Springing into the Baseball Season (NY Times)

The baseball season is ready to get underway and here is some fun analysis we did for spring training -- and what it might mean for the regular season.  (By Carlton Chin, Don LaFronz & Jay Granat; picked up by the NY Times; here's an excerpt).

Spring training is almost over and your team has been red hot. Or maybe your team has had a tough spring. But who cares? It’s just spring training, right? Do wins and losses during spring training mean anything? To answer that, we analyzed whether spring training is connected to performance during the regular season.

Data shows that spring training can be a leading indicator for regular-season performance. In fact, some big surprises are sometimes predicted by spring training results. 

Read more here:
http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/divining-clues-from-spring-training-success/#more-41909

The article is by Carlton Chin, a fund manager for Adamah/CARAT and Don LaFronz, a financial adviser.  Jay Granat, a psychotherapist, contributed reporting.  

March Madness: Elite 8 Probabilities

The Financial Markets Program at the University of Chicago - together with Carlton Chin, a fund manager - devised a March Madness pool -- that models each game as a financial marketplace.  The pool is being run "round-by-round" so it can generate fresh pricing as each round develops. 

The points awarded for correct selections -- are based on market participant entries.  As a result, the final price for each game can be used as a proxy for the probability of a team advancing to the next round.  Below is a table that shows the final pricing for the current round's match-ups.  It is interesting that our financial marketplace model produced probabilities similar to projections from various sources.  The pool is designed to study:  

• Financial marketplaces and market pricing.
• Ideas of game theory.
• Concepts of contrarian methods.

For more information - please visit the March Madness link at CARATcapital.com.  Please also visit this summary of the March Madness Pool.

Financial Markets Program: Elite 8 Final Prices 

(Proxy for Probability of Advancing to Next Round)

Kansas 72%

VCU      28%

Arizona 55%

U-Conn  45%

North Carolina 52%

Kentucky 48%

Florida 57%

Butler 43%

March Madness Bracket Probabilities (2011)

The Financial Markets Program at the University of Chicago - together with Carlton Chin, a fund manager - devised a March Madness pool -- that models each game as a financial marketplace.  The pool is being run "round-by-round" so it can generate fresh pricing as each round develops. 

The points awarded for correct selections -- are based on market participant entries.  As a result, the final price for each game can be used as a proxy for the probability of a team advancing to the next round.  Below is a table that shows the final pricing for the first round's match-ups.  It is interesting that our financial marketplace model produced probabilities similar to projections from various sources, including the New York Times 538 forecast -- even with a relatively small sample size of just under 40 data points.  The pool is designed to study:  

• Financial marketplaces and market pricing.
• Ideas of game theory.
• Concepts of contrarian methods.

For more information - please visit the March Madness link at CARATcapital.com.  Please also visit this summary of the March Madness Pool.

Financial Markets Program: First Round Final Prices 

(Proxy for Probability of Advancing to Next Round)

Region	Seed	Team	Official Final Price (1st Rd)
SW	1	Kansas	94.80
SW	16	Boston U	5.20
SW	8	UNLV	52.20
SW	9	Illinois	47.80
SW	5	Vanderbilt	53.20
SW	12	Richmond	46.80
SW	4	Louisville	83.90
SW	13	Morehead St	16.10
SW	6	Georgetown	65.60
SW	11	TBD	34.40
SW	3	Purdue	89.25
SW	14	St. Peters	10.75
SW	7	Texas A&M	44.40
SW	10	Florida St	55.60
SW	2	Notre Dame	90.10
SW	15	Akron	9.90
W	1	Duke	92.95
W	16	Hampton	7.05
W	8	Michigan	43.05
W	9	Tennessee	56.95
W	5	Arizona	66.95
W	12	Memphis	33.05
W	4	Texas	77.65
W	13	Oakland	22.35
W	6	Cincinnati	40.20
W	11	Missouri	59.80
W	3	Connecticut	85.40
W	14	Bucknell	14.60
W	7	Temple	50.10
W	10	Penn St	49.90
W	2	San Diego St	90.25
W	15	No. Colorado	9.75
E	1	Ohio St	93.95
E	16	Play-in Winner	6.05
E	8	George Mason	47.60
E	9	Villanova	52.40
E	5	West Virginia	75.35
E	12	Play-in Winner	24.65
E	4	Kentucky	86.90
E	13	Princeton	13.10
E	6	Xavier	48.95
E	11	Marquette	51.05
E	3	Syracuse	83.55
E	14	Indiana St	16.45
E	7	Washington	60.20
E	10	Georgia	39.80
E	2	North Carolina	94.30
E	15	Long Island	5.70
SE	1	Pittsburgh	92.45
SE	16	TBD	7.55
SE	8	Butler	42.20
SE	9	Old Dominion	57.80
SE	5	Kansas St	47.75
SE	12	Utah St	52.25
SE	4	Wisconsin	64.60
SE	13	Belmont	35.40
SE	6	St. Johns	50.30
SE	11	Gonzaga	49.70
SE	3	BYU	78.20
SE	14	Wofford	21.80
SE	7	UCLA	45.95
SE	10	Michigan St	54.05
SE	2	Florida	93.15
SE	15	UC Santa Barb	6.85