Last week, I introduced the first of a three-part series on key betting data for the college basketball conference tournaments. In it, I covered the 15 mid-major conferences that tipped off their tournaments between March 4th and March 9th. In this second part, I will cover the 11 mid-major conferences starting their tournaments a bit later, specifically March 12th or beyond. The third part in the series, covering the power conferences, will be released Sunday.

In opening up last week’s piece, I explained how many bettors and fans find the two-week span of conference tournament games even more exhilarating than the postseason action. Well, if early conference tourney action is any indication, we will be witnessing another full month of surprises and, well, madness.


For those of you who tend to invest more heavily in this time period than you will later in March, this conference tournament betting data, specifically team performance records, trends, and systems made just for you.

The angles that I have chosen to look at focused on three key areas, with combinations of each in some cases. Those areas were bye games, rounds, and line ranges.

A reminder of the general thought I introduced last week. Bettors need to understand the value of having a bye in conference tournaments is typically significant, especially when they are believed to be the better team. In fact, heading into the 2023 action, conference tournament favorites off a bye are 621-193 SU and 394-338-17 ATS (53.8%) over the last 10 seasons against teams that played earlier in that tournament. There has been profit in betting that and considering nothing else.

Note: All of these betting systems included games heading into the respective 2024 tournaments.

The leagues covered in this second mid-major piece include:

ATLANTIC 10 – March 12
BIG WEST – March 13
IVY LEAGUE – March 16
MAC – March 14
MEAC – March 13
SWAC – March 13
WAC – March 13

For my latest strength ratings, including Power Ratings, Effective Strength indicators, Bettors’ Ratings, Recent Ratings, and Schedule Strengths, visit the NCAAMBB TEAM POWER RANKINGS page on, sortable by conference.

Key Trend(s)

·  Opening round single-digit favorites are just 7-13-1 ATS (65%) in their last 21 tries in the AAC tourney.

·  In the American quarterfinals, underdogs of 6 points or less that played in the opening round are on a 5-2 SU and 6-1 ATS stretch vs. teams that enjoyed a bye. In that same span since 2014, underdogs of 6.5 points or higher are 1-19 SU and 9-11 ATS (45%).

·  In the nine-year history of the AAC tourney, Under the total is 6-2-1 (75%) in the championship game. Favorites are 7-2 SU and 6-3 ATS (75%) in those contests, allowing just 59.4 PPG.

Key Trend(s)

·  Atlantic 10 teams off a bye are on a 33-8 SU and 25-15-1 ATS (62.5%) ATS run vs. teams that have already played in the tournament since 2016.

·  The Atlantic 10 is one of just a few conferences that host a “second round” in its tournament. Favorites have been nearly automatic in this round since 2014, going 31-4 SU. Those laying 5.5 points or less are on an incredible 15-2 SU and ATS (88.2%) surge.

·  Atlantic 10 favorites are on a run of 19-1 SU and 16-4 ATS (80%) in the quarterfinal round.

·  Atlantic 10 totals of 144 or higher have been predictably high scoring, going 17-8 Over the total (68%) since 2014.

Key Trend(s)

·  There has been a significant benchmark line point in recent years of the Big West tourney, which has been 7.5 points. Favorites of 7.5 points or more are 17-1 SU and 10-7-1 ATS (58.8%) since 2014, while underdogs of 7 points or less have gone 32-19-3 ATS (62.7%) in that same span.

·  Favorites in the semifinal round of the Big West tournament are just 8-10 SU and 5-11-2 ATS (31.3%) since 2014.

·  Totals of 140 or less in the Big West tourney are 14-6 Under (70%) since 2014. All but one of the nine games a year ago met this criteria.

Key Trend(s)

·  In Conference USA’s ever-changing field, favorites have been a reliable wager over the last eight years, going 61-23 SU and 50-33-1 ATS (60.2%) during that stretch.

·  Teams off a bye in an earlier round(s) are on a 33-9 SU and 26-16 ATS (61.9%) run in the CUSA tourney versus teams that have already played.

·  Conference USA tournament games have gone Under the total at a 34-17 (66.7%) rate since 2018.

Key Trend(s)

·  The previous five Ivy League tourneys have shown a distinct pattern regarding rounds and totals. Championship games are 4-1 Over the total (80%), while semifinal games are 6-4 Under the total (60%).

·  All eight of the previous Ivy League tourney favorites of 4 points or more have won outright, going 5-2-1 ATS (71.4%).

Key Trend(s)

·  The highest totaled games (154+) in the MAAC tourney have trended significantly Under, 12-1 (92.3%) in the last 13. However, there hasn’t been such a game since 2018.

·  The smallest of favorites have been the most successful of late in the MAAC tournament, with those laying 2 points or fewer going 14-2 SU and 13-3 ATS (81.3%) since 2014.

·  Other single-digit MAAC tourney favorites (-2.5 or higher) are just 28-20 SU but 19-28-1 ATS since 2017.

·  Byes have not been a reward lately for the MAAC’s top teams as those teams off of byes playing against teams that have played already are just 8-10 SU and 4-14 ATS (22.2%) since 2016 in this bracket.

·  MAAC Championship game favorites are on an 8-1 SU and 7-2 ATS (77.8%) surge.

Key Trend(s)

·  Favorites of 4.5 points or more in the MAC tourney boast a record of 32-4 SU since 2017, to go along with a respectable ATS record of 21-14-1 (60%). Favorites of 4 points or fewer are on a 6-15 SU and 4-17 ATS skid (19%).

·  The semifinal round of the MAC tournament has been the most predictable as far as totals are concerned, 10-6 Under the total (62.5%) since 2014.

Key Trend(s)

·  Small underdogs of 5 points or less are on a highly profitable 12-8 SU and 17-3 ATS (85%) run up through the quarterfinal round of the MEAC tournament. There were no such underdogs in 2023, however.

·  Eight of the last nine (88.9%) MEAC Championship games went Under the total

·  MEAC Semifinal favorites are on a 9-2 SU and ATS (81.8%) surge.

Key Trend(s)

·  Since 2011, Mountain West Conference tourney favorites of 5.5 points or less are on a 41-18 ATS (69.5%) surge.

·  MWC teams facing an opponent that had an earlier round bye are just 2-19 SU and 7-14 ATS (33.3%) as underdogs of fewer than 12 points since 2014. In all other line scenarios, including when favored, they are 8-0 ATS

·  MWC Semifinal favorites are on a current run of 13-3 SU and 11-5 ATS (68.8%), including eight straight outright wins and four straight covers.

·  The last five MWC title games went Under the total (100%).

Key Trend(s)

·  SWAC semifinal favorites boast a record of 14-3 SU and 11-5-1 ATS (68.8%) since 2014.

·  Favorites in the SWAC title game are on a 2-9 ATS (18.2%) skid and have lost three of the last four outright.

Key Trend(s)

·  Only two WAC tournament underdogs of 3 points or more have won outright in the last 10 years, going 2-44 SU and 18-28 ATS (39.1%).

·  WAC championship favorites are on a 10-2 SU and ATS (83.3%) surge, with the only two losses coming in 2021 and 2023 with 1-point dogs winning.

·  Totals higher than 147 are on a 12-5 Under (70.6%) run in the WAC tourney.