Quote:
Originally Posted by Yipyapper
First of all, I love reading these week after week.
The only thing I wanted to point out was the above blurb, since the results only go down by about 0.6 points seedwise for regional winners, but the big thing that was noted on CD concerning upsets was that the second week had a good number of sizeable upsets. The results you have include the 1st week, which fared much better for the higher seeds and skewed the overall data to favour the higher seeds.
Without the 1st week, the mean winners had a seed value of 3.364, which is more than a full seed below the 2.014 in 2012. This also doesn't show the details with the low seeds reaching the finals several times, which would show that upsetting teams in general (not just winning upsets) seems to be at an all-time or near-all-time high.
|
It's still too early to tell. With small data sizes (only 8 events in week 1 and 12 events in week 2), the data is bound to be noisy.
A better comparison would be to track previous games week by week to compare how noisy their data was.