How Do I break This Tie? (Commish Question)

[Infidel]

your league didnt have decimal scoring at the beginning of the year, and there's no way you can use it as a tiebreaker if you didnt do so in advance. all 3 teams still need to play for the title.

I would like one poster (any poster) to explain to me how it is fair to force the only team that made the SB without issue should now be forced to play 2 teams in the SB. Please see my original post.

Moreover, using decimal scoring only refines what all players on the field did for their respective owners. It is not a "change" in scoring.

Saying that all 3 need to play is just the other side of saying neither of the 2 tied teams should play as neither won therefore neither advanced. If I am the third team (that did advance) I think I have an equal case of saying they both lost so crown me now.

[lmcjaho]

I would like one poster (any poster) to explain to me how it is fair to force the only team that made the SB without issue should now be forced to play 2 teams in the SB. Please see my original post.

Moreover, using decimal scoring only refines what all players on the field did for their respective owners. It is not a "change" in scoring.

Saying that all 3 need to play is just the other side of saying neither of the 2 tied teams should play as neither won therefore neither advanced. If I am the third team (that did advance) I think I have an equal case of saying they both lost so crown me now.

Quite honestly, I don't recall agreeing with Infidel too often but he is the one making the most sense in this thread so far...

I too would like to see someone come up with an explanation that makes the 3-way SB fair for the 3rd team...

[buffalobillsrul2002]

Here's an idea (although I doubt anyone will like it...). You slate all 3 teams to play in the SB. However, you offer the 3rd team (the one not involved in the tie) half the pot (the pot being defined as whatever the SB champion usually gets) if he doesn't want to play.

If he takes the offer, you let the other 2 teams play for the other half of the pot. If he decides to play, give the pot as normal (first place would be SB winner, 2nd would be person with 2nd most points in SB, etc.)

This is an absolute mess though.... Good luck solving it.

[flotsamnjetsam]

your league didnt have decimal scoring at the beginning of the year, and there's no way you can use it as a tiebreaker if you didnt do so in advance. all 3 teams still need to play for the title.

Exactly.

You can't just make up new rules in between weeks 16 & 17 to make up for the huge mistake of not having a tiebreaker in place before the season started. While it might not be fair for the one SB team to have to play against 2 opponents, having all 3 teams play eachother in the SB is the only fair thing for the league as a whole. Suck it up, play against the 2 other teams and then learn from this and have a tiebreaker system in place for next year. Sorry but there's no way you can just start making up new rules or making up a tiebreaker system at this point in the season.


PS: Put yourself in the shoes of the 2 teams that tied. It's not their fault that NOONE in the entire league thought about having a tiebreaker system. All 3 have to play and I'd quit the league if all 3 didn't play (even if I came in last place).

[niblet]

This is unfair for the other semifinal winner as he will have to be going up against 2 other teams when he should only be going up against one. It doubles his chance of losing.

1/2= 50%
1/3= 33%

Three-way dance is the only way to resolve it. Its stupid not to have a tie breaker rule in a league because it happens so often. But you cant make one up at this point.

That wasn't my point. I don't care the exact % of losing. My point is that it makes him more likely to lose.

Now I am going to use it against you.
Its should be It's.
It's = it is

[steelerfan513]

your league didnt have decimal scoring at the beginning of the year, and there's no way you can use it as a tiebreaker if you didnt do so in advance. all 3 teams still need to play for the title.

I would like one poster (any poster) to explain to me how it is fair to force the only team that made the SB without issue should now be forced to play 2 teams in the SB. Please see my original post.

Moreover, using decimal scoring only refines what all players on the field did for their respective owners. It is not a "change" in scoring.

Saying that all 3 need to play is just the other side of saying neither of the 2 tied teams should play as neither won therefore neither advanced. If I am the third team (that did advance) I think I have an equal case of saying they both lost so crown me now.

You know what, you're absolutely right. It isn't fair for that team to have to play those other two. However, that is the only fair option because there were no tiebreaker rules put into place in the beginning of the year.

Fractional scoring is a choice a league makes in the beginning of the year. You either use it the whole year or you don't. It changes the outcome.

A tie is neither a win or a loss. You can't penalize teams for having the same output for that week, and because you can't say neither advance, the only other option is having both advance.

You can't change the rules in the middle of a season. 3 teams have to play for the title, and a tiebreaker system needs to be put in place for next year.

[niblet]

I say let all 3 teams play in the championship.

As for the other semifinal winner that now has to go up against two teams instead of one, he should get an extra 1/3 of the 1st place winnings if he wins, and 1/3 less of what he would pay if he loses.

[ChyBoy]

I think that you play all 3 teams in the SB and whom ever wins is the champ, if you have the best team, I wouldn’t complain about playing 2 teams.

But if you want to be PC, then you give allowances to the 1 team. If the 1 team out scores both of the tied teams then that is easy he wins all the money. If both of the tied teams out scores the 1 team then the highest scoring team wins all the money. If the one team finishes between the 2 tied teams, then you split the pot, giving the highest scoring team 2/3 the money and the 1 team the other one third. This seems fair because you just don’t know who would have been in and the winner in week 17 should get the majority of the money, but the 1 team should get something.