Worst Tiebreakers Ever

[Give My Regards]

Don't worry, the ECAC(H) still rules the roost when it comes to most convoluted tie-breaking system, even with the addition of league wins this year.  However, there's a new contender for the title in Atlantic Hockey, and they're moving up fast.

http://www.uscho.com/news/college-hockey/id,15338/ThisWeekinAtlanticHockeyFeb282008.html

First, consider the AH tiebreakers, as listed in the article:

1. Points head-to-head
2. Goal differential head-to-head
3. Conference wins
4. Goal differential
5. Goals allowed
6. Goals scored

Let's think about that last one for a minute.  Now, if two tied teams have the same goal differential (goals scored minus goals allowed), and they've both allowed the same number of goals -- well, wouldn't they have both scored the same number of goals??

But wait, we're just getting warmed up!  See, Atlantic Hockey does not have a balanced schedule -- some teams play each other only twice in a season, while other teams play each other four times.  So, what happens if there's a three-way tie, but not all the teams played each other the same number of times that season?  Maybe they would use head-to-head winning percentages or something.  Or, maybe not:

If three or more teams are tied and all played the same number of games against one another, you would use the tiebreaker above top to bottom as a mini-conference.

A mini-conference... got that?

If three or more teams are tied and all played an uneven amount of games, we will use the tiebreaker above, but break the teams up into a mini-mini-conference.

That's right, a mini-mini-conference.  No no, keep going:

If three teams are tied and one team played two games against the other two, while the other two faced each other four times, we will break the teams that played four times and run the tiebreaker policy to see who would win that series. Then take the team that won that tiebreaker and pit them against the team that they played twice to see who would win the higher seed. Then you take the final two teams and run the tiebreaker again to see who garners the higher seed.

Egad.  Well, that's for three teams -- what if there are FOUR teams tied that didn't all play the same number of games against each other?  Don't ask.  No, seriously, don't ask.

If you have a four-way tie and two teams played four times and other two played twice, the winners of the four-team tiebreaker and two-team tiebreaker are the number-one and -two seeds based on their head-to-head comparisons, and the losers are the third and fourth seeds based on their head-to-head comparisons.

Sadly, after all that, the only tie in Atlantic Hockey was between Connecticut and Canisius, with Canisius winning on head-to-head goal differential.

[French Rage]

Remaining ties will be broken with a sack race held every alternating Sunday.

[jtwcornell91]

I challenge some enterprising Canisius fan to code that up for the AH Playoff Possibilities Script. ::cool::

Of course, in any league where teams play an unbalanced schedule, there's something to be said for just making the first tie-breaker some sort of measure of strength of schedule.  Or just doing the standings by KRACH or KASA or something in the first place.

[Give My Regards]

I know you've all been waiting with bad breath for Atlantic Hockey's convoluted three-way tiebreaking system, complete with mini-conferences and mini-mini-conferences, to be put into practice.  Well, joy of joys, this year Atlantic Hockey's final standings produced a three-way tie for third among RIT, Mercyhurst, and Holy Cross.  So hop on board and enjoy the ride.

So far as I can tell, Atlantic Hockey's tiebreaking system has remained unchanged over the last four years, except that the maximum number of league games two teams can play against each other is now three instead of four.  But anyway, let's see how this all plays out in the RIT-Mercyhurst-Holy Cross tie.

Can we form an RIT-Mercyhurst-Holy Cross mini-conference?  Did they all play each other the same number of times?  No, they did not.  RIT and Mercyhurst played three times, while those two teams each played Holy Cross only twice.  So we have to take RIT and Mercyhurst and place them in a mini-mini-conference, leaving Holy Cross out for now.  (No, that does not mean that Holy Cross is in a mini-mini-mini-conference)

RIT and Mercyhurst went 1-1-1 against each other, so we need to go to the second tiebreaker. head-to-head goal differential.  RIT lost to Mercyhurst by one and beat them by four, giving them a +3 and the tiebreaker edge.

Now we see how RIT matches up against Holy Cross.  RIT won the season series 2-0, so RIT wins the tiebreaker and, having won the ties against both Holy Cross and Mercyhurst, gets the #3 seed.

Now we look at Mercyhurst and Holy Cross.  Mercyhurst won the season series 1-0-1, so they get the #4 seed and Holy Cross finishes #5.

Simple, no?

[Rita]

I know you've all been waiting with bad breath for Atlantic Hockey's convoluted three-way tiebreaking system, complete with mini-conferences and mini-mini-conferences, to be put into practice.  Well, joy of joys, this year Atlantic Hockey's final standings produced a three-way tie for third among RIT, Mercyhurst, and Holy Cross.  So hop on board and enjoy the ride.

So far as I can tell, Atlantic Hockey's tiebreaking system has remained unchanged over the last four years, except that the maximum number of league games two teams can play against each other is now three instead of four.  But anyway, let's see how this all plays out in the RIT-Mercyhurst-Holy Cross tie.

Can we form an RIT-Mercyhurst-Holy Cross mini-conference?  Did they all play each other the same number of times?  No, they did not.  RIT and Mercyhurst played three times, while those two teams each played Holy Cross only twice.  So we have to take RIT and Mercyhurst and place them in a mini-mini-conference, leaving Holy Cross out for now.  (No, that does not mean that Holy Cross is in a mini-mini-mini-conference)

RIT and Mercyhurst went 1-1-1 against each other, so we need to go to the second tiebreaker. head-to-head goal differential.  RIT lost to Mercyhurst by one and beat them by four, giving them a +3 and the tiebreaker edge.

Now we see how RIT matches up against Holy Cross.  RIT won the season series 2-0, so RIT wins the tiebreaker and, having won the ties against both Holy Cross and Mercyhurst, gets the #3 seed.

Now we look at Mercyhurst and Holy Cross.  Mercyhurst won the season series 1-0-1, so they get the #4 seed and Holy Cross finishes #5.

Simple, no?

But there was not an infinite loop, so how can it be the worst ever? ;-)

Maybe the AHA should contract with JTW for a playoff tie breaking script/formula.

[ftyuv]

Don't worry, the ECAC(H) still rules the roost when it comes to most convoluted tie-breaking system, even with the addition of league wins this year.  However, there's a new contender for the title in Atlantic Hockey, and they're moving up fast.

Since it may come up soon, what are the tiebreakers for the Worst Tiebreakers Ever rankings?

[billhoward]

This isn't one of these posts to see if people here are gullible? You know, like the Congressman who mistook The Onion story for real? I love the goal differential, then goals allowed, then goals scored tiebreakers in that order.

[Trotsky]

Don't worry, the ECAC(H) still rules the roost when it comes to most convoluted tie-breaking system, even with the addition of league wins this year.  However, there's a new contender for the title in Atlantic Hockey, and they're moving up fast.

Since it may come up soon, what are the tiebreakers for the Worst Tiebreakers Ever rankings?

Coin toss with two-headed coin.

[Beeeej]

You know, like the Congressman who mistook The Onion story for real?

Can you be more specific?

[jtn27]

You know, like the Congressman who mistook The Onion story for real?

Can you be more specific?

If you scroll down far enough you'll eventually find the most recent example: http://literallyunbelievable.org/

[Beeeej]

You know, like the Congressman who mistook The Onion story for real?

Can you be more specific?

If you scroll down far enough you'll eventually find the most recent example: http://literallyunbelievable.org/

Perhaps for optimal humor value and minimal misunderstanding value, I should have phrased it "You'll have to be more specific."

[jtn27]

You know, like the Congressman who mistook The Onion story for real?

Can you be more specific?

If you scroll down far enough you'll eventually find the most recent example: http://literallyunbelievable.org/

Perhaps for optimal humor value and minimal misunderstanding value, I should have phrased it "You'll have to be more specific."

I knew what you meant. I just wanted to share that link.

[Beeeej]

You know, like the Congressman who mistook The Onion story for real?

Can you be more specific?

If you scroll down far enough you'll eventually find the most recent example: http://literallyunbelievable.org/

Perhaps for optimal humor value and minimal misunderstanding value, I should have phrased it "You'll have to be more specific."

I knew what you meant. I just wanted to share that link.

I... knew that you knew what I meant.  I just wanted to use some big words.

[marty]

This isn't one of these posts to see if people here are gullible? You know, like the Congressman who mistook The Onion story for real? I love the goal differential, then goals allowed, then goals scored tiebreakers in that order.

So which congressman follows Onion hockey?

[ftyuv]

This isn't one of these posts to see if people here are gullible? You know, like the Congressman who mistook The Onion story for real? I love the goal differential, then goals allowed, then goals scored tiebreakers in that order.

So which congressman follows Onion hockey?

Saaaaaafety vote!