from Amazon
Monday, September 14, 2009
Tie-breaking scenarios
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.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date