It’s that time of year when the likes of Joe Lunardi and Doug Gottlieb crawl out of… It’s that time of year when the likes of Joe Lunardi and Doug Gottlieb crawl out of hibernation and enlighten viewers with their perfect predictions of Tournament outcomes.

March Madness is the perfect passage from the start of spring training in baseball to the NHL and NBA playoffs. Brackets become artifacts. Upset picks become secret obsessions. Seeds go beyond apple and sesame.

So what do you, the bracket connoisseur, need to cash in on this month-long March obsession? Here are a few points to review when looking at those numerous lines, numbers and colleges known as the NCAA Tournament bracket:

Research school history in the Tournament, it matters.

Some teams just know how to step it up at Tournament time. Duke owns the top winning percentage in the Tournament at .782., UNLV at .719, Kentucky at .694 and Connecticut at .760probably won’t be top-three seeds in this year’s bracket, but they have history on their side. For the record, Pitt is 17-20 all-time in the Tournament, a .459 winning percentage.

Research a coach’s history in the Tournament.

It’s no surprise that the top winning percentage in the Tournament – .782 – is held by Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski. Other coaches you can trust are Michigan State coach Tom Izzo (.727), Louisville’s Rick Pitino (.762) and Connecticut’s Jim Calhoun (.731).

We’re going streaking! A winning streak has propelled some teams to the Sweet 16 and beyond. It’s obvious to expect the top teams to own some type of winning streak. But several mid to low seeds this year are getting hot at the right time. Check up on how these teams played during their conference tournaments.

Here are some Tournament qualifiers’ records over the last 12 games: Davidson, 12-0; Butler, 11-1; BYU, 10-2; Gonzaga, 10-2; Kent State, 11-1; UNLV, 9-3; South Alabama, 9-3; and Kentucky, 9-3.

On the opposite side, here are some Tournament qualifiers struggling over their last 12 games: Michigan State, 6-6; Kansas State, 5-7; Arizona, 4-8; Washington State, 7-5; Texas A’M, 6-6; and Miami (Fla.), 7-5.

Keep some key statistics in mind. In the past, teams that have excelled in the Tournament have shared a few regular season stats. They beat opponents by more than 15 points per game, make a high percentage of their 3-pointers, shoot better than 70.8 percent from the free-throw line, get the majority of their points from their starters and have a regular season winning percentage greater than .850.

Of course, the chief stat to always keep in mind is the percentage of shots that actually go through the net. During Florida’s back-to-back championship run, the Gators shot an impressive 52.7 percent from the floor.

I keep these four general ideas in mind while making my picks. But I like doing a lot more research. I factor in a more detailed aspect of these three Tournament mysteries: upset picks, which go hand-in-hand with Cinderella teams, an overall champion and those menacing toss-up games.

Last year, I discovered Pete Tiernan, who has been writing a special series on Tournament predicting for ESPN.com since 2003. Tiernan has built an extensive database on Tournament history, which is available for research online at www.bracketscience.com, and he uses it to evaluate odds on team’s chances advancing in the Tournament.

His statistical analysis does not predict bracket-busting upsets, but it does predict Tournament outcomes with good accuracy. Last year, his analysis predicted both first round upsets (VCU vs. Duke, Winthrop vs. Notre Dame) and almost a third, but Illinois blew a double-digit, late-second-half lead to lose to Virginia Tech.

Tiernan defines an upset as an instance when a team seeded four or more positions below a higher-seeded team, beats that team. Here are some of his upset pointers I use:

Don’t pick a No. 14, 15 or 16 seed to upset in the opening round.

The first-round blowout games – 1-vs.-16, 2-vs.-15 and 3-vs.-14 games – are virtually pushovers. A No. 16 seed has never won a Tournament game, and this year’s batch of No. 2 seeds looks too