Pool Tracking Sheet

I updated our old pool spreadsheet with this year's teams and games. Also added some cumulative score tracking charts (still a bit of a work in progress). If I get the time I will also add in "what if" scenario modeling to project pool ranking implications of potential results.

Link (Google Docs spreadsheet):

http://bit.ly/a4s52a

2010 Pool Intro

I have been meaning to get an initial post up for a while now. No time like the present.

Many have asserted that more people would follow the World Cup if only they could gamble on it. We tested this in our office during the 2006 Cup and refined the pool during the 2008 European Championships. With the 2010 Cup starting in a few weeks, I wanted to share our pool structure out with a few friends.

Once I update the pool spreadsheet I will post that as well.

Scoring

Quick review of our pool scoring:

First Round
Each pool entry selects the outcome for every group game. (Team A wins, Team B wins, or Draw)

You pick the actual score for each game. (More on this in a minute.)

Each correct first-round pick scores 1 point in the pool. (48 pts total)

Group Advance

You don't have to get the exact scores right, but this gives you a way resolve ties in the group standings. E.g.,., you predict that Team X and Team Y both finish with 7 points from 2 wins and a draw, but Team X finishes first in the group because of better goal differential.

Each correctly picked team advancing to the second round scores 1 additional point in the pool -- regardless of whether the team finished first or second in the group. (16 pts)

There are four reasons behind this:

1. It rewards the main point of picking the groups -- picking who advances -- without getting too caught up in what happens down the road. E.g., if you peg Algeria and Slovenia to advance instead of England and the USA, you get extra credit for that -- even if you don't think either team will advance farther than that.
2. It doesn't hose your pool over if you trip over a minute detail in group play, esp. in a strong group. that sends your picks into the opposite sides of the single-elimination bracket. E.g., if you really like Brazil and Ivory Coast to advance and play again in the final, you don't break your bracket if you had Brazil picked 1st and Ivory Coast 2nd and they wind up reversed because Ivory Coast runs up the score on North Korea and finishes 1st on goal differential.
3. Despite this tolerance, there are still strong incentives to pick the group standings exactly, in order to maximize points in later rounds. E.g., if you pick France and Argentina to win their groups and make it to the semis, only France trips up, finishes second, and plays Argentina in the Round of 16, you've lost a bunch of later-round points by not nailing the group play.
4. It avoids the need to re-pick after round 1. You can just re-pick a 16-team single elimination bracket after round 1; some people run NCAA pools in a similar way, re-picking after each round. But there are philosophical and practical reasons why we don't. Philosophically, it sucks to give a new lease on life to a guy who initially thought North Korea and New Zealand were likely group winners. Practically, in a pool of any size there are always people who miss the deadline for re-picking. This method allows everyone to pick in one shot, and amplifies the praise or ridicule their prognostications receive later.

Second Round

For later round games, you simply pick a winner. The pick sheet asks for a score, but it doesn't really matter. If you think England will beat Australia on penalty kicks, you can still put the score in as 7-0.

Each correct second-round pick scores 2 points in the pool. (16 pts)

Quarterfinals

Each correct quarterfinal pick scores 4 points in the pool. (16 pts)

Semifinals

Each correct semifinal pick scores 8 points in the pool. (16 pts)

Third Place Game

Correctly picking the third place game scores 2 points in the pool. (2 pts)

(We have previously awarded just 1 point for this game. The argument for a single point is that sometimes one team may not care nearly as much as the other in this game, e.g. Holland v. Croatia, 1998. The argument for two points is that this is often a contested game between two good teams with some prestige for the winner, e.g. 2002, 2006, and is worth a little more.

Final

Picking the champion correctly scores 16 points in the pool. (16 pts)

In total there are 130 points available. Escalating point values in later rounds make it possible to recover from weak group play predictions. Strong early performance makes it possible to survive losing your predicted champion and still place in the money.

Entry Rules

These vary a ton from office to office. We charge a flat fee per entry in order to encourage broad participation, with a maximum of two entries per person.

Payout

The last-place entry gets their fee back, with the winner taking 80% of the remainder and the runner-up 20%. Running this in our office in the last two major tournaments, the pool outcome has come down the to championship game each time.