Betting the Underdogs in March Madness

Ask yourself this question: Should you blindly bet all the underdogs in March Madness?

The 2023 NCAA Tournament had a weird betting theme to it. We visualize upsets when looking at the bracket, and then we take them to the betting window.

It was an exciting tournament but an unorthodox one to be sure. For the first time in NCAA Tournament history, there were no #1 seeds in the Elite 8 as the March Madness underdogs stole the show. And in a huge way!

TRENDS?

I see these types of trends a lot on sports betting social media that isn't Twitter — Now X, Instagram, TikTok, especially. "If you bet X in X event last year, you'd be up X units." But they usually fail to tell the whole story, or purposely narrow the sample size to sound interesting and profitable.

So is betting underdogs to win outright in March Madness actually a good idea?

Betting No. 15 and No. 16 seeds.

Now, let’s look at the frequency of a No. 16 or No. 15 team upsetting a No. 1 or No. 2 seed.

Since 1985, No. 1 seeds are 150-2 against No. 16 seeds, but the two upsets have both happened in the last six seasons. Maybe the transfer portal will make it even more advantageous this season.

Virginia was upset by UMBC in 2018 – the first time a No. 16 seed beat a No. 1 seed in the men’s NCAA Tournament. Purdue was knocked off by Fairleigh Dickinson in 2023.

Betting No. 15 Seeds

No. 15 seeds beating No. 2 seeds is more common, especially recently. Eleven No. 15 seeds have beaten No. 2 seeds since 1985, with seven of those wins coming since 2012. I’m definitely going to bet some higher seeds early in the tournament. By the time the “Elite Eight” get here, things will have settled down.  

Breaking it down, a No. 15 seed has upset a No. 2 seed just 11 times in 152 games (7.2%). In the 27 tournaments from 1985 to 2011, No. 15 seeds won only four times in 108 games (3.7%).

This is where it gets interesting. Since then, No. 15 seeds have seven wins in 44 games over the last 11 tournaments – a winning percentage of 15.9%. That’s a drastic increase. Being that the money line is so large, there will be opportunities with a No. 15 seed to pay large dividends. 

If a bettor placed a $100 moneyline bet on every underdog in the NCAA Tournament since 2017, they’d be up $1,132. That’s making money line bets only. However, if taking no points is profitable, then taking the points is where one should initially be looking to bet. 

Let’s look at the point spread bets. 

There’s a similar trend for the spread as well. Bettors who wagered $100 on every underdog spread during that span would be up $723. It’s profitable bot that’s not even making minimum wage. 

Spread bets are safer and more likely to hit because the underdog doesn’t need to win the game to cover. However, spreads also come with worse odds and lower potential payouts, so there’s a trade-off there. Have you seen favorite(s) with a -250 money line, the payback is +200. That money goes in the casinos fund to add another floor. 

Regardless, both bet types have been profitable lately on March Madness underdogs. It’s profitable because of transfers and NIL’s. Imagine a high school star player getting recruited to Duke and sitting on the bench his entire college career. He knows he’ll never play so he transfers to another college where he’ll be a starter and has the potential to be an instant hit. 

Betting Underdogs

Accordingly, underdogs have become more viable bets based on recent trends. No. 15 and No. 16 seeds are still far more likely to lose than win, but upsets are becoming more common as stated above.

Time will tell if those trends continue, as tournaments vary every year. In the meantime, wagering a small amount of money on a large underdog appears to be a reasonable betting strategy that could prove profitable this March. We will look further into investing in the underdog as the seeding is completed.

Betting it all on “That One Dog”

So if you were firing +250 dogs throughout the tourney — you know, the ones we actually thought could win — you probably lost your shirt. And if you want to blindly bet every team on the moneyline, you better be comfortable betting every team. If you missed on Saint Peters — which I don't think anyone advocated for — you did lose your shirt.

In 2022, Saint Peters was +19.5 units thanks to its epic Elite Eight run with included wins at +1100, +650 and +300. The rest of the dogs were -13.5 units. It’s all or nothing. 

The only time it's really paid off for bettors is in the Elite Eight, which is too small a sample size to read much into. In the first two rounds and Final Four, it's been a downright disaster.

One more example from 2023 March Madness.

A bettor’s plan was simple: bet $100 on the underdog in every March Madness game. Despite going 0-for-3 in the final 3 games of the tournament, he still came out up $1,900 on his bets. That’s an exceptional month. 

Across all 67 games, he had 24 wins and 43 losses. Betting $100 on the money line on every underdog, he walked away up comfortably after the final whistle was blown.

That is two years in a row now he’s taken this strategy and both years have been profitable.

Finally, is betting underdogs profitable?

It's not a simple yes or no answer on whether you should bet on an underdog or not. Underdogs will likely win less than 50 percent of the time, but that doesn't mean they won't be profitable. Recreational bettors often gravitate toward favorites, which can sometimes create value on the underdogs by inflating the lines. That’s where the sharp money and us seasoned professionals lay in wait.

Professional bettors study the markets, check the odds, and crunch the numbers. Sportsbooks use incredibly complex software to check the stats, predict the most likely outcome, and set the odds accordingly. We, at VEGASWINNERS follow suit..

Good Wagering