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
24228.56 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)
This Post:
00
24228.61 in reply to 24228.60
Date: 4/17/2008 5:23:03 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
I just said "reduce", and everybody will want to be the first of the series to have the HCA in the 3-games final.

Not if HCA doesn't give you a meaningful advantage.

You seem to be pulling in both directions since you suggested that (a) games should be as equal as possible, and (b) everybody will want HCA in the 3-games final.

These effects are linked, you can be somewhere in the middle, but you can't have both.

Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 4/17/2008 5:23:26 PM

"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
24228.62 in reply to 24228.61
Date: 4/17/2008 5:33:38 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
329329
I understand that I write too much, so it is hard to follow all I want to say.
What I said is that it could be a good idea to reduce both CT/TIE and HCA effects for the quarter and semi-final, not the regular league and not the final.
I hope I expressed it clearer.

¡Me aburro! (Homer Simpson)
This Post:
00
24228.63 in reply to 24228.62
Date: 4/17/2008 5:37:32 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
I understand that I write too much, so it is hard to follow all I want to say.
What I said is that it could be a good idea to reduce both CT/TIE and HCA effects for the quarter and semi-final, not the regular league and not the final.
I hope I expressed it clearer.

Well, I am a bit of a lazy reader. This sounds reasonable.

"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
24228.64 in reply to 24228.50
Date: 4/17/2008 6:15:28 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
22
I dont think this should be the question. in my opinion the question to aks is, why we are having 1 Game series.

Why is it not possible to make play offs one week longer?
why is it not possible to have more games a week during play offs?

There are several proposals in the sugggestion forum. Some of them might have disadvantages (e.g. having 3 games a week) but any of these I like better then having 1 game series.
all we do is waiting and preparing for play offs and after one game the most exciting part is over for most of us.

Advertisement