1)
2016	Wichita State	#11	13th	Second Round (2-1 incl. First Four)
2016	Vanderbilt	#11	25th	First Four (0-1)

Identifying Vulnerable #1 and #2 Seeds for Upsets

Betting on the fall of a #1 or #2 seed can yield substantial returns, but it requires a discerning approach. Although such upsets are relatively rare, analyzing historical data reveals intriguing insights. Among the key findings, teams that exhibit weaknesses in either offensive or defensive efficiency, as well as those that favor a slow tempo, are more susceptible to early-round upsets. 

By identifying teams with these characteristics, bettors can strategically assess matchups and the potential for unexpected outcomes. 

 

Year	Team	KP Off. Rank	KP Def. Rank	KP Tempo Rank
2021	#2 Ohio State	4th	82nd	251st
2018	#1 Virginia	30th	1st	351st
2016	#2 Michigan State	2nd	26th	254th
2013	#2 Georgetown	80th	4th	300th
2012	#2 Duke	8th	79th	108th
2012	#2 Missouri	1st	111th	152nd

While betting on #1 and #2 seeds to lose in the first round is rare, certain traits signal vulnerability. Teams with notable offensive or defensive efficiency weaknesses, particularly those that play at a slower tempo, have been more prone to upsets. 

This strategic insight can guide decisions when evaluating high-seeded matchups.

With these trends and data in mind, you’re better equipped to navigate the excitement of March Madness. Calculated bets make for a winning strategy, and responsible gambling is paramount. As you explore our comprehensive strategy section, embrace the unpredictability of the NCAA Tournament and make informed choices that elevate your betting experience.