Quote:
Originally Posted by Mntwins
Lost again 
13 trips to the playoffs and 1 series win.
Not trying to sound like I'm whining but I just find it unbelievable.
Oh well, I'll keep trucking along not giving up. |
FWIW, completed my first season and did win the championship in seven games. My impression, for the most part, was that a lot of players on both teams played above my performance expectations of them. One of my starters (#2 for most of the year, but #3 as the end of the season approached) fell considerably short, gathering three losses spread over all of the playoffs with no wins. One of my longball stars only hit app. .140 until midway through the League Championship and then brought it up to standard by the end of the World Series.
I did see a couple of opponents along with, IIRC, one of my own who hit their first homers of the season during the playoffs. This, and all of the above, I'm able to conceive as the 'stuff' it takes to bring it under the pressures of the playoffs. No huge chokers, no unusual number of injuries just before the playoffs. It wasn't smooth, but it wasn't all an uphill climb or challenge. It was, however, suspenseful. Some very interesting games.
Maybe I'm lucky. Maybe it's a fluke? At the rate I play my games, it is possible I may only have one or two more seasons in before the next version.
Given that, if I win them all, I'd be sure to let you know. But if I don't, I wouldn't be much help shoring up your argument as I'd only be 1 in 3-4 trips.
I'm guessing so many variables are different for all of us, it would be most difficult to pin down causal factors for playoff performances, either on the micro-player level or even from the macro league-setup perspective. I think RchW inquired about sample size, having played out 200+ seasons. I can't contend that that's enough, largely because they're all his seasons even if with different leagues. I'm no statistician, but intuitively, I'd wager that 200+ seasons with say, 50+ game-owners reporting similar results (a purely arbitrary number, but high enough
) is more aligned with a correlation that some yet-to-be defined aspect of this area is due more scrutiny.