THE BOOK cover
The Unwritten Book is Finally Written!
An in-depth analysis of: The sacrifice bunt, batter/pitcher matchups, the intentional base on balls, optimizing a batting lineup, hot and cold streaks, clutch performance, platooning strategies, and much more.
Read Excerpts & Customer Reviews

Buy The Book from Amazon


SABR101 required reading if you enter this site. Check out the Sabermetric Wiki. And interesting baseball books.
MOST RECENT ARTICLES
MAIL : You ask | We say

Advanced


THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

<< Back to main

Monday, September 14, 2009

Tie-breaking scenarios

By Tangotiger, 11:55 AM

The thought process behind this, and the “ideal” benchmarks are EXACTLY what should have happened.  I don’t know if they had.  I especially want to highlight this:

Three Tied for Division and One Additional Team Tied for the Wild Card
...
In the perfect world, the three NL West teams should have a 55.55% chance of advancing, while the Cubs should have a 33.33% chance of advancing. However, depending on who gets lucky or unlucky in being Team A, B, or C, these can be thrown off wildly.
...
Solution:
...
Overall the Dodgers, as Team C in the first tiebreaker and Team B in the second tiebreaker have a 58% chance of advancing - close to the ideal 55.6%. The Giants, who were home as Team A in the first tiebreaker, also have a 58% chance of advancing. The Rockies draw the short straw by being the road team in the first game and have a 53% chance of advancing. Meanwhile, the Cubs, fixed as Team A in the second tiebreaker, have a 31% chance of advancing - very close to the ideal 33.3%. Overall, the solution comes very close to matching the ideal probabilities - something that the current MLB rules do not do. This is a must fix.

I agree with Sky here.  Read that part of the article especially.  I also want to point out that Sky “cheated” for some of his other solutions by bringing in extra games.  Obviously, if Sky is given 3 games to resolve something MLB has forced itself to resolve with 2 games, Sky will have the better solution.  So, it’s really a “recommended alternative” rather than “fix with what you got” solution.


#1          (see all posts) 2009/09/14 (Mon) @ 13:11

Glad you found the article interesting.  You are right that in the first two scenarios, I recommend playing one additional game, so there is a case for keeping it the way it is.  However, the other 6 scenarios have the same number of games played so they should be no-brainer changes.  It’s surprising that in a billion dollar industry they don’t have people to get this stuff done right.


#2    Patriot      (see all posts) 2009/09/14 (Mon) @ 14:58

I have to disagree with Sky that it’s surprising they don’t have a logical policy on tiebreakers.  Things like this tend not to be thought through particularly well until they actually occur, and then all hell breaks loose.  Since there has never been a multi-way tie in MLB, I would personally be surprised if they had a sensible policy in place.

There are examples elsewhere in MLB (see the fact that there was no policy in place to deal with a rain-shortened World Series game, forcing Bud to unilaterally declare that Game 5 last year would have to be played to completion--the obvious and right call, but one that should have already been codified).  But it happens elsewhere in sports too (see the Big XII and their divisional tiebreaker procedure which ended up deciding which team would play for the BCS Title last year), and it surely happens in government too, where the stakes are higher (there are all sorts of crazy Presidential election hypotheticals that people think up).


#3    Tangotiger      (see all posts) 2009/09/14 (Mon) @ 15:20

What was weird about the non-policy of MLB (rain?  in autumn?  at non-domed stadiums?  IMPOSSIBLE!) is that the Bruins/Oilers had a Stanley Cup game called after 2 periods when power went out:

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/05/26/sports/boston-blackout-brings-disbelief.html?pagewanted=all

After more than an hour of talks among Ziegler and representatives from both clubs, it was decided that the best reaction to the blackout was a nullification of the game. Ziegler went to his league’s bylaws and produced a ruling that mandates that Tuesday’s game, since it could not be completed, will be replayed at the end of this series, if necessary. Reliance on what was deemed an objective, if somewhat bizarre solution, was obviated by the fact that the Garden was unavailable for a replay for the next several evenings because of the basketball playoffs and a college graduation.

Now, this is clearly a less likelihood scenario than MLB faced.  But, also a scenario that presented itself 20 years ago, long enough for every league to catch-up.

It was lucky that the game was 3-3 when it was called.


#4    James      (see all posts) 2009/09/16 (Wed) @ 08:32

As a minor alteration which would improve the “fairness” without requiring extra games, why not just alter the way the A B C teams are chosen from random choice to being ranked according to run scored/conceded ratio. From the Pythagarous formula a team with a higher run scored/conceded ratio should have a better record so it is only fair that they have the edge in the tiebreaker games.

Also did the original article include HFA?

James


Page 1 of 1 pages


Name (required)
E-Mail (optional; WILL be published)
Website (optional)

<< Back to main


Latest...

COMMENTS

May 25 15:12
Do pitcher’s reach back for velocity when needed?

May 25 15:02
Pete Palmer’s new book: Basic Ball

May 25 14:44
What sabermetrics is NOT

May 25 13:04
“Why Kickstarter works”

May 25 12:51
Chad Curtis

May 25 12:40
Largest demonstration in Canadian history?

May 25 11:32
Howard Stern

May 25 11:26
Lack of hustle during a game

May 25 10:58
Rooting for laundry

May 25 02:38
NFLPA lawsuit against collusion