3 Way Tie Bug

[cabot41]

I threw this up in the general section and based on the feedback I think this can be viewed as a bug.

TOP LVL SUMMARY: 3 way ties do not work as MLB does it. Under some circumstances the 3rd team gets left out (seemingly randomly) with no opportunity for a one game playoff to get into the postseason.

This all gets pretty complicated so bear with me.

Last year there was an outside chance that the NYY,BOS and CLE would all end up tied, a situation that has not happened since MLB went to their current 3 division/wildcard playoff structure in 1994. I paid attention to the possible permutations, and I am not sure if those are dealt with accurately here (Post Patch. Thanks for fixing the wildcard thing BTW).

If 3 teams end up tied for the wildcard (and only the wildcard) and they are all from 3 diffrent divisions, a coin flip determines which two teams play in the first single game playoff. THEN, the winner of that games plays the third team (the team that "won" the coin flip or whatever). The winner of that second playoff game is the one that gets into the playoffs (there is no third game, it is not a world cup style round robbin).

OK: If 2 of the three teams that are tied are in the same division, then those two teams play a one game playoff, and the third team, (the team from a different division altogether) plays the winner in a second one game playoff. Again, there is no round robin. I just reached that situation in my sim, and I know that that is not how the sim handles it. Instead the game picks two of the three teams (not sure how) and the third team does not get a chance to participate in a one game playoff against anybody, they are just out of the mix altogether.

AND THEN: If 2 of the 3 teams are tied for the wildcard and for the winning the divison (this was the potential situation IRL from last year) again, the two teams from the same division play first for the win of the division and the loser of that game plays the third team for the wildcard. I don't kinow how the sim handles it as I've never seen it before.

BUT: If there are only two teams tied, that have both clinched the wildcard regardless of the which one wins the division (Which is what ACTUALLY Happened last year with BOS and NY) , there is no one game playoff to determine the division winner and wildcard. Instead, the team with the best head to head record takes the division, and the other one is slotted as the wildcard.
You'll remember that the Yanks didn't need to win the last game of the year against BOS (and in fact did not win that game), because they had already clinched the division because of head to head.


FINALLY: I have no earthly idea what happens when there are 4 team ties.

If OOTP wants to do it round robin style instead of how baseball does it, I am okay with that (its arguably more fair and exciting anyway). But I think it would be cool if under no circumstances a third team gets left out altogether, with no opportunity to advance. I think, when people are going to sim a century's worth of baseball, it will happen often enough that it should be fixed.

Thanks again for all of your great work.

[tysok]

The rules are ridiculously stupid... this seems to go through them fairly well.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/ab...ion_ties.shtml

The game either needs to be right with the rules, or have a playoff system to decide. Personally, I'd rather a playoff system...

[sovereignstar]

Personally, I think it may be best to use tiebreakers exclusively. I've never been a big fan of the extra game that's played when there's a tie for the wildcard as home field advantage can be huge. You might as well just flip a coin.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by cabot41

If 2 of the 3 teams are tied for the wildcard and for the winning the divison (this was the potential situation IRL from last year) again, the two teams from the same division play first for the win of the division and the loser of that game plays the third team for the wildcard

That only started in 2003. Prior to that year, the rule was different. The loser of the divisional tiebreaker would have been eliminated altogether since it would have had a worse record due to losing the divisional tiebreaker than the team in the other division.

[Zeyes]

Originally Posted by cabot41

AND THEN: If 2 of the 3 teams are tied for the wildcard and for the winning the divison (this was the potential situation IRL from last year) again, the two teams from the same division play first for the win of the division and the loser of that game plays the third team for the wildcard. I don't kinow how the sim handles it as I've never seen it before.

I've seen that happen, and the game handled it exactly like that.

[battists]

Good god.

So, do we think the game should attempt to mimic the existing MLB version?

[darkcloud4579]

Originally Posted by battists

Good god.

So, do we think the game should attempt to mimic the existing MLB version?

No. It might be a pain and probably would be too complicated for words.

I think it'd be a lot simpler to have a bunch of one-game playoffs to solve ties. Or a coin flip? I mean, it works in the world cup...

[Chappy]

What if everyone finishes 81-81?

[scefalu]

Originally Posted by Chappy

What if everyone finishes 81-81?

Post a screenshot! And dust off those tie-breaker rules!

[scefalu]

Originally Posted by battists

So, do we think the game should attempt to mimic the existing MLB version?

While there is a certain logic (albeit twisted) to the MLB rules for breaking ties, I will not advocate for incorporating them into the game.

I would like to see a one-game playoff. Now, if there are two teams tied for one playoff spot, then they will play for the spot. If there are more than two teams tied, a series of tie-breakers should be used to determine which two teams will play in the one-game playoff.

Following the overall season record:
1. Head-to-head record
2. Divisional record
3. Head-to-head run differential
4. Overall run differential
5. Coin flip

I don't even know if the game tracks the head-to-head run differential. That may need to come from the stored scores. I'd hate to see it come to that, though. I will frequently put in scrubs or position players to pitch when the game gets too far out of hand. If I knew that a run differential counted for anything, then I may be less inclined to 'give up' on blowouts. That may also affect a team's strategy on playing their September call-ups.

With all that said, we would at least know what was going on. For that matter, it could be all coin flips for all it matters, as long as a news article comes out describing the results of the coin flip ...

"The Milwaukee Brewers lost out on their first trip to the postseason in 24 years, today, when Manager Ned Yost should have called 'tails' at the postseason selection meeting in New York City. In their place, the Atlanta Braves will face the Dodgers to determine who will advance to the Divisional Series against the Cardinals."

[tysok]

It just needs to have a playoff system that makes sense. Or it needs to go by official MLB rules, which are a pain.

I linked a page discussing the rules before, but here it is again:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/ab...ion_ties.shtml

Personally... I think the official rules are stupid and ticked me off last year. There should simply be single game playoffs to decide who goes on, and in what positions (divison winner or wild card position).

[scefalu]

Originally Posted by tysok

Personally... I think the official rules are stupid and ticked me off last year. There should simply be single game playoffs to decide who goes on, and in what positions (divison winner or wild card position).

While I think settling the matter on the field is nice, we have a potentially huge series of single game playoffs in the very unlikely event of 6+ teams having identical records. With the ability to have 10+ divisions of 10+ teams in a league, there is the possibility that just determining which teams go to the playoffs could take 1-2 weeks. That's why I suggested a single game with supplemental tie breakers.

Again, any system ... as long as it's consistent ... would be better than two random teams being selected. But, then, isn't random selection a system in its own right? (POOF! He disappears in a puff of logic.)

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by battists

So, do we think the game should attempt to mimic the existing MLB version?

To a point, yes. The use of head-to-head records to decide which club gets designated what in a three-way tie need not be used though, just do it randomly (which is what MLB does in the case of two-way and four-way ties; I don't know why they seed three-way ties using head-to-head record).

I was going to post this little treatise on the Beta forums, but I'll do it here. Consider this my beginner's primer on tiebreaking playoff game procedures which mostly follow MLB's rules but have been somewhat simplified where necessary.

Single elimination scenarios
(one loss and a team is eliminated)

Two team tie
The teams are randomly designated A and B. The playoff game is then:

Day 1: B at A

Three team tie
The teams are randomly designated A, B, and C. The playoff games are then:

Day 1: B at A
Day 2: C at A/B

Four team tie
The teams are randomly designated A, B, C, and D. The playoff games are then:

Day 1: B at A, D at C
Day 2: C/D at A/B

Five team tie
The teams are randomly designated A, B, C, D, and E. The playoff games are then:

Day 1: B at A, D at C
Day 2: E at A/B
Day 3: C/D at A/B/E

Double elimination scenarios
(two losses and a team is eliminated)

Double elimination playoffs are the way MLB used to resolve ties before divisional play was introduced in 1969. Note that from about 1929 up to 1956 the AL used the single elimination method; in other years it used the double elimination method. The NL used the double elimination method right up until 1969.

Two team tie
The teams are randomly designated A and B. The playoff games are then:

Day 1: A at B
Day 2: B at A
Day 3: B at A*

*if necessary

Three team tie
The teams are randomly designated A, B, and C. The first three playoff games are:

Day 1: B at A
Day 2: C at B
Day 3: A at C

After these three games, there are two main possibilities. The first is that one of the teams may have lost twice, in which case it is eliminated and the remaining two teams continue to play the tiebreaker; the other is that all of the teams may have won once and lost once in which case all three clubs continue on in the tiebreaker.

If one of the teams has been eliminated after the first three games, the possible matchups are:

If A was eliminated:
Day 4: B at C
Day 5: C at B*

If B was eliminated:
Day 4: C at A
Day 5: A at C*

If C was eliminated:
Day 4: B at A
Day 5: A at B*

*if necessary

If none of the teams have been eliminated after the first three games, then the remaining games are:

Day 4: B at A
Day 5: C at A/B

Four team tie
The teams are randomly designated A, B, C, and D. The playoff games are then:

Day 1: A at B, C at D
Day 2: B at A, D at C
Day 3: B at A*, D at C*
Day 4: A/B at C/D
Day 5: C/D at A/B
Day 6: C/D at A/B*

*if necessary

I'll discuss the permutations in regards to wildcard and division ties in a three-division league in a subsequent post.

[Carplos]

I've seen that happen, and the game handled it exactly like that.

Really? That's great.

How would MLB handle a 3-way tie for the Wildcard if none of the teams were tied for a division? I haven't seen it in any of my leagues yet, but an online friend had it happen.

Houston, SF and SD all tied for the Wildcard with Arizona winning the West. The game just had SF and SD in a playoff, Houston got screwed.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Carplos

How would MLB handle a 3-way tie for the Wildcard if none of the teams were tied for a division?

If the tie only involves the wildcard, then it's the standard three-way tiebreaker.

B at A on the first day, C at the winner of A/B the next day. The winner of that game gets the wildcard berth.

The tiebreaking playoff game procedures are not as complicated as it might first seem from reading MLB's rules (other that the use of head-to-head record to determine which teams are A, B, and C in a three-way tie).

[tysok]

The rules La Grande puts up look fine to me...

The thing is the tiebreaker rules were bogus last year. It doesn't make any sense, or didn't. The tiebreaker rules are quite simple... but on September 29 last year it was still possible for Cleveland, NY, Boston, and Chicago to be all tied at 96-63. If I recall correctly, the postseason was already set by the head-to-head records.
I do know Chicago clinched the division at this point.

If I remember, Boston and NY were playing each other... so on September 30 a 3 way tie wasn't possible anymore, but Cleveland still could have tied for the wild card... but again the post season was already set.

It was actually kind of funny, they spent a week talking about the tie breaker rules and all the strange things that could occur if there was a 3 way tie with Boston NY and Cleveland... then it came down to September 29 and they were talking about Chicago playing Boston in the first round and Cleveland was just a day late and a dollar short.
Apparently not even MLB knew what it's rules were, because all the supposed tiebreakers were already decided.

[Carplos]

(other that the use of head-to-head record to determine which teams are A, B, and C in a three-way tie).

When did they stop using coin tosses? I know as recently as 2001 and 2002 the Giants were in a series of coin tosses during the last month of the season just in case.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Carplos

When did they stop using coin tosses? I know as recently as 2001 and 2002 the Giants were in a series of coin tosses during the last month of the season just in case.

They still use that for 2-way and 4-way ties, just not 3-way ties. Don't understand that rationale myself; why not go random for all tie situations or use head-to-head record in all tie situations to determine which team is designated what.

[battists]

Someone please PM me when you guys come to a conclusion...

[battists]

We have a rule that states that Tech Support threads wherein we have not received a response within 7 days will be closed.

This one meets this criteria, so I'm closing this.

If you want to discuss it again, just PM me with the thread link, and I'll re-open. (Don't just say "Hey, reopen my thread." I need to know the URL, thanks!)

Steve