I really like Georgetown in this one. I took them -4.
because this is to fucking easy
With all due respect...Love your posts. Read them just about every day. But with this comment, I think you're getting just a little too full of yourself. Relying solely on seeding yesterday, I made close to a grand. Just wondering what the 1-4 seeds record is against the 13-16 seeds in the history of the tournament. Something tells me there's a useful trend in there somewhere. 
because this is to fucking easy
With all due respect...Love your posts. Read them just about every day. But with this comment, I think you're getting just a little too full of yourself. Relying solely on seeding yesterday, I made close to a grand. Just wondering what the 1-4 seeds record is against the 13-16 seeds in the history of the tournament. Something tells me there's a useful trend in there somewhere.
With all due respect...Love your posts. Read them just about every day. But with this comment, I think you're getting just a little too full of yourself. Relying solely on seeding yesterday, I made close to a grand. Just wondering what the 1-4 seeds record is against the 13-16 seeds in the history of the tournament. Something tells me there's a useful trend in there somewhere.
close to Nada, covers had a article on the seedings, and they show the #`s and %`s when a #1 seed vs a #16 seed. ... When the top 4 seeds arematched up vs the bottom seeds 16-13, The %`s was terrible.. The best %`s were the 5 seed vs the 12 seeds, they 12 seeds are thee best long shots to take a chance on, another example are the #2 seeds, 3 outta the 4 #2 seed advanced to the round of 32 or even to the sweet 16.... they went into more detail about the seeding in the tournament...
because this is to fucking easy
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
