MAJOR playoff bug.

Can of Corn · 08-09-2006, 09:36 PM

Two divisions, five teams each. Two champs plus two wild cards make the post season. In the East, three teams are tied for the #1 spot, but they are also all three are 2 games up on the wild card (also from the same division).

REAL baseball would just have all three go to the post season and not determine the champs - but not OOTP!

The three teams are Colorado, Chicago, and St. Louis.

So the day after the season there's one game played between Chicago and Colorado which Colorado wins. Then StL plays Colorado, and STL wins. Then STL plays CHI and CHI wins. So after three days, all three are still tied.

Then CHI and COL play again with CHI getting the win. Then STL and COL play again with COL getting the win. Finally STL and CHI play with CHI getting the win. So now CHI has 2 wins, COL has 1, and STL has none. So you'd THINK that CHI takes the division, COL takes the #1 WC and STL takes the #3.

NO

Instead since the standings (and player stats) keep accumulating, the two losses put STL's win percentage below the #5 team, so the #5 team, Grand Rapids, enters the post season, despite being a game back at the end of the season, but with the two additional losses to STL, Grand Rapids now has the better win percentage. STL is out.

There are a couple issues, first this was handled completely wrong, second players stats should NOT continue to accumulate in the post season run-offs. Finally, the #5 team shouldn't get in.

Can of Corn · 08-09-2006, 09:37 PM

and how's this for an ironic twist of fate? The team who shouldnt' have been in, just won it all.

Zeyes · 08-09-2006, 09:46 PM

Huh, interesting...I'm pretty sure I've seen this work correctly with two-way ties both intra- and inter-division, so I'm stunned to hear it fails so spectacularly with three-way ties.

BTW, did you mean to write that Grand Rapids was the #4 team, or did I miss something?

Edit: Oh, #5 including the other division winner, I take it...nevermind.

Zeyes · 08-09-2006, 09:57 PM

Another question...did all four teams in question (the 3 tied teams and Grand Rapids) have a winning percentage above .600 or so? Otherwise I'm having serious trouble coming up with a scenario where a 1-3 runoff performance can eradicate a 2-win advantage from the regular season...

Edit yet again: Hmm, actually now that I've thrown the values into Excel, it would even take approximately a .750 performance by the wildcard runner-up for that to work... I'll guess that your penultimate paragraph was the correct one, and Grand Rapids was just one game behind? That would make the numbers work out much better.

kq76 · 08-09-2006, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Can of Corn

... second players stats should NOT continue to accumulate in the post season run-offs...

Actually, those games are considered regular season games in real life MLB and the player stats do count towards their regular season stats. Not that I agree with it (if two players are competing for a title and one guy gets the chance to play in 1 or 2 more games, that's not fair to the other guy), but that's what they do. I'd rather just consider them part of the post-season.

Source:

Quote:

individual stats will count towards players' regular-season stats

http://www.baseball-analysis.com/art...articleid=2293

Can of Corn · 08-09-2006, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeyes

Another question...did all four teams in question (the 3 tied teams and Grand Rapids) have a winning percentage above .600 or so? Otherwise I'm having serious trouble coming up with a scenario where a 1-3 runoff performance can eradicate a 2-win advantage from the regular season...

Edit yet again: Hmm, actually now that I've thrown the values into Excel, it would even take approximately a .750 performance by the wildcard runner-up for that to work... I'll guess that your penultimate paragraph was the correct one, and Grand Rapids was just one game behind? That would make the numbers work out much better.

48 game season

Zeyes · 08-09-2006, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Can of Corn

48 game season

Hmm, that wasn't really my question.

The season length doesn't really matter for this, anyway, just the number of games behind.

Can of Corn · 08-09-2006, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeyes

Hmm, that wasn't really my question.

The season length doesn't really matter for this, anyway, just the number of games behind.

it was one game back. sorry for the confusion

Le Grande Orange · 08-10-2006, 02:59 AM

Yeah, OOTP always has had some trouble with tiebreakers. That's something I'm really going to have to push for to get fixed up properly for next year's version.

Especially since I want to see old-school tiebreaking in there (i.e. a two-way tie necessitates a best-of-three playoff series rather than the single game used nowadays) as an option.

Erik W. · 10-13-2006, 02:13 PM

Sorry for the delay on this, folks.

This has been logged as TT #41 for 2007.

08-09-2006, 09:36 PM	#1 (permalink)
Can of Corn Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 169 Warnings: 1	MAJOR playoff bug. Two divisions, five teams each. Two champs plus two wild cards make the post season. In the East, three teams are tied for the #1 spot, but they are also all three are 2 games up on the wild card (also from the same division). REAL baseball would just have all three go to the post season and not determine the champs - but not OOTP! The three teams are Colorado, Chicago, and St. Louis. So the day after the season there's one game played between Chicago and Colorado which Colorado wins. Then StL plays Colorado, and STL wins. Then STL plays CHI and CHI wins. So after three days, all three are still tied. Then CHI and COL play again with CHI getting the win. Then STL and COL play again with COL getting the win. Finally STL and CHI play with CHI getting the win. So now CHI has 2 wins, COL has 1, and STL has none. So you'd THINK that CHI takes the division, COL takes the #1 WC and STL takes the #3. NO Instead since the standings (and player stats) keep accumulating, the two losses put STL's win percentage below the #5 team, so the #5 team, Grand Rapids, enters the post season, despite being a game back at the end of the season, but with the two additional losses to STL, Grand Rapids now has the better win percentage. STL is out. There are a couple issues, first this was handled completely wrong, second players stats should NOT continue to accumulate in the post season run-offs. Finally, the #5 team shouldn't get in.

08-09-2006, 09:46 PM	#3 (permalink)
Zeyes All Star Reserve Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 818	Huh, interesting...I'm pretty sure I've seen this work correctly with two-way ties both intra- and inter-division, so I'm stunned to hear it fails so spectacularly with three-way ties. BTW, did you mean to write that Grand Rapids was the #4 team, or did I miss something? Edit: Oh, #5 including the other division winner, I take it...nevermind. Last edited by Zeyes : 08-09-2006 at 09:58 PM.

08-09-2006, 09:57 PM	#4 (permalink)
Zeyes All Star Reserve Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 818	Another question...did all four teams in question (the 3 tied teams and Grand Rapids) have a winning percentage above .600 or so? Otherwise I'm having serious trouble coming up with a scenario where a 1-3 runoff performance can eradicate a 2-win advantage from the regular season... Edit yet again: Hmm, actually now that I've thrown the values into Excel, it would even take approximately a .750 performance by the wildcard runner-up for that to work... I'll guess that your penultimate paragraph was the correct one, and Grand Rapids was just one game behind? That would make the numbers work out much better. Last edited by Zeyes : 08-09-2006 at 10:07 PM.

08-10-2006, 02:59 AM	#9 (permalink)
Le Grande Orange Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Scheduleslovakia Posts: 6,172	Yeah, OOTP always has had some trouble with tiebreakers. That's something I'm really going to have to push for to get fixed up properly for next year's version. Especially since I want to see old-school tiebreaking in there (i.e. a two-way tie necessitates a best-of-three playoff series rather than the single game used nowadays) as an option. __________________ . "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win." .

10-13-2006, 02:13 PM	#10 (permalink)
Erik W. Moderator* Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Montréal Posts: 3,598	Sorry for the delay on this, folks. This has been logged as TT #41 for 2007. __________________ Formerly known as Azamien

08-09-2006, 09:37 PM	#2 (permalink)
Can of Corn Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 169 Warnings: 1	and how's this for an ironic twist of fate? The team who shouldnt' have been in, just won it all.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode