Who should you pick? Well, the tables below might be of some assistance. Feel free to consult them for guidance if you wish. Or just for enjoyment. Or look at them and wonder when Walt is going to get a life.  One caveat though: using the stats below is no guarantee that your pool performance will improve; in fact, it could get worse! (Another caveat: these stats are from my personal records; I do not vouch for the absolute veracity of the numbers).

In addition to the summary stats below, you can now track the records of every single team that has made the 64-team field since 1985. You can see year-by-year seedings for each team and year-by-year wins. Plus, teams are ranked by various criteria such as total wins, sweet sixteens, final fours, high seeds, etc.  Check it out at the Tournament Teams Page.

The stats have been compiled since 1985, the year the tournament went to 64 teams: 38 years total (through 2023). For each of the pairings in the first four rounds there are 152 results (4 regions/year  x 38 years = 152). For the final game there will be 76 results (2 teams x 38 years); of course, there will be 36 champions (as of the completion of the 2023 tournament).
 

Listed in the first table above is the frequency of wins by favorites (higher seeds) over the 156 first-round games between each pairing over the last 39 years. The hardest games to pick are the first round upsets. How hard? For reference, in the right column is a predicted winning % and record over the 156 games by the higher seed based on a very crude model. The model works as follows: Notice that all seed match-ups add up to 17 (1 vs. 16, 8 vs. 9). Assume that the seed is an indication of how many times out of 17 that seed would be expected to lose. So, a #8 seed would be expected to lose 8 times (and win 9 times) every 17 games.

Remarkably, this simple model works amazingly well, outside of a couple exceptions. First, a #1 seed has only lost two games, though the model predicts 9 such losses since 1985; the number of #2 seed losses is also overestimated (18 compared to the actual 11). As might be expected, the largest variation from year-to-year has occurred for the #8 vs. #9 match-up, where the underdog #9 seed actually won more total games through most of the history, until 2015; then, the #8 seeds fared much better through 2018, winning 7 out of 8 in 2016 and 2017, then split 2-2 in 2018; then in 2019, the #9 seeds swept putting the #8 two games below .500. The #8s went 3-1 in 2021 to bring the record to exactly .500 (72-72). Things tilted back to the #9s over the last three years, winning 3 of 4 in 2022 and 2024, and splitting in 2023.

Actual results for seeds #3 through #7 are quite close to the statistically predicted results - within ~2-3% (2 to 4 games over 156 games for each seed pairing). Recently, there has been a skew in the 5 vs. 12 games, especially after 2013 and 2014 when three #12 seeds won each. A 4-0 run by #5s in 2015 and 2018 brought things more in line, though that reversed in 2019 with #12s going 3-1; it reversed again in 2021, with #5 seeds going 3-1. In 2022, the two seeds split, 2 wins each. Then in 2023, there was an unusual sweep by the #5 seeds, before again splitting the games 2-2 in 2024. So, the #5 seeds generally under-perform, though the performance can vary greatly from year to year. Interestingly, overall the model only errs substantially for the most mismatched teams! One question might be, is this a statistical fluke that just comes out of a few years?  Perhaps, but I've updated this for many years now and the percentages haven't changed much from year to year.

Why does the model break down for the 1-16 and 2-15 match-ups? In terms of the mismatches, the worst 6-8 teams (#15, #16 seeds) are all automatic bids from very weak conferences; these teams are usually not anywhere near the top 57-64 teams (often their rated in the 100s); so there is much more of a mismatch than the seeds indicate. But perhaps that is changing now with UMBC's win over Virginia in 2018 and Fairleigh Dickinson's win over Purdue in 2023. Why have the 8-9 and 5-12 match-ups been off? I have no idea! (It could be that the committee simply mis-seeds the teams).

So, now you have the necessary information to decide which seeds are most likely to get upset. Of course, knowing that it's likely that at least one #5 seed will lose to a #12 seed this year doesn't help one determine which one of the #5 seeds will be the one to get upset!

Now, what about the second round? See below:

Looking at the 2nd round winners (those making the Sweet 16), more intriguing things show up. While #9 and #8 seed are roughly even in the first round, don't pick a #9 to make the Sweet 16. #8 seeds are far more successful in the 2nd round (in absolute numbers even though they get to the 2nd round less frequently than #9 seeds). In fact, getting a #9 seed, while giving a team a chance to win one game, is a virtual guarantee that the team will be gone by the end of the first weekend. However, 2018 broke this pattern - getting two #9s into the Sweet Sixteen - a 40% increase from the total of the previous 33 years! But still, you're better off picking a #11, #12, or even a #13 seed to make the Sweet 16. In 2018, along with the two #9s, two #11s also made it. 2019 was very chalky with only two upsets, one being a #5. Only #12 Oregon was a true "Cinderella" - yet another #12 into the Sweet 16. 2021 was a rather crazy year with at least one of every seed except #9, #10, and #16. 2022 add two #11 seeds to the Sweet Sixteen and, most notably, St. Peter's as a #15. In 2023, Princeton was yet another #15, and -surprise!- there was a #9, Florida Atlantic. In 2024, things went close to chalk, with only two seeds below #5 making the Sweet 16: a #6 (Clemson) and a #11 (NC State). 

How does one explain this? A #9 seed, having just won a very tough first round game, faces a nearly impossible task of playing a #1 seed with only one day to practice for them. Lower seeds face an easier 2nd round opponent and have momentum and perhaps a psychological advantage (the Cinderella effect) on their side. Often, there may be multiple upsets, so that a #12 seed actually becomes a favorite against #13. In fact, once the #12 seed wins their first round game, close to 50% of the time (20 out of 47 through 2018) they've won their next game and gone to the Sweet 16. Picking a #15 or #16 is generally throwing money away, but in 2013 Florida-Gulf Coast became the first #15 to make the Sweet Sixteen; then in 2021 Oral Roberts became the second; in 2022 St. Peter's became the third, and in 2023, Princeton became the 4th. And now, the third round and beyond, where for the first time in 2023 there were no #1 seeds: