__A Wimpy Squares Cost
Analysis__

I've been running the Wimpy
Squares pool for 11 years now (2018 is the 12th year) and I've been pleased with
its popularity. Although I'd "borrowed" the basic idea from someone else,
(he charged $50 for every square) I thought I could improve on it by charging
less for the (perceived) lesser popular combinations, along with a premium for
the numbers that everyone seemed to want. This seemed to work pretty well,
however it was still more difficult to move the cheaper squares, even with the
discount. In 2013, I decided to do a cost analysis of the whole pool based on
7 (now 11) years of data. Which squares were __really__ better, and
which ones were poor investments? So far, I've limited my focus to final point
spreads. That is to say, I'm making the assumption that a final score of 54-50
is no more likely than a final score of 55-51. All 4 point differentials
are lumped together. While the data exists on the site if you want to attempt to
break it down by specific combinations, I feel this point differential analysis
yields some fascinating conclusions.

Point Differential | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |

2007 | 500 | 1200 | 550 | 350 | 325 | 225 | 275 | 600 | 250 | 625 |

2008 | 525 | 425 | 650 | 1225 | 100 | 825 | 275 | 150 | 300 | 425 |

2009 | 175 | 500 | 125 | 1275 | 75 | 400 | 550 | 400 | 725 | 675 |

2010 | 75 | 200 | 225 | 800 | 50 | 275 | 150 | 625 | 1650 | 850 |

2011 | 275 | 175 | 675 | 500 | 100 | 150 | 225 | 600 | 1575 | 625 |

2012 | 125 | 125 | 1425 | 375 | 275 | 325 | 725 | 700 | 700 | 125 |

2013 | 475 | 25 | 175 | 150 | 1475 | 425 | 700 | 250 | 700 | 525 |

2014 | 725 | 150 | 175 | 350 | 1300 | 350 | 450 | 275 | 500 | 625 |

2015 | 800 | 350 | 175 | 725 | 400 | 1075 | 300 | 375 | 350 | 350 |

2016 | 75 | 175 | 200 | 500 | 400 | 800 | 850 | 1500 | 275 | 125 |

2017 | 300 | 175 | 100 | 275 | 1225 | 125 | 775 | 550 | 675 | 700 |

11 YR VALUE | $368.18 | $318.18 | $406.82 | $593.18 | $520.45 | $452.27 | $479.55 | $547.73 | $700.00 | $513.64 |

Adj. 11 yr value | $368.18 | $227.27 | $315.91 | $411.36 | $338.64 | $361.36 | $479.55 | $456.82 | $518.18 | $513.64 |

2013 Cost Was | $40.00 | $44.00 | $44.00 | $50.00 | $50.00 | $52.00 | $52.00 | $56.00 | $56.00 | $56.00 |

2014 Cost Was | $30.00 | $34.00 | $47.00 | $55.00 | $45.00 | $52.00 | $52.00 | $60.00 | $65.00 | $60.00 |

2015 Cost Was | $35.00 | $34.00 | $47.00 | $52.00 | $50.00 | $52.00 | $52.00 | $53.00 | $65.00 | $60.00 |

2016 Cost Was | $38.00 | $35.00 | $45.00 | $54.00 | $50.00 | $53.00 | $50.00 | $53.00 | $65.00 | $57.00 |

2017 Cost Was | $36.00 | $34.00 | $45.00 | $55.00 | $50.00 | $54.00 | $52.00 | $55.00 | $64.00 | $55.00 |

2018 New Cost | $36.00 | $32.00 | $43.00 | $54.00 | $52.00 | $51.00 | $54.00 | $55.00 | $65.00 | $58.00 |

Let's look at the results. The
gray shaded cells show which
differential won the grand prize $1000 for that year. An award that large
will naturally skew the results in favor of that spread. This is similar
to the way that a slot machine may pay back 95% of the money taken in, but if
you don't hit the big jackpot, you're going to receive a substantially smaller
percentage. After
11 years, winning the grand prize clearly raises the expected value of that
point spread about $8.25 The
__ cells show the return __
without__ the grand prize factored in.

For the first 6 years, the 6-point spreads had performed terribly. Then they hit the big jackpot two years in a row. The 9 point spreads haven't been much better, paying back less than $23 per square if you don't count the grand prize in 2007. In 2013, there was only ONE 9 pt winner, and it was only for $25. The 4 point spreads had been one of the most expensive squares, yet had performed horribly until the last two years where they have been winners.

On the opposite end, the 2 point differentials have been the huge winners, winning back over $50 per square, even without factoring in TWO jackpot hits. Their actual return has been $70 per square! They underperformed in both 2015 and 2016, bringing the total down from their high of $80 per square! The 1 point differentials at almost $50 had also been big winners, despite never winning the big jackpot.

I acknowledge that 11 years of data is probably statistically insignificant, but I don't think it should be ignored either. Based on the numbers, I have continued to revamp the costs of the squares.

__What happened in 2014...__

2014 saw some corrections in the data that were probably due.
The underperforming 10 point squares hit it big for $72.50/square, which was a
huge windfall for a few players with 2-2 ($250) and 3-3 ($375). The 10
point squares also have a strong chance to hit the halftime score of the
Championship Game for $300. Recognizing that with approximately double the
chance to win the $300 halftime final than a 9-pt square, the price of 10 point squares has gone up $5/square. Despite hitting only one other game for $50, (1-5), a 6-point
differential (0-4) hit the jackpot for the 2nd year in a row. Two jackpots in 2
years cannot be ignored, and I've increased the cost of 6-point squares by $5. There are
corresponding cost * reductions* on the 7 and 3 point differentials.
7 point squares have been reduced $3 and 3 point squares have been reduced a
whopping $7/square!

The 10 point squares hit it big again, with 1-1 winning a Final Four game for $300, and then again, hitting the halftime of the Championship Final for another $300. As a group, each $35 10-point square won an average of $80 each. This reinforces my observation last year that the added chance of hitting a halftime score in the Final Game makes 10-pt differential square a better investment than a 9-pt differential square. I've raised the price of 10-pt squares $3. After a strong year, I've also raised the prices of of the 5, 7, and 9 point spreads. After a disappointing year, I've lowered the prices of the 1, 4, and 8 point spreads.

Historically, the higher pricing will do little to deter people from selecting the 1 and 2 point spreads. My goal is to make the other combinations attractive by competitive pricing. I am expecting continued higher interest in the 9 and 10 point squares. I also expect that despite underperforming for 3 straight years, the 3 point squares at $53 will remain popular.

The 10 point squares bottomed out, winning only 3 $25 games. They still offer strong chances to win the halftime of the final game, thus cost a bit more than the 9 point squares. I've lowered the price of 10-pt squares $2, and the 9-pt squares $1. After a strong year, I've also raised the prices of of the 3, 4, and 5 point spreads. I've raised the price of the 7-pt squares after a moderate return in 2016 to reflect their strong performance over the last 10 years. Finally, I've slightly lowered the prices of the 1 and 2 pt squares, after both underperformed 2 years in a row.

The 1 and 2 point combinations continued to be consistent winners. The 5, 8, and 9 point squares had terrible returns, and the 7's weren't much better. The 7-point squares still have a relatively high cost because they remain one of the three columns to have won the Championship game more than once over the last decade. I reduced the price on all of them. The 6-point squares hit the jackpot for the third time in 2018. They haven't earned much when they don't hit that final game, but a small increase in price seemed appropriate. The 4-point squares came in strong for the second year in a row. I raised the price on the 4 most profitable columns from 2017. At $36 and $32 respectively, the 10 and 9 point squares offer tremendous value if they should happen to hit even once for $25.

Pretty much everything you need to know is posted here, or elsewhere on the site. Perhaps you can spot a bargain amongst the clusters of data. Did I raise some combinations too much? If so, then there is value somewhere else. Find the diamond in the rough, and you can cash in.