March Madness Betting Trends, Stats, Notes: Action Network Betting Primer
Before we start — it is important to know this is a live running article. Content, matchups, odds, trends, systems will all be added through the piece through the first round of action on Sunday, March 23rd (check the updated as of date below!).
We're here to answer tourney questions, dish out stats and facts, talk futures, the bracket, coaches, cinderella and more. Welcome to the March Madness edition of Action Network's betting primer.
All data, stats and trends are updated as of Monday, March 17, 2 a.m. ET.
Three Is The Word
Connecticut's Quest
Connecticut's quest for a third consecutive National Championship begins with them as an 8-seed. Only once in NCAA Tournament history dating back to 1939 has a team won three straight titles — and that was UCLA between 1967 and 1973, who won seven straight titles.
Seven other teams entered a season after winning two straight titles and they all came up short:
2008 Florida
1993 Duke
1966 UCLA
1963 Cincinnati
1957 San Francisco
1950 Kentucky
1947 Oklahoma State
UConn has covered 12 in a row in the tournament, going 6-0 ATS in 2023 and 2024. In March Madness history, eight different schools have won back-to-back titles, with there being a total of 13 instances of back-to-back titles being won, including UCLA winning seven titles in a row between 1967-73.
UConn in 2023-24 was the first instance of a team covering the spread in each of its tourney wins en route to the back-to-back titles. Let's start with Dan Hurley. His 15-3 ATS (83.3%) record is the highest ATS win percentage for a coach (min. 10 games) in the seeding era since 1979.
- UConn is the first team in seeding era ('79) to win and cover 10, 11 and 12 in a row.
- The Huskies are on a 28-6 ATS run in the dance since 2009 (covered by double-digits in 14 games).
Most Consecutive NCAAT ATS Covers Since 1979
- UConn 12 (2023-24)
- WVU 12 (1998-08)
- Villanova 11 (1985-88)
Public Strikes Back
A 2024 To Remember
Last year in March Madness, the public had their best season in over two decades. Teams with more than 50% of the spread bets (or tickets) went 45-21 ATS (68%). A $100 bettor was up $2,003 for a 30.4% ROI. Prior to last season, the public had covered 47.8% of games between 2005-23 in the tourney and since the 2010 NCAA Tournament, the betting public was .500 ATS or below in eight of the previous 13 seasons.
Entering last year's tournament, teams with 60% or more of the bets on the spread — indicating an even bigger public pick — were 73-97-5 (43%) against the spread since 2016. A $100 bettor was down $2,986 (-17% ROI) tailing each of those public picks. These "public" bets had been .500 ATS or worse in six straight NCAA Tournaments entering last year. In 2024, these went 20-14 ATS.
They Are Free!
Back Best FT Teams
Hit your free throws kids. To say it simply, good free throw shooting teams have historically had covering success in the tournament. Teams averaging 75%+ from the stripe have been cashing at a 55% rate with a 6.2% ROI since 2006. Raise it to 76%, it's 13.1% ROI and at 77%, it's been historically a 20.3% ROI. Teams shooting 77% or higher on the year are 87-52-2 ATS (63%) in the NCAA Tournament.
Where free throw shooting is most important is in tight games. At 77%+, when the spread is 6 or less, that good FT team is 60-29 ATS (67%), with a spread of 4 or less, they are 41-18 ATS (70%), covering the spread by 4.6 PPG.
Round of 64 matches: COMING SOON!
Big Chalk
Houston Meets Florida
Houston and Florida are massive favorites in the Round of 64, both sitting at -28.5, tied for the 4th-highest marks in the Round in the last 20 years. With Duke and Auburn's line still to come out, here are the biggest Round of 64 lines recently.
Highest Round of 64 Lines Since 2005
-34.5, Kentucky vs. Hampton (2015)
-33, Gonzaga vs. Norfolk State (2021)
-31.5, UCLA vs. Mississippi Valley State (2008)
If Auburn or Duke join as 28+ pt favorites, 2025 would join 2001 (3) and 1996 (3) also with three teams favored by 28+ in the Round of 64. In both previous years this occurred, the eventual National Champion and another Final Four finalist were among the three teams with a big Round of 64 spread.
Reminder!
Weak Favorites
The only team since 1985 to start an NCAA Tournament 0-2 ATS and go on to win it all was Arizona in 1997.
Inflation Issues
Ice Cold
Don't always believe what you just saw. Since 2013, teams to win by 20+ points in the Round of 64 are 22-39-1 ATS (36%) in the Round of 32 when their opponent won by less than 20 points in the Round of 64.
Quiet on the Western Front
Is This The Year?
Since Arizona won the national title in 1997, no team west of Texas has won it all.
Mountain Cover Up
Tough Going
Since 2016, the Mountain West conference is 10-23 ATS (-$1,392 on $100 bet, -42.2% ROI) in the NCAA Tournament. Of conferences with at least 10 tourney games played in that span, that is the lowest ROI of any conference and the 2nd-least profitable of any conference ahead of just the SEC (-$1,431).
Double-digit seeds in the Mountain West conference are now 3-31 all-time SU in the tourney, including 6-26-2 ATS.
In the last 16 tournaments dating back to the start of the 2007 season, the Mountain West has been above .500 ATS in a single tournament once, back in 2018.
 |  |  |  |
Momentum Matters Sometimes
Don't Lose Early
Since seeding began in 1978, every NCAA champion to play in a conference tournament won at least one game in that appetizer for March Madness. In that span, eight champions never actually had a conference tournament ('97 ARI, '95 UCLA, '89 MICH, '87 IU, '81 IU, '79 MSU, '78 UK, '77 MARQ).
If this trend holds true, here are some of the candidates this eliminates this year: Xavier, UCLA, Texas A&M, Georgia, Vanderbilt.
Cinderella Rollercoaster
Ups and Downs
According to our Bet Labs database, after a team pulls off a double-digit point spread upset in the NCAA Tournament, they are 4-20 straight up and 8-16 against the spread in the next round, dating back to 2005.
After pulling the upset in the previous round, teams who get the majority ticket count ATS in their next game are 1-16 SU and 4-13 ATS in this span, with the only win coming from Florida Gulf Coast back in 2013.
First Time
Cal's New Experience
In his coaching career, John Calipari has been listed as an underdog in the tournament ten times and he is 6-3-1 ATS, going 4-0-1 ATS while with Kentucky. Calipari hasn't been an underdog in either the Round of 64 or 32 since 2014 and this will be his first game as an underdog in the Round of 64 after 23 straight as a favorite.
Out of Nowhere
Izzo and The Storm
In the 64-team era, there have been 39 teams to enter the tournament as a 1- or 2-seed that weren't ranked in the preseason AP poll. They have combined for zero Final Fours, averaging fewer than two wins per tournament. (via KenPom)
Since 2018, none have advanced past the Sweet 16:
2024: Iowa State (S16)
2023: Purdue (R64), Marquette (R32)
2022: Arizona (S16)
2021: Alabama (S16)
2018: Virginia (R64)
In 2025, that is Michigan State and St. John’s
Skyfall
Can Montana Break It?
Since the 2000 NCAA Tournament, the Big Sky Conference has had their issues in the big dance. Overall, the Big Sky is 1-24 SU and 7-16-2 ATS in the NCAA Tournament, with the only SU win coming from Montana back in 2006 — with the conference losing 18 consecutive games in the tourney.
Last year, Montana State lost to Grambling State by seven points in the First Four, their shortest margin loss since Montana lost by 5 to New Mexico back in 2010.
Let's take a look at the best and worst conferences against the spread in the NCAA Tournament over the last decade…
Conferences ATS in NCAA Tournament
 The Best |  The Worst | ||
| 1. | Big East: 66-44-1 ATS | SEC: 62-73-5 ATS | |
| 2. | Pac-12: 56-45-2 ATS | Mountain West: 14-27 ATS | |
| 3. | America East: 8-4 ATS | West Coast: 19-30-1 ATS | |
| 4. | Ivy League: 9-5 ATS | Big 12: 73-80-2 ATS | |
| 5. | WAC: 8-4 ATS | Big Sky: 2-7-1 ATS | |
| Updated as of March, 16th | |||
Keep It Up
Have A Lead, Hold A Lead
Teams who lead at the half in the NCAA Tournament are above .500 against the second half spread in six consecutive tournaments dating back to 2018, going 220-160-5 (58%) against the second half spread in that span.
Going back to 2011, these teams who lead at the half are cashing at almost a 4% ROI. if you just include the Round of 64 and Round of 32, the ROI raises to 5.8%, covering by over a full point per game.
March Madness 2025
Futures | Matchups | Coaches | Bet Labs | Public | Trends | First Four | Upsets |
Future Markets & Notes
Here's a look at the BetMGM futures market, from opening to current lines to win it all:
What are the highest odds to win the title entering the NCAA Tournament since seeding began in 1978? Only four teams listed above 20-1 entering March Madness have won the title in that same time frame:
2014 Connecticut
100-1 pre-tournament
1985 Villanova
35-1 pre-tournament
2011 Connecticut
25-1 pre-tournament
1983 NC State
25-1 pre-tournament
After the bracket release, Duke became the favorite to win it all at +300 ahead of Florida, who is now at +350. How have pre-tournament favorites performed in March Madness recently? The pre-tournament favorite has gone on to win it all ten times since 2000, including last year by UConn.
| |  |  |  | |  | |
➤Last pre-tournament favorites to lose in the first weekend since 1990: 2010 Kansas, 2004 Kentucky, 1994 UNC, 1990 Oklahoma.
How has the preseason favorite to win the national title performed in March Madness?
Kansas
UConn
This year's preseason favorites entering the regular season were Kansas and Connecticut, both at +900 odds. Kansas entered the regular season last year as the favorites to win it all and lost in the Round of 32.
In 2021, Baylor and Gonzaga were preseason favorites and met in the title game (Baylor won it all). Prior to that, the last preseason favorite to win it all was UNC at +500 back in 2009.
Preseason favorites to make Final Four Since 2009:
2021 Baylor
+800 preseason
2021 Gonzaga
+800 preseason
2014/2015 Kentucky
+300/+400 preseason
2009 North Carolina
+500 preseason
Matchups: Thursday Games
Greg McDermott’s NCAA Tournament streaks are close to unmatched. Up to 2021, he was 4-9-1 ATS in the tourney with Northern Iowa and Creighton. Since 2022, he is 7-2 ATS in the tournament, with both his ATS losses coming in his team's exit, in the Elite 8 and Sweet 16 the last two years.
No team has been on a better run starting off games than Louisville. Dating back to mid-December, they are 21-2 against the first half spread in their last 23 total games, covering those first halves by over 5 PPG.
Louisville faces Creighton at home in Lexington. This will be the Cardinals third NCAA Tournament game played in Kentucky where they are listed as the favorite dating back t0 1980 – they are 3-0 SU/ATS in those games.
Between his days at Southern Illinois and Purdue, Matt Painter has coached 16 Round of 64 games — his teams are 12-4 ATS (75%) in that round. His 75% ATS win pct in the Round of 64 is tied for the highest mark for any head coach with a minimum of 10 games coached (tied w/ Rick Majerus). Painter has also had success as a favorite, going 15-8 ATS in the tourney.
Big Ten received the second most bids in the dance with 8 and they will try to keep their Round of 64 success going. Since 2011 NCAA Tournament, the Big Ten is 51-34-3 ATS in the Round of 64, the best mark of any conference. Big Ten has gone seven straight tournaments .500 ATS or better in the Round of 64, including .500 ATS or better in 12 of the last 13 tournaments.
Montana is winning and covering entering the tournament — they are 14-1 SU and 12-2-1 ATS in their last 15 games dating back to mid-January. Under Montana coach Travis DeCuire, they have played 32 lined games vs. power 6 conference teams — ACC, Big 12, Big East, SEC, Big Ten and Pac-12 — and they are 8-24 ATS, failing to cover the spread by 5.8 PPG.
Greg Gard has coached 12 NCAA Tournament games with Wisconsin — he is 5-6-1 ATS, 4-1-1 ATS as an underdog and just 1-5 ATS as a favorite.
In the last 30 years of the NCAA Tournament, this would be just the second game to have a team favored by 28+ pts and a total close under 131 points, joining UCLA in 2008 against Mississippi Valley State, Bruins won 70-29.
Under Brian Barone, SIUE has faced nine teams in the Power six conferences — Big Ten, Big East, ACC, SEC, Big 12, Pac-12 — and his teams are 6-3 ATS, covering the spread by 4.1 PPG. Barone’s teams haven’t been their best later in the season:
Nov-Jan: 53-49 ATS
Feb-Apr: 25-37-3 ATS
This season, SIUE is 18-11 against the 2nd half spread, which was 2nd-best in the Ohio Valley, including 10-5 2H ATS when trailing at the half.
For Kelvin Sampson, the issues came later in the tournament. Since 2005, he is 10-6 ATS in the Round of 64 and 32, and 2-6 ATS in the Sweet 16 or later. In his coaching career in the NCAA Tournament, Sampson has avoided the big upset, going 11-0 SU as a favorite of 8 pts or more.
Gonzaga coach Mark Few is 21-3 SU in the Round of 64, but in his last 12 games in the NCAA Tournament overall, the Bulldogs are 3-9 ATS dating back to the Final Four in 2021. In program history, Gonzaga is 19-11 ATS when seeded outside the top four — they are currently a XXXX-seed this season.
Mark Few has made the Round of 32 in 15 consecutive tournaments. The automatic bid is good for the Zags. Both title game appearances came as a WCC tournament winner and they are 35-18 SU in the tournament and 16-2 SU in the Round of 64 as an automatic qualifier. The issue has been covering, where they are 20-32-1 ATS under Few as an auto and 7-11 ATS in the Round of 64.
No team had a wider disparity between ATS marks at home and away from the friendly confines. In their 13 lined home games, they went 3-8 ATS, but they ended the season on a 6-game ATS losing streak. Away from home, Wofford is 11-2 ATS in their last 13 games entering the dance. Wofford has also been a great second half team lately, winning and covering five straight 2nd halves entering the tournament.
Rick Barnes is 22-36 (38%) against the spread in the NCAA Tournament in his coaching career with Providence, Clemson, Texas and Tennessee. That includes a record of 5-17 ATS in the tournament since 2010. Of the 299 coaches in that span, Barnes is the least profitable on a $100 wager at -$1,233. Barnes hasn’t finished a single NCAA Tournament above .500 ATS since 2009 — 11 straight tournaments .500 ATS or worse.
The good thing for the Vols' Round of 64 matchup with Wofford is 3 of those five ATS wins for Barnes were as double-digit favorites. He is 2-15 ATS in that span as an underdog or favorite of under 10 points. Between Tennessee, Texas and Clemson, Rick Barnes knows his orange — but in his 28 tournament appearances, he’s lost in the first weekend in 19 of them, losing in the Sweet 16 in five more, with Barnes going to one Final Four, with Texas in 2003.
John Calipari is 20-3 straight up in Round of 64, but he’s just 1-2 SU in the round over the last three years. Overall, Calipari is 1-4 ATS in his last five NCAA Tournament games overall, his worst stretch since 2015-17.
In his coaching career, Calipari has been listed as an underdog in the tournament ten times and he is 6-3-1 ATS, going 4-0-1 ATS while with Kentucky. Calipari hasn't been an underdog in either the Round of 64 or 32 since 2014 and this will be his first game as an underdog in the Round of 64 after 23 straight as a favorite.
Over the last six NCAA Tournaments, Bill Self is 7-12 ATS, losing a $100 bettor $551, making him the least profitable coach in the tourney in that span of 186 coaches. Kansas barely got by Samford in the Round of 64 last year, but Self has been good ATS in the round overall, going 7-2 ATS since 2015.
Kansas and Bill Self have won 12 consecutive games SU as a favorite in the tourney. The last loss came in 2017 against Oregon in the Elite 8 (they are 18-2 SU as a favorite in NCAAT since 2016).
Under Bill Self, Kansas has never been higher than a four seed in the NCAA Tournament. You have to go all the way back to 2000 for the last time they entered a tournament with a seed higher than 4th (8th that year).
Kansas lost to Arizona in the Big 12 conference tournament — dating back to 2017, KU is 2-7 ATS in their last nine NCAAT games as an at-large bid.
Drake has only played five NCAA Tournament games in the seeding era (since 1979) and they are 0-5 ATS in those games, four of which coming in the Round if 64.
Drake has played nine games this season with a total of 135 pts or more, and the under is 7-2 in those games, going under the total by a whopping 9.8 PPG. Drake has played seven neutral site games this season and they have been very consistent in those matchups. They are 7-0 SU and 6-1 ATS in those games, going 6-1 ATS in the first half and 6-1 ATS in the second half
Utah State is 2-20 straight up in its last 22 NCAA Tournament games dating back to their 1970 Elite Eight loss. Last year, they got just their second win in that span beating TCU in the Round of 64 before losing to Purdue in the Round of 32.
Rick Pitino will enter this year’s tournament with his 6th different school — going from Boston University, to Providence, to Kentucky, then Louisville, then Iona and now St. John’s.
Pitino has only made the tournament in his first season with a school once, in 2020-21 with Iona, a Round of 64 SU loss, but ATS cover. The question is, how should we look at the Red Storm this year? In the Round of 64 and 32, Pitino is 28-5 SU when listed as the favorite, including 16-2 SU in the R64.
Omaha enters the NCAA Tournament 24-9 ATS this season, the best ATS record for any team in the Summit League. Omaha has won and covered 7 straight games entering the big dance and they are 16-5 ATS either on the road or at a neutral site this year.
The trendy pick. Seeds 12 or higher in the Round of 64, who are either a favorite or an underdog of 4 pts or less, are 0-5 ATS since 2020 and 4-8 ATS over the last decade.
The Red Raiders have played five neutral site games this season and have yet to cover the spread, going 0-5 ATS. That 0-5 ATS mark is the worst for any team to make the NCAA Tournament.
UNC Wilmington enters the NCAA Tournament actually losing their last two games against the spread — teams seeded 10th or higher in the dance who are on a 2+ game ATS losing streak are 27-33 ATS since 2005, including 0-7 ATS in the last two years.
Matchups: Friday Games
Don’t mind the higher totals. Nate Oats is 9-8 ATS in the NCAA Tournament. When the total is 155+, his teams are 6-1 ATS, under that, they are 3-7 ATS.
Last year's NCAA Tournament changed the game when it comes to totals. In the Round of 64, 32 and Sweet 16, Alabama had a closing over/under of 172.5, 173 and 175 — the highest totals we've seen in the tournament since 1995. Prior to last year, we had only seen two totals since 1995 reach above the 170 mark in the NCAA Tournament, and those came all the way back in 1995, both with Texas involved.
This year has been even higher.
On Feb. 22 vs. Kentucky, they had a game close 181.5 — the highest total in any CBB game since 2019.
Alabama's last four games have closed with totals of: 178.5, 179.5, 178.5 and 180.5 — the six highest totals since 2019 have all involved Alabama. Including having the two highest conference tourney totals in any game in the last 20 years.
A run like no other. Robert Morris enters the NCAA Tournament 16-1 SU and ATS in their last 17 games going into the tourney. Their SU loss came by 2 pts to Wright State and their ATS loss came by 4.5 pts in a win by 9.
The Mountain West’s tourney struggles are well known, but the auto bid has been tough outside of San Diego State’s run in 2023. Mountain West conference tourney winners are 5-17 SU in the Round of 64 since 2001 — and 1-9 SU since 2013, with that San Diego State team in 2023 with the lone win.
This year, though has been different. Colorado State enters the NCAA Tournament on a 10-game both SU and ATS win streak. 2024-25 has been a different story for Nike Medved. He entered this year 17-26-1 ATS in March and this year is 6-0 ATS.
It’s not every day you have a team make the bracket after going winless ATS in their Conference Tournament — Norfolk State went 0-3 ATS, including actually being 1-6 ATS in their last seven games entering the dance.
Norfolk State trailed at the half in the MEAC semifinal and final and came back to win both — but this year, the Spartans are 18-0 SU when leading at the half, figuring out multiple ways to win this season.
Todd Golden has yet to win or cover a game in the NCAA Tournament, going 0-1 with San Francisco and 0-1 with Florida last year losing to Colorado. Florida has only been a 1 seed twice, in 2007 and 2014, both times making the Final Four.
New Mexico has historically struggled in the NCAA Tournament. They've covered one game since 1999 (1-8 ATS). Overall, Smart's teams are 3-9 ATS in their last 12 NCAA Tournament games dating back to 2013. This will be Shaka's 19th NCAA Tournament game — he has never closed above a 10.5-point favorite and he's 2-5 ATS as a favorite in his NCAA Tournament career.
Akron began MAC conference play on January 3rd vs. Bowling Green at 7-5 SU, coming off a loss to Princeton — Akron won that game and is 21-1 SU since entering the big dance.
Arizona has had their issues covered in the tournament, going 4-15-1 ATS since 2014. They are the least profitable team in the country, including 1-8 ATS in their last 9 tourney games. Arizona is 0-7-1 ATS in Round of 64 and 0-7 ATS in Sweet 16 or later in that span, not covering a game in Round of 64 since 2013.
Let's start with Dan Hurley. His 15-3 ATS (83.3%) record is the highest ATS win percentage for a coach (min. 10 games) in the seeding era since 1979.
- UConn is the first team in seeding era ('79) to win and cover 10, 11 and 12 in a row.
- The Huskies are on a 28-6 ATS run in the dance since 2009 (covered by double-digits in 14 games).
Most Consecutive NCAAT ATS Covers Since 1979
* UConn 12 (2023-24)
* WVU 12 (1998-08)
* Villanova 11 (1985-88)
Bryant hasn’t played the role of an underdog too much this year, doing so in 7 total games and just once in the 2025 calendar year. In those 7 games, Bryant is 1-6 SU/ATS, including 0-5 SU/ATS as a 3-pt dog or higher.
In the Round of 64 or earlier, the over has cashed in 8 of the last 10 NCAA Tournament games for Michigan State since 2014, including 10-3 since 2011.
Tom Izzo is tough to beat in tight spread games. In NCAA Tournament games with a spread of 3 or less, he is 19-9 SU, 18-10 ATS career.
Fade or follow. In the First 4 or Round of 64, the over is 10-3 for Michigan State games in the Round of 64 or earlier in the tournament since 2011, but in 2023 and 2024 they went over the total bucking the trend.
Oregon coach Dana Altman is 19-13-2 ATS in the NCAA Tournament as head coach in his career, but since joining Oregon, he is 16-6-1 ATS (+$897) since 2010-11. That makes him the third-most profitable coach of 288 coaches in that span ATS behind only Jay Wright and Dan Hurley.
Altman is 8-0 SU in the first round of the NCAA Tournament with Oregon, despite an average seed of just 7.6.
With Oregon, he is 12-4-1 ATS when favored by three points or less as an underdog in the NCAAA Tournament game.
Coaching Notes
Dating back to 1978, the start of the seeding era in the NCAA Tournament, here is an ATS search-based database of every head coach. Search a name and enjoy.
Here is a breakdown of the best and worst ATS win percentages for active coaches in this year's NCAA Tournament (minimum 10 NCAAT games, since 1978):
Best ATS Win Pct
Dan Hurley
15-3 ATS
Brad Brownell
8-4-1 ATS
Matt Painter
24-14 ATS
Chris Beard
10-6 ATS
Dana Altman
19-13-2 ATS
Worst ATS Win Pct
Randy Bennett
6-10 ATS
Rick Barnes
22-36 ATS
Mark Few
29-37-1 ATS
Buzz Williams
9-11-1 ATS
Greg Gard
5-6-1 ATS
Kelvin Sampson
22-23 ATS
Now, let's look at a few superlatives for different head coaches in the NCAA Tournament. Tap the tables below to reveal lists for each category.
List A: Best and worst active head coaches ATS as a favorite (min. 10 games, since 1978)
List B: Best and worst active head coaches ATS as an underdog (min. 7 games, since 1978)
List C: Best and worst active head coaches ATS in Round of 32 and 64 (min. 10 games, since 1985)
A. The ATS Favorites List
The Best | The Worst | ||
| 1. | Dan Hurley, UConn: 14-2 ATS | Shaka Smart, Marq.:3-7 ATS | |
| 2. | Matt Painter, Purdue: 15-8 ATS | Buzz Williams, TXAM: 4-7-1 ATS | |
| 3. | Tom Izzo, Mich. St: 30-19-2 ATS | Rick Barnes, Tenn.: 18-29 ATS | |
| 4. | Scott Drew, Baylor: 13-9 ATS | Mark Few, Gonzaga: 18-26-1 ATS | |
| 5. | Greg McDermott, Crei.: 7-5-1 ATS | Bruce Pearl, Auburn: 7-10-1 ATS | |
| Updated as of March, 16th (Min. 10 games) | |||
B. The ATS Underdogs List
The Best | The Worst | ||
| 1. | John Groce, Akron: 6-2 ATS | Randy Benett, St. Mary's: 2-7 ATS | |
| 2. | Sean Miller, Xavier: 8-3 ATS | Rick Barnes, Tenn.: 4-7 ATS | |
| 3. | Shaka Smart, Marq.: 8-3 ATS | Greg McDermott, Crei.: 4-6 ATS | |
| 4. | Dana Altman, Oregon: 13-6-1 ATS | Scott Drew, Baylor: 4-5 ATS | |
| 5. | John Calipari, Arkansas: 6-3-1 ATS | Bill Self, Kansas: 7-8 ATS | |
| Updated as of March, 16th (Min. 7 games) | |||
C. The ATS First Weekend List
The Best | The Worst | ||
| 1. | Matt Painter, Purdue: 20-7 ATS | Randy Benett, St. Mary's: 5-9 ATS | |
| 2. | Dan Hurley, UConn: 7-3 ATS | Rick Barnes, Tenn.: 17-27 ATS | |
| 3. | Sean Miller, Xavier: 13-6-2 ATS | Buzz Williams, TXAM: 7-8-1 ATS | |
| 4. | Chris Beard, Miss.: 6-4 ATS | Bruce Pearl, Auburn: 10-11-1 ATS | |
| 5. | Nate Oats, Alabama: 7-5 ATS | Mark Few, Gonzaga: 22-23 ATS | |
| Updated as of March, 16th (Min. 10 games) | |||
Bet Labs Systems
Let's take a look at some NCAA Tournament systems. Click each system for matches, bets and detailed profitability charts.
Notes: This system targets undervalued teams coming off a good defensive performance. The system is 93-75-4 ATS in the Round of 64.
Current matches: Mount St. Mary's, SIU Edwardsville, Drake
Notes: The old notion, "Fade The Public." This system targets under-bet teams in high-bet games. For this, we are using 1.1X daily bet average. If you have Bet Labs, increase that DB-AVG for smaller sample, higher ROI matches.
Current matches: Check updated betting lines
Notes: Free-throw shooting in the tournament is key. This system targets the better shooting teams vs. the teams shooting under 75%.
Current matches: COMING SOON!
Notes: In the NCAA Tournament, it's been all about first-half Unders. Since 2017, they are 217-177-7 (55%) and the unders are above .500 in every round except for the Round of 32.
Slow It Down
Look for first-half Unders in the NCAA Tournament between slower-paced teams.
Current matches: COMING SOON!
Speaking of pace. When a higher-paced team for the season faces a lower-paced team during the tournament, historically the slower-paced team has had the advantage covering the spread.
Current matches: COMING SOON!
Over! Look Under.
When two teams who are both over .500 to the over during their season entering the NCAA Tournament meet, the total being inflated and the under hitting has been a good strategy.
Current matches: BYU-VCU, Wisconsin-Montana, Alabama-Robert Morris, Memphis-Colorado State, Arizona-Akron
Buyer Beware
Teams to win by 20+ points in the Round of 64 are 77-30 straight up, but just 46-59-2 ATS in the Round of 32 when their opponent won by less than 20 points in the Round of 64 since 2005. Last year's tournament, these teams went 7-0 SU and 5-2 ATS, their first year above .500 ATS in this trend since 2012.
Bounceback
Teams entering the NCAA Tournament off a loss of 20+ points are 25-13-1 ATS in the Round of 64 since 2005.
Current matches: COMING SOON!
Historical Public Betting
When looking strictly at game-to-game spread betting percentages from our Action Labs software — which is available for every game across 10+ sports — here are some notes about public betting patterns:
How do popular underdogs perform in the NCAA Tournament?
In the Round of 64, underdogs receiving the majority of the ticket count are basically .500 ATS at 78-77-2 ATS since 2005, but in the Round of 32 they are 35-51-1 ATS, the worst mark of any round in the tourney.
How has the public performed overall in March Madness?
Last year in March Madness, the public had their best season by far. Teams with more than 50% of the spread bets or tickets went 45-21 ATS (68%) during the NCAA Tournament. A $100 bettor was up $2,003 for a 30.4% ROI. Prior to that season, the public had covered 47.8% of games between 2005-23 in the tourney and since the 2010 NCAA Tournament, the betting public was .500 ATS or below in eight of 13 seasons.
What have we learned about public betting and over/unders?
The public tends to do a better job at accurately predicting Unders in the NCAA Tournament than Overs. Here are the public betting results for Overs and Unders in the past four tournaments (since 2017-18):
When Overs are the public side (51%+ of tickets on the over): 118-138-4 (46%) to the Over — going under the total by 0.8 PPG
When Unders are the public side (51%+ of tickets on the under): 77-54-1 (59%) to the Under — going under the total by 1.5 PPG
Should you avoid massive public sides?
Since 2005, only 13 different teams have closed with at least 80% of the spread bets in the NCAA Tournament. Those 13 teams are 2-11 ATS. When you lower it to 75%+, those sides are 30-43-2 ATS in March Madness.
Biggest Public Sides in NCAA Tournament Since 2005 (0-8 ATS)
| Team | Matchup (ET) | Year/Result |
|---|---|---|
| Oregon (-8.5) vs. Miami-Ohio | 2007, Round of 64 Oregon (89%) | ORE, 58-56 |
| Louisville (-21.5) vs. Morehead State | 2009, Round of 64 Louisville (87%) | UL, 74-54 |
| Oklahoma (-14.5) vs. Cal State Bakersfield | 2016, Round of 64 Oklahoma (85%) | OU, 82-68 |
| Tennessee (-19) vs. American | 2008, Round of 64 Tennessee (85%) | TENN, 72-57 |
| Memphis (-20) vs. Cal State Northridge | 2009, Round of 64 Memphis (84%) | MEM, 81-70 |
| Duke (-20.5) vs. Albany | 2013, Round of 64 Duke (83%) | Duke, 73-61 |
| Memphis (-26) vs. UT Arlington | 2008, Round of 64 Memphis (83%) | MEM, 87-63 |
| Michigan State (-5) vs. George Mason | 2006, Round of 64 Michigan St. (82%) | George Mason, 75-65 |
March Madness Trends
Let's take a live look at the biggest line movements for the Round of 64 so far.
Biggest Spread Moves
Mississippi State 3-pt move: +1.5 to -1.5 vs. Baylor
Rising Totals
Gonzaga-Georgia 2-pt move: 150.5 to 152.5
Falling Totals
San Diego State-UNC 3-pt move: 145.5 to 142.5
American-Mount St. Mary's 2.5-pt move: 134 to 131.5
Dog Hunting
In last year's NCAA Tournament, favorites had their way, going 39-28 ATS (58%), the most profitable tournament for favorites ATS since 2008.
- Favorites went 6-1 ATS in Elite 8 or later — best mark since '81.
- Favorites of 8+ went 20-5 ATS — best ever.
- Top-3 seeds went 21-10 ATS vs. seeds 4+ — best since '09.
Entering last year's dance, underdogs were .500 ATS or better in six straight NCAA Tournaments overall and 12 of the previous 13 tournaments. We haven't seen consecutive NCAA Tournaments finish above .500 ATS for favorites since 2008-09.
Let's Talk Elevation
Using Bet Labs, we've identified 17 schools playing in the highest elevation in the country during the season. Since 2005, those teams are 23-55-1 ATS (30%) in the NCAA Tournament. They've finished above .500 ATS as a group of schools just once since 2005.
Current matches: Utah State, BYU, New Mexico, Colorado State
a Different Class
How do teams with automatic bids perform in the Round of 64 vs. teams who have at-large bids? They are 33-118 SU over the last decade, but an even 75-74-2 ATS. Of that group, there have only been 17 total favorites. They went 9-8 SU and just 7-10 ATS.
What about the impact of playing on Sunday in the Conference Tournaments. Since 2014, 33 teams have come off playing on Sunday in the Conference tourney — playing on 5 days rest or less — facing a team who is on 6+ days of rest since their last game — those teams are 26-7 SU, but an even 16-16-1 ATS. The average spread for those teams is a 9-pt favorite.
Market Money
Follow The Movement? Since 2010, in the Round of 64 or earlier, when the line moves two points or more from opening to closing toward any team (ex. -5 to -7), they are 45-36-1 ATS, a +9% ROI.
Current matches: Check updated betting lines
➤Watch Out Later: When it comes to the later rounds, fade the movement. When the line moves two points or more from open to close after the Round of 64, those teams are 4-18 ATS.
High Spread, Low Totals
NCAA Tournament teams with a big spread tend to go over total the lower the over/under in the game is.
Since 2014 tourney, favorites of 15+ pts with a total of…
150 or less: 35-23-1 to over (15.6% ROI)
140 or less: 26-11 to over (35.2% ROI)
135 or less: 22-7 to over (46.1% ROI)
Let's Talk Seeding
We'll start with the 8 vs. 9 battle. 8-seeds are 75-81 SU, 70-82-4 ATS vs. 9-seeds in the Round 64 since 1985. It's the Round of 32 where you see the difference.
➤Round of 32 Results: 8-seeds in R32: 19-72 SU | 9-seeds in R32: 10-80 SU.
11 Is The New 12
Of teams seeded 10th or higher in the NCAA Tournament, the 11 seed is the only one above .500 on the moneyline since 2010 in the Round of 64. If you look recently, the 11 seeds are 18-14 SU in the Round of 64 since the start of the 2016 tourney — a $100 bettor would be up $1,253.
11 seeds have been profitable on the moneyline in the Round of 64 in 14 of the last 18 tournaments.
Double The Fun
One double-digit seed has reached every Sweet 16 since 2008 and at least one 10-seed has at minimum one win vs. a 7-seed in 29 of last 30 NCAA Tournaments, including 42 of 45 tournaments since seeding began.
In the Round of 64, blindly betting each team seeded 11th or higher on the moneyline has actually turned a profit in each of the last four tournaments and since the 2012 dance, a $100 bettor on almost 300 total games would be up almost $4,800 for a 17% ROI, profiting in 8 of 12 years.
Reversal of Fortune
The normal betting strategy has been to beware of lower-seeded teams as underdogs. Teams who are seeded at least two spots lower than their opponent (ex. 6 vs. 11 or 7 vs. 9), who are listed as an underdog, are 25-32-1 ATS and 22-36 on the moneyline since 2005.
But over the last three tournaments — 2022, 2023 and 2024 — these lower-seeded underdogs are 7-3 SU on the moneyline.
Current matches: (5) Memphis +2.5 vs. (12) Colorado State
Early Shooting
Ice Cold
Since 2011, games played at 1p ET or earlier in March Madness have seen the under go 64-47-3 (58%) in the first half with a +10% ROI.
First half unders in the NCAA Tournament overall are cashing at a 55% rate since 2018 and 55% in the Round of 64 and First Four in that span.
Dogs Run Faster
Look At Pace
Looking for a way to identify a Round of 64 double-digit seed to pull the upset? Let’s look at seeds 11 through 16 seeds since 2005…
Pace of play is an interesting start. A slower paced team — bottom 3rd in the country, 67 possessions or less — wins just 21% of R64 games, -17% ROI SU.
Over that pace mark, they win 26% of games, for a +24% ROI.
(The team's pace for the current season. Pace is measured as possessions per 48 minutes in the NBA, possessions per 40 minutes in NCAAB. The higher the number, the faster the team's tempo is.)
How To Bet First Four
Here is what you need to know all about the First Four:
➤ The "First Four" began back in 2011. There have been 104 "First Four" teams and 52 winners.
➤ Entering 2025, 26 of those 52 winners were 16-seeds, while 26 were non-16-seeds.
➤ 25 of those 26 teams seeded 16th lost in the Round of 64, with Fairleigh Dickinson beating Purdue as the lone exception.
Here is how those 26 non-16-seeds performed in the NCAA Tournament:
15 lost in the Round of 64
6 lost in the Round of 32
3 lost in the Sweet 16
2 lost in the Final Four (2021 UCLA, 2011 VCU)
➤ Is there anything actionable we can take away from the 12 First Four teams (all seeds) to advance past the Round of 64?
9 of 12 were 11-seeds (2024 Colorado, 2013 La Salle, 2023 Fairleigh Dickinson being the exceptions)
10 of 12 Round of 64 games had spreads under 7 points
9 of 12 teams entered the NCAA Tournament top 50 in RPI
10 of 12 teams faced an opponent in the Round of 64 that was an at-large bid
10 of 12 Round of 64 games went under the total
8 of 12 teams had Round of 64 games with over/unders below 140
7 of 12 teams won their Round of 64 game by double-digits
➤A First Four team has advanced to the Round of 32 in 12 of 13 years, including advancing to the Sweet 16 in five of 13 years.
➤Since the inception of the First Four in 2011, the public is 22-29 ATS in that round. The public has finished .500 ATS or below in the First Four in 9 of the 13 tournaments.
Upsets and Betting Records
Heading into March Madness, here are the biggest upsets in the tournament and the betting records set throughout the years.
What is the biggest NCAA Tournament favorite?
In the seeding era, 1999 Duke takes the cake when it was a 46-point favorite against Florida A&M. The Blue Devils beat the Rattlesnakes 99-58, failing to cover the lofty 46-point spread by five points.
Only three teams have closed as a favorite of 35 pts or more dating back to 1978 and none since 1999 (all listed below). Since 2015, we've only seen one team close above a 32-pt favorite and that was Gonzaga in 2021 winning and covering as a 33-pt favorite vs. Norfolk State.
Biggest Favorites in NCAA Tournament Since 1978:
| Team | Matchup (ET) | Year/Result |
|---|---|---|
| Duke (-46) vs. Florida A&M | 1999, Round of 64 Duke, 99-58 |
| Kansas (-36.5) vs. Prairie View A&M | 1998, Round of 64 Kansas, 110-52 |
| Kansas (-35.5) vs. Jackson State | 1997, Round of 64 Kansas, 78-64 |
What are the highest & lowest totals in the NCAA Tournament?
Last year's NCAA Tournament changed the game when it comes to totals. In the Round of 64, 32 and Sweet 16, Alabama had a closing over/under of 172.5, 173 and 175 — the highest totals we've seen in the tournament since 1995.
Alabama in 2024 Tournament
Alabama had an over/under of 170+ in all three of their NCAA Tournament games in 2024. They went over the total by 30+ pts against College of Charleston, went under by 40 pts against Grand Canyon and went over by a single point against North Carolina.
 |  | |
Prior to last year, we had only seen two totals since 1995 reach above the 170 mark in the NCAA Tournament, and those came all the way back in 1995, both with Texas involved.
Maryland vs. Texas
O/U: 177
Oregon vs. Texas
O/U: 176
➤In the 1995 tourney, the Texas Longhorns, behind coach Tommy Penders, were averaging almost 93 points per game and had back-to-back games with a total above 170. They faced Oregon in the Round of 64 and won, then the total got a little higher when they faced an even higher-scoring team in Maryland, a game in which the Longhorns lost by 14. Both games went under the total.
When it comes to the lowest totals, we've only seen one close below 110 and that came in 1996 between Princeton and Mississippi State. If we lift the floor a bit, we've only seen two totals close at 115 or lower since the 2010 NCAA Tournament — Northern Iowa/Wyoming in 2015 (110.5) and Cal/South Florida in 2012 (114).
Princeton vs. Mississippi State
O/U: 108
➤The story of this over/under tale is Princeton's defense, which was No. 1 in the country in 1995-96 and allowing under 52 points per game. As a 13-seed in the Round of 64, the Tigers beat 4-seed UCLA, 43-41, and held the Bruins to 38.5% shooting (Princeton shot 37% and won). Then in the Round of 32, the total closed at 108 vs. Mississippi State, which beat Princeton, 63-41, barely staying under the total.
What are the easiest betting wins in the NCAA Tournament?
Between the moneyline, against the spread and totals, going through history, what have been the easiest (largest margin) wins for bettors? Let's explore.
Easiest Bets Won in NCAA Tournament Since 1978:
| Teams | Year/Result | Bet Type |
|---|---|---|
| 2016 National Semifinals Villanova (-2.5) | VIL, 95-51 Covered by 41.5 pts | Against The Spread |
 | 1998 Round of 64 Kansas (-36.5) | KU, 110-52 Won by 58 pts | Moneyline |
 | 2002 Round of 32 Cincinnati/UCLA (139) | 105-101 Went over by 67 pts | Over |
 | 2017 Round of 64 S. Dakota St/Gonzaga (157.5) | 66-46 Went under by 45.5 pts | Under |
What are the biggest betting upsets in the NCAA Tournament?
Since seeding began in 1978, nine teams have lost straight up in the NCAA Tournament as a favorite of 15 points or more. Let's look at the top six and more.
2023
Purdue (-23.5) lost to Fairleigh Dickinson
2012
Missouri (-21) lost to Norfolk State
2018
Virginia (-20.5) lost to UMBC
1997
South Carolina (-18.5) lost to Coppin State
1993
Arizona (-18.5) lost to Santa Clara
2022
Kentucky (-17.5) lost to Saint Peter's
2001
Iowa State (-17.5) lost to Hampton
1986
Notre Dame (-17) lost to Arkansas-Little Rock
2016
Michigan State (-16.5) lost to Middle Tennessee State
➤Since 1978, Kansas has the most losses by any school as a double-digit favorite (6), but none since 2011. Arizona and Duke are second on that list with four losses as double-digit favorites each — Arizona's last loss came in 2023, while Duke's was back in 2014.
➤Perfect Trip: In that same timeframe, here are the teams with the most SU wins without a loss as a double-digit favorite: Louisville (16-0), Michigan (15-0), Syracuse (12-0), Arkansas (10-0), Maryland (10-0) and UNLV (10-0). Cincinnati (9), Pittsburgh (8) and Tennessee (8) are the next-closest teams.
What are the worst betting losses later in March Madness?
Since seeding began in 1978, seven teams have lost straight up in the Sweet 16 or later as a favorite of 10 points or more. Our last example of this came back in 2022 when both Purdue and Gonzaga lost in the same season. Let's take a look at the top seven losses.
2022
Purdue (-13) lost to Saint Peter's
2002
Duke (-12) lost to Indiana
2011
Kansas (-11.5) lost to VCU
1998
Arizona (-10.5) lost to Utah
1997
Kansas (-10.5) lost to Arizona
2022
Gonzaga (-10) lost to Arkansas
1985
