BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Tactics in a 3 game series

Tactics in a 3 game series

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
24228.51 in reply to 24228.50
Date: 4/17/2008 1:53:38 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
303303
How often should the #4 seed be able to beat the #1 seed by playing CT vs. normal?


That's a tough question - not all #4 and #1 seeds are created equal.

It's hard to fit that into one box for the thousands of 4-1 matchups each season.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
This Post:
00
24228.52 in reply to 24228.50
Date: 4/17/2008 1:53:59 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
I think many times... 4 place don't have what they can lost agains 1st place, 1 place are thinking about final, and can't play CT, so they play normal against 4 place, 4 place CT and they win, next stage lost agains 2/3 place and thats all.. I also agree that in playoff it need to dagree CT effect

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Also I have one more question where will be play final if in the final will play EAST 1st team and WEST 1st team ? I think it would be better play in neutral arena, and get money 50/50

Last edited by Vycka at 4/17/2008 1:56:49 PM

This Post:
00
24228.54 in reply to 24228.53
Date: 4/17/2008 2:14:04 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
I think the key question to ask, really, is this:

How often should the #4 seed be able to beat the #1 seed by playing CT vs. normal?


Ideally, I would say 20-25% of the time. Any more and the regular season becomes less meaningful. Any less and there's no real reason to have the playoffs.

Just my opinion of course.

Seed has absolutely nothing to do with the relative strength of teams. I find it problematic to make any verdicts of win probabilities based on seeds.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
24228.56 in reply to 24228.55
Date: 4/17/2008 3:50:48 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
Seed has absolutely nothing to do with the relative strength of teams. I find it problematic to make any verdicts of win probabilities based on seeds.


Really? Absolutely nothing? I agree that seed might not be a perfect indicator, but the team that won more games over the span of a season will have the better team in the vast majority of the cases.

Probably. Maybe. But you won't even know how much better (hence the stress on 'relative'). The fourth seed can be almost as good as the top team (and will be, in the long run), but in some leagues it can even be a bot.

Plus, it is always possible that a stronger team lost some games because they were concentrating on the tournament.

In view of all this, I find it extremely problematic to commit to any sort of percentage probability of how often the lower seed should upset the top seed.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
24228.57 in reply to 24228.50
Date: 4/17/2008 4:07:53 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
3535
How often should the #4 seed be able to beat the #1 seed by playing CT vs. normal?

If, as your data suggest, the CT (vs. normal) compensates for the home court advantage... than the result is mainly up to the teams strength.
If that is the case it seems really fair to me :)

This Post:
00
24228.58 in reply to 24228.50
Date: 4/17/2008 5:07:11 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
329329
I don´t think the CT/TIE in one-game playoffs brings more gameplay, because the effect of CT is so wide and effective that tactics become less important point. The most important decision is whether to CT or Normal.

I support strongly the idea of reducing the CT/TIE effect in these games, and I would also reduce the home court advantage. It is only one die or live match, so it should be as equal as possible. This game has enough strategic depth, to make these matches interesting by themselves.

Last edited by Emilio at 4/17/2008 5:09:19 PM

¡Me aburro! (Homer Simpson)
This Post:
00
24228.59 in reply to 24228.58
Date: 4/17/2008 5:12:18 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
I don´t think the CT/TIE in one-game playoffs brings more gameplay, because the effect of CT is so wide and effective that tactics become less important point. The most important decision is whether to CT or Normal.

I support strongly the idea of reducing the CT/TIE effect in these games, and I would also reduce the home court advantage. It is only one die or live match, so it should be as equal as possible. This game has enough strategic depth, to make these matches interesting by themselves.

If there is no home court advantage in the playoffs, then teams will be motivated to finish fourth rather than first to secure a better draft position. I just don't think this will be a good incentive.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
24228.60 in reply to 24228.59
Date: 4/17/2008 5:14:34 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
329329
I just said "reduce", and everybody will want to be the first of the series to have the HCA in the 3-games final.

¡Me aburro! (Homer Simpson)
Advertisement