Season Standing Tie-breaker- Next Year

[Matt DeAngelis]

The current 2012 charter does not allow for a tie-breaker when/if the season standings for a particular division ends in a tie. We put both names on the plaque as we did last year. However, there has been discussion that there should be some sort of tie-breaker. Please discuss the options available for a tie breaker, keeping in mind that it is very late in the season and a head to head playoff is unlikely to happen before finals.


The most logical and exciting way to prevent this from happening, is to tweek the point series a little bit and make higher point factor events during the course of the year, especially down the stretch. In addition, make the finals event count toward the season standings, and be worth more than any other event. Not only would this allow for a tie to be broken after the regular season ends, but it would also allow for players to jump up some spots at finals, instead of it being a tournament that doesn't mean much.

I guess it could still end in a tie under this scenario, but I think it would be far less likely with the varying point factors during the year and at finals. As opposed to always getting right around 100 points for a victory, the higher point factor events would result in a 130 point victory, and finals in a 150 point victory (just as an example).

viewtopic.php?f=34&t=9702

[Matt Aubin]

Season series goes to the player with the most wins.

If still tied (very possible), season series could go to who won the most head-to-head during the season, or the season could be awarded to whomever wins finals. I'd vote for the later, makes finals super high pressure.

[Matt DeAngelis]

What if neither player shows up to finals or plays in a different division at finals?

[Matt Aubin]

Good point... keep it within the season series results:

Most outright wins

next tiebreaker: most head-to-head wins

next: most people beat in wins during season (those 1/10th points).

after that, Rochambeau.

[Jeff Wiechowski]

MPM
Gary Cyr
Mark Lyons

Most outright wins: Both with 4
Next tiebreaker: most head-to-head wins: One each
3rd tiebreaker: most people beat in wins during season (those 1/10th points). Gary 19, Mark 15

MPG
Danny White
Ken Gary

Most outright wins: Both with 4
Next tiebreaker: most head-to-head wins: Never played together
3rd tiebreaker: most people beat in wins during season (those 1/10th points). Danny 14, Ken 12

[Titan Bariloni]

In addition, make the finals event count toward the season standings, and be worth more than any other event.

^ plus some other tie breaker method just in case they still tie

drrrr on never putting a tie breaker method into the equation..and the drrrr is partially directed at myself as it never crossed my mind as well

[Bill Bertera]

Aside from those mentioned above, you can go down to the next set of scores that were removed (if they both played more than the minimum number of necessary events).

[Josh Connell]

If a tie had come up back when the Points Final was match-play, and we needed to determine who was the #1 seed and who was #2, or who was #10 and who was #11, there'd have been a tiebreaker formula determined and written into the charter.

As it was, ties never came up as a problem, then things changed over to stroke-play at the finals, and the only tie that might matter in the standings is first place. And evidently, until this point, the powers that be were satisfied with just awarding the "win" to both players and moving on. Nothing at all wrong with that.

If the powers that be choose to write a tie-breaker formula into future charters, that's fine. But there's absolutely no need to "fix" anything for this year's results. Gary and Mark are the co-champs in MPM, and Danny and Ken are co-champs in MPG. Simple as that.

And may I chime in with another vote for making the finals a part of the final standings. I think I've suggested it before. One simple way to do it would be to make finals worth 3x or 4x points so it could play a big role in the final standings for those that attend. A win or high finish could give a player a huge jump in the standings while a poor showing wouldn't necessarily hurt someone since the points they earn likely wouldn't be good enough to crack their top 4, 5, or 6 events.

[Troy Dietrich]

MPM
Gary Cyr
Mark Lyons

Most outright wins: Both with 4
Next tiebreaker: most head-to-head wins: One each

But Gary finished ahead of Mark at Kisco head-to-head, so that should decide it even though it wasn't a win for either of them.

Also, I agree with Josh ^^, finals should count in the total and be the tie-breaker.

[Jeff Wiechowski]

But Gary finished ahead of Mark at Kisco head-to-head, so that should decide it even though it wasn't a win for either of them.

The points for that event was not included in Mark's total.

[Troy Dietrich]

But Gary finished ahead of Mark at Kisco head-to-head, so that should decide it even though it wasn't a win for either of them.

The points for that event was not included in Mark's total.

Doesn't matter, it was a head-to-head matchup and Gary finished higher even if it wasn't included in either players top 5.

[Jeff Wiechowski]

But Gary finished ahead of Mark at Kisco head-to-head, so that should decide it even though it wasn't a win for either of them.

The points for that event was not included in Mark's total.

Doesn't matter, it was a head-to-head matchup and Gary finished higher even if it wasn't included in either players top 5.

But not a head-to-head win for either so invalid per the 2nd tiebreaker wording you highlighted in red.

[Jeff Wiechowski]

Aside from those mentioned above, you can go down to the next set of scores that were removed (if they both played more than the minimum number of necessary events).

This is what i was thinking as far as the 4th, 5th, etc. tiebreakers. Just keep tacking on the next highest finish til you break the tie.

[Titan Bariloni]

If the powers that be choose to write a tie-breaker formula into future charters, that's fine. But there's absolutely no need to "fix" anything for this year's results. Gary and Mark are the co-champs in MPM, and Danny and Ken are co-champs in MPG. Simple as that.

x2

[Jeff Wiechowski]

Also, I agree with Josh ^^, finals should count in the total and be the tie-breaker.

So if one player can't make Finals, he/she conceds to 2nd place?
Or what if neither can make it?

Gotta throw in all the what-if.........

[Troy Dietrich]

So if one player can't make Finals, he/she conceds to 2nd place?

- Yes. Finals date and location are decided well in advance. If you make the playoffs/finals, you play it out or concede in every sport.

Or what if neither can make it?

- Then it would have to go to an alternate tie breaker, head to head, biggest win, etc... I think it would be rare that it would come to this if finals counted. (and finishing position used to break any ties in the season ending standings).



Titan, I don't think we're talking about making a change for this year. Co-Champs for sure.
We're just tossing out ideas on how to break ties in the future.

[Titan Bariloni]

Titan, I don't think we're talking about making a change for this year. Co-Champs for sure.
We're just tossing out ideas on how to break ties in the future.

I figured but the covo was so vigorous that I could not fully tell

good discussion..shocked this never came up before

[Matt DeAngelis]

I updated the subject to include 'Next Year' to make things clearer!

[Rob Tatro]

And may I chime in with another vote for making the finals a part of the final standings. I think I've suggested it before. One simple way to do it would be to make finals worth 3x or 4x points so it could play a big role in the final standings for those that attend. A win or high finish could give a player a huge jump in the standings while a poor showing wouldn't necessarily hurt someone since the points they earn likely wouldn't be good enough to crack their top 4, 5, or 6 events.

Kinda like where that post is going Josh since you would assume that both players would most likely be attending finals in many cases.

[Matt DeAngelis]

And may I chime in with another vote for making the finals a part of the final standings. I think I've suggested it before. One simple way to do it would be to make finals worth 3x or 4x points so it could play a big role in the final standings for those that attend. A win or high finish could give a player a huge jump in the standings while a poor showing wouldn't necessarily hurt someone since the points they earn likely wouldn't be good enough to crack their top 4, 5, or 6 events.

Kinda like where that post is going Josh since you would assume that both players would most likely be attending finals in many cases.

viewtopic.php?f=34&t=9702