4 ms·
I love the look of this, but I have one suggestion to make. If the probability for a particular round is < 1%, I would at least leave one decimal place or show
by dmsimpkins 13y ago
I love the look of this, but I have one suggestion to make. If the probability for a particular round is < 1%, I would at least leave one decimal place or show "< 1%" instead of having 0%, since obviously there is still some chance of the team making it to that round, even if it's a fraction of a percent.
- 3j8z5t9m 13y agoAgreed - summing all of the center values (presumably the chances of a team winning the championship) you get 90%. There's a whole 10% unaccounted for.
- llimllib 13y agoTotally agreed, but I wrote the whole thing yesterday, so some corners got cut.
- jader201 13y agoA bit off topic, but I find it odd how the 16-seed teams are calculated at between 1-4%, even though no 16-seed team has made it past the first round in the entirety of the 64-team tournament (1985: 29 years x 4 teams = 0 for 116). Not sure how any of these have more than a <1% chance, let alone 4%.
- llimllib 13y agoThe usual method for calculating these percentages is to calculate a power rating for each team, then to use the log5 formula[1] to arrive at the percentage chance of a team winning. So, the 1-4% chance of a 16 winning is the result of applying the log5 algorithm to their power ratings. Also remember that there's only 80 16-vs-1 games in 20 years, and only expanded to 64 teams in 1985, so it's totally possible that there is a 1-4% chance for a 16 to beat a 1 and it just hasn't happened yet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log5