It is tourney time, March Madness 2004 and I have dug around for an interesting angle that has produced first round winners in the past. This major event is the second most popular in terms of North American wagering, taking a back seat to only the Super Bowl (although it has been reported March Madness takes in more in wagers over the course of the entire tournament than the single Super Bowl matchup). It is also a time where little known schools gain national exposure, albeit ever so brief, in a one-game spotlight. When #16 plays a #1 seed, the 16th seed goes home.

David vs. Goliath:

So, the top four seeds in this year's tournament are Kentucky, Stanford, Duke and St. Joseph's. Be careful when using trends to help you during the Final 64, as many a gambler would think if a team played well on the road this season, then perhaps they would be worth a look at the big dance in games played at a neutral site, especially teams getting all those points! The answer to this question is yes and no. The chances of a #16 seed defeating a #1 seed are slim to nil. It's not too far a stretch to suggest that you would have a better chance of winning the Power Ball jackpot, or hitting 8 out of 8 numbers on a KENO ticket. A 16th ranked foe just does not defeat a #1 ranked team in the feature tournament of the NCAA season. So, would it then be wise to simply back those big favorites in the first round? I looked back six years and noted how the #1 seeds fared vs. the #16 seeds against the spread (ATS). There were, of course, 24 contests, with these results: the #1 seed went a perfect 24 - 0 straight up, but ATS they produced a 14 - 10 mark, or 58.3% against the spread. Now 58.3% certainly is a positive result, but I dug a little deeper and here is what I uncovered. Keep in mind though, this is only a 24-game sampling.

Play on all #1 seeds vs. #16 seeds when the 16th ranked team played 16 or less road/or neutral site games. Here are the games that fit this criteria, from the last six tournaments:

#1 seeds from the 1998 Tournament.
N. Carolina ( - 27) vs. Navy - N. Carolina won ATS 88 - 52.
Arizona( - 26 ½) vs. Nicholls State - Arizona won ATS 99 - 60.
Duke ( - 32) vs. Radford - Duke won ATS 99 - 63.
Kansas ( - 37) vs. Prairie View - Kansas won ATS 110 - 52.

# 1 Seeds from the 1999 Tournament.
Auburn ( - 29) vs. Winthorp - Auburn won ATS 80 - 49.
UCONN ( - 27½) vs. Texas S. Antonio - UCONN lost ATS 91 - 66.

# 1 Seeds from the 2000 Tournament.
Michigan State ( - 25½) vs. Valpraiso - Michigan State won ATS 65 - 38.

# 1 Seeds from the 2001 Tournament.
Stanford ( - 28½) vs. UNC Greensboro - Stanford won ATS 89 - 60.
Duke ( - 34½) vs. Monmouth - Duke won ATS 95 - 52.
Michigan State ( - 29) vs. Alabama State - Michigan State won ATS 69 - 35.

# 1 Seeds from the 2002 Tournament.
Duke ( - 34½) vs. Winthorp - Duke won ATS 84 - 37.
Kansas ( - 27½) vs. Holy Cross - Kansas lost ATS 70 - 59.
Cincinnati ( - 24½) vs. Boston University - Cincinnati won ATS 90 - 52.

# 1 Seeds from the 2003 Tournament.
Oklahoma ( - 27) vs. S. C. State - Oklahoma lost ATS 71 - 54.

The above sampling produced a very respectable 11 - 3 ATS or a 78.5% record. The big underdogs played a fairly even home/away schedule and apparently were overwhelmed by all the hoopla.

Now we'll look at playing on all #16 seeds vs. a #1 seed when the 16th ranked team played 17 or more road/or neutral site games. By playing on the 16th ranked teams vs. the #1 ranked teams the dog has covered at a 7 - 3 ATS clip when the dogs were away for more road than home contests. When you combine the play on and play against records in the above two scenarios your 14 - 10 ATS original result by simply backing the #1 seed has now improved to a combined 18 - 6 ATS or 75% winners. Does this assure pointspread success for the 2004 tournament? Absolutely not! Who are the play on and play against teams? This year all four #16 seeds played 16 or fewer road contests so the #1 seeds would be the play on teams. Don't simply go with #1 vs. #16. Consider the St. Joe's scenario. This is their first ever #1 seeding, while Duke, Kentucky and Stanford have been in this lofty perch before. I wouldn't blindly play on #1 vs. #16; additional research is required to justify a play on the #1 seeds in this years' tournament.

In days past, all roads led to Rome, but in 2004 all roads lead to San Antonio. Don't get too caught up in the madness, utilize patience and good judgment, remember Rome wasn't built in a day!

Beer & Pizza tourney selections:

I am going to make four small (beer & pizza wagers) on all four #1 seeds when they face the #16 seeds. If you are new to my column, a beer & pizza wager is nothing more than recreational fun. If you go 0 - 4 it shouldn't cost you more than 1-unit. St. Joe's have never been in the spotlight and perhaps 22 or so points are too many to lay. We all know Murphy's law, so if you play three of the contests and leave out St. Joe's, most certainly St. Joseph's will cover the number.