three-way tie for wildcard (2 Viewers)

[seabronc]

In a league where I am commissioner, we are headed toward a likely outcome of three teams tied for two wildcard spots. Unfortunately, we don't have three-way tiebreak rule written into our leagues rules. All that our rules say is that for wildcard, ties will be broken in the order of: 1) head-to-head, 2) total points, 3) cumulative record of opponents. And both wildcards can come from the same division.

Here's the setup:

Teams A and B are in the same division, team C in the other division.

A and B split their games 1-1. C beat A in their one game, B played C twice and beat him twice.

Team A will win total points.

Without anything else in place, my interpretation is that by applying the league rules B&C get in. (B is 3-1 in head to head games, the other teams are 1-2, but C beat A). So we can determine this by head-to-head.

Obviously A thinks this is horrible...

For what it's worth, NFL tiebreaking procedures would put A and C in, because it first looks at the top team in each division. C beats A because of head-to-head, but then A would beat B because of total points.

However, we haven't agreed to go by NFL procedures, so I think my reading is the closest to our rules. Your thoughts?

 

[The Dude]

In a league where I am commissioner, we are headed toward a likely outcome of three teams tied for two wildcard spots. Unfortunately, we don't have three-way tiebreak rule written into our leagues rules. All that our rules say is that for wildcard, ties will be broken in the order of: 1) head-to-head, 2) total points, 3) cumulative record of opponents. And both wildcards can come from the same division.Here's the setup:Teams A and B are in the same division, team C in the other division.A and B split their games 1-1. C beat A in their one game, B played C twice and beat him twice.Team A will win total points.Without anything else in place, my interpretation is that by applying the league rules B&C get in. (B is 3-1 in head to head games, the other teams are 1-2, but C beat A). So we can determine this by head-to-head.Obviously A thinks this is horrible... For what it's worth, NFL tiebreaking procedures would put A and C in, because it first looks at the top team in each division. C beats A because of head-to-head, but then A would beat B because of total points.However, we haven't agreed to go by NFL procedures, so I think my reading is the closest to our rules. Your thoughts?

Head to head is arbitrary. You need to compare H2H records as if they played each other all 13 weeks. then use that to set your rank.

 

[David Yudkin]

If you can't break a tie with your existing rules, IMO, you have to go with the way the NFL does it. Then vote in the offseason on how to better break ties moving forward.

 

[golfguy]

winning %, then total points, then head to head from now.

looks like B&C to me according to your rules

 

[shadyridr]

Scenarios like this is why I eliminated H2H as a tiebreaker years ago. Damn right A should be pissed but according to your rules B & C get in

 

[jason12vb]

My opinion....head to head should only be considered if one team went undefeated against both teams.

I'd go with NFL rules, Division standings should count first, would be odd for team A to finish above team B in the standings but not make the playoffs.

Any chance these two teams play each-other first round? Maybe let all three of them go head-to-head-to head.

 

[footballnerd]

isn't a head to head determination just between two teams? sounds like you're doing a special cumulative head to head record. Think this should go to total points imo.

 

[Sarnoff]

Flip a coin.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

"Head-to-head" does not mean "highest winning percentage amongst all games between the tied teams." There are situations where you apply this method and end up with nonsensical results.

By head to head records, you have B > C, C > A, and A = B. This is a contradiction. There's no way to resolve this using "head to head" criteria.

So you move on and go to the second tiebreaker. Team A gets the first wildcard based on total points.

Now you're down to two teams, and go back to the beginning. B beat C twice, so Team B gets in based on head to head record.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Rock Paper Scissors

 

[Real Man of Genius]

Noe of the three swept or got swept, so throw H2H out and A gets the first spot on total points. Then B gets the second spot on H2H vs. C.

 

[ArbyMelt]

"Head-to-head" does not mean "highest winning percentage amongst all games between the tied teams." There are situations where you apply this method and end up with nonsensical results.By head to head records, you have B > C, C > A, and A = B. This is a contradiction. There's no way to resolve this using "head to head" criteria.So you move on and go to the second tiebreaker. Team A gets the first wildcard based on total points.Now you're down to two teams, and go back to the beginning. B beat C twice, so Team B gets in based on head to head record.

What he said.

 

[footballnerd]

"Head-to-head" does not mean "highest winning percentage amongst all games between the tied teams." There are situations where you apply this method and end up with nonsensical results.By head to head records, you have B > C, C > A, and A = B. This is a contradiction. There's no way to resolve this using "head to head" criteria.So you move on and go to the second tiebreaker. Team A gets the first wildcard based on total points.Now you're down to two teams, and go back to the beginning. B beat C twice, so Team B gets in based on head to head record.

head to head criteria is thrown out, C > A, but C is out? imo you dont go back to head to head once you moved on to total points.

 

[T J]

"Head-to-head" does not mean "highest winning percentage amongst all games between the tied teams." There are situations where you apply this method and end up with nonsensical results.By head to head records, you have B > C, C > A, and A = B. This is a contradiction. There's no way to resolve this using "head to head" criteria.So you move on and go to the second tiebreaker. Team A gets the first wildcard based on total points.Now you're down to two teams, and go back to the beginning. B beat C twice, so Team B gets in based on head to head record.

This is correct.

 

[Joe Summer]

Shouldn't you re-start the tiebreaker after choosing the first playoff spot?

edit: nevermind.

 

[belljr]

"Head-to-head" does not mean "highest winning percentage amongst all games between the tied teams." There are situations where you apply this method and end up with nonsensical results.

By head to head records, you have B > C, C > A, and A = B. This is a contradiction. There's no way to resolve this using "head to head" criteria.

So you move on and go to the second tiebreaker. Team A gets the first wildcard based on total points.

Now you're down to two teams, and go back to the beginning. B beat C twice, so Team B gets in based on head to head record.

It should read H2H sweep

Three or More Clubs

(Note: If two clubs remain tied after third or other clubs are eliminated, tie breaker reverts to step 1 of applicable two-club format.)

Apply division tie breaker to eliminate all but the highest ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2. The original seeding within a division upon application of the division tie breaker remains the same for all subsequent applications of the procedure that are necessary to identify the two Wild-Card participants.

Head-to-head sweep. (Applicable only if one club has defeated each of the others or if one club has lost to each of the others.)

Of course you aren't using the NFL way to break division ties firts

"Head-to-head" does not mean "highest winning percentage amongst all games between the tied teams." There are situations where you apply this method and end up with nonsensical results.

By head to head records, you have B > C, C > A, and A = B. This is a contradiction. There's no way to resolve this using "head to head" criteria.

So you move on and go to the second tiebreaker. Team A gets the first wildcard based on total points.

Now you're down to two teams, and go back to the beginning. B beat C twice, so Team B gets in based on head to head record.

head to head criteria is thrown out, C > A, but C is out? imo you dont go back to head to head once you moved on to total points.

Once the first team has been established ... you then start over with the remaining teams

Shouldn't you re-start the tiebreaker after choosing the first playoff spot?

C gets the first spot because it has the best H2H record.

Then you break the tie between A and B. In that case, A wins because it has the most total points.

You start over but C doesn't have the best H2H record

 

[Joe Summer]

"Head-to-head" does not mean "highest winning percentage amongst all games between the tied teams."

The NFL does actually use that definition for Head-To-Head -- but that's only because the NFL assumes that all tied teams will have played the same number of games against each other.The NFL never uses Head-To-Head to break a tie between teams did not play an equal number of games against each other, and neither should Fantasy Football.

 

[Joe Summer]

You start over but C doesn't have the best H2H record

Oops, fixed.

 

[lod01]

Noe of the three swept or got swept, so throw H2H out and A gets the first spot on total points. Then B gets the second spot on H2H vs. C.

Here's your correct answer. The key is H2H SWEEP FOR WILDCARD (between 3 teams). Must be a sweep or it gets thrown out. http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingproceduresI'll assume you use NFL tie breakers.

 

[da_budman]

If you dont have a rule how can you arbirarily decide to use the NFL rules now? This is fantasy football not the NFL. The only thing that makes it at all like the NFL is that we use their players stats to determine our winners and losers. IMO without a rule in place the only think fair at this point is something completely arrbitrary.... IE coin flip, number draw, rock/paper/scissors/lizard /spock whereby: Scissors cuts paper, paper covers rock, rock crushes lizard, lizard poisons Spock, Spock smashes scissors, scissors decapitates lizard, lizard eats paper, paper disproves Spock, Spock vaporizes rock, and—as it always has—rock crushes scissors

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

isn't a head to head determination just between two teams? sounds like you're doing a special cumulative head to head record. Think this should go to total points imo.

I think most leagues skip over the H2H tiebreaker if there are more than 2 teams involved.(Personally, I just use total points as first tie-breaker in leagues I run. K.I.S.S.)

 

[Ned Ryerson]

I think it should be that A & B should get in. B on cumulative head to head. Because A & C have the same cumulative head to head record, that first tiebreaker is a tie, so you move to the second tiebreaker and A should get in on points.

I was involved in a three way tie, most points, but 1 -3 amongst the three teams, unfortunately now on the outside looking in.

 

[packseasontix]

This is what I use in my league that I commish, cant remember where I got it but it was from a template on Dynasty Rules worked great and we had 2 3-way ties in the leagues I commish. Also the sweep is required to win the spot outright is a nice touch I think. Could find something better probably but it works.

Two teams:

1) Head-to-head record

2) Net points overall

3) Head-to-head points

4) Conference record

5) Net points in conference games

6) Coin toss

Three or more teams (Note: If two teams remain tied after third or other teams are eliminated, tiebreaker reverts back to step #1 of the two-team tiebreaker):

1) Head-to-head sweep

(Note: Teams must have played an equal number of head-to-head games for this tiebreaker to apply)

2) Net points overall

3) Net points against overall (Higher net points against wins the tiebreaker)

4) Coin toss

 

[LuckyOne]

If the tiebreaker is not specifically laid out in your rules, draw straws. Random selection is the only non-biased way to handle it.

 

[The Jerk]

Rules should be in place before the season.

For teams looking into avoiding future issues, another layer to consider is having division ties broken first before moving to league/conference ties. In many cases, this avoids three-way ties, and it would have in this case as well.

 

[getsmartt]

I would think that ties in the division get resolved first, meaning A wins out on points, then it would be between b and C, with B winning.

But your rules seem fairly vague, so this year I would likely let all three submit line-ups with the winner advancing in a 3-way H2H contest.

 

[hines]

Total points should be every tiebreaker. Head to head and division record are inferior options you should only turn to if teams are exactly tied in points

 

[Utter Chaos]

Using NFL rules it's C - A - B.

Team A represents their division wild card by total points over B. C gets the first WC because they beat A head to head. A gets the second wild card by total points.

Loosely interpreting your league rules has B - C - A.

B is 3-1 head to head so they get the first wild card. C beat A so they get the second wild card.

Interpreting 3 way ties like the NFL you have A - B - C.

Head to head does not apply because no team won them all or lost them all. A gets the first wild card based on total points. B beat C twice so they get the second wild card.

So without clear cut rules, every team can make a claim for 1st, second, or third. Whatever you decide, one team will be pissed.

My solution:

Have three playoff brackets instead of one. All prize money will be divided by 3. Say first place money is $300, second place is $150 and third place is $75. Then in each bracket the teams will be playing for $100, $50, and $25. If team D wins all three brackets then they get $100 + $100 + $100 or $300. If team A comes in 1st and 3rd in the two brackets they are in then they would get $100 + $25 or $125.

Then next year add a three way wild card tie breaker to the league rules.

 

[Mr.Pack]

Noe of the three swept or got swept, so throw H2H out and A gets the first spot on total points. Then B gets the second spot on H2H vs. C.

Spot on.

 

[Ned]

Noe of the three swept or got swept, so throw H2H out and A gets the first spot on total points. Then B gets the second spot on H2H vs. C.

Spot on.

Yup.

 

[renesauz]

IMO...H2H should be among the LAST considerations in fantasy tiebreakers. NFL bye weeks make H2H completely unfair as a primary tiebreaker.

But that's a rule change for off-season. Generally, tiebreakers are only used until the FIRST spot is awarded. Then, you start over from the beginning for the second spot.

 

[renesauz]

Noe of the three swept or got swept, so throw H2H out and A gets the first spot on total points. Then B gets the second spot on H2H vs. C.

Spot on.

Yup.

I agree with this interpretation...but your rules suck. It's insane to use a three way H2H when the teams didn't play each other an even number of times.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

"Head-to-head" does not mean "highest winning percentage amongst all games between the tied teams." There are situations where you apply this method and end up with nonsensical results.By head to head records, you have B > C, C > A, and A = B. This is a contradiction. There's no way to resolve this using "head to head" criteria.So you move on and go to the second tiebreaker. Team A gets the first wildcard based on total points.Now you're down to two teams, and go back to the beginning. B beat C twice, so Team B gets in based on head to head record.

head to head criteria is thrown out, C > A, but C is out? imo you dont go back to head to head once you moved on to total points.

When you have a 3+ team tie for 2+ playoff spots, you go through the tiebreaking procedure until one of the teams earns a playoff spot. Then you go back to step one of the tiebreaking procedure with the remaining teams to determine the next team to earn a playoff spot. It's not like you skip head to head, get to total points, and just pick the two teams with the highest total points.

 

[babydemon90]

In a league where I am commissioner, we are headed toward a likely outcome of three teams tied for two wildcard spots. Unfortunately, we don't have three-way tiebreak rule written into our leagues rules. All that our rules say is that for wildcard, ties will be broken in the order of: 1) head-to-head, 2) total points, 3) cumulative record of opponents. And both wildcards can come from the same division.Here's the setup:Teams A and B are in the same division, team C in the other division.A and B split their games 1-1. C beat A in their one game, B played C twice and beat him twice.Team A will win total points.Without anything else in place, my interpretation is that by applying the league rules B&C get in. (B is 3-1 in head to head games, the other teams are 1-2, but C beat A). So we can determine this by head-to-head.Obviously A thinks this is horrible... For what it's worth, NFL tiebreaking procedures would put A and C in, because it first looks at the top team in each division. C beats A because of head-to-head, but then A would beat B because of total points.However, we haven't agreed to go by NFL procedures, so I think my reading is the closest to our rules. Your thoughts?

I don't think you can use H2H for a 3 way tie here...Looks like A gets in first by total points, then B win the tiebreak over C for H2H.

 

[babydemon90]

"Head-to-head" does not mean "highest winning percentage amongst all games between the tied teams." There are situations where you apply this method and end up with nonsensical results.By head to head records, you have B > C, C > A, and A = B. This is a contradiction. There's no way to resolve this using "head to head" criteria.So you move on and go to the second tiebreaker. Team A gets the first wildcard based on total points.Now you're down to two teams, and go back to the beginning. B beat C twice, so Team B gets in based on head to head record.

 

[GregR]

I would think that ties in the division get resolved first, meaning A wins out on points, then it would be between b and C, with B winning.But your rules seem fairly vague, so this year I would likely let all three submit line-ups with the winner advancing in a 3-way H2H contest.

This is a really, really, really..... really really really unfair thing to do to whoever is their opponent.Think about it if you are him. "Hey getsmartt... so we don't know who your opponent is going to be, so instead of having to outscore 1 team to advance, you have to outscore 3 teams to advance."I know it sounds like a good idea to let the teams settle it on the field, but it's too unfair to their opponent to do it this way.

 

[GregR]

While I agree with Ignoratio's post that if I had to say one method is more right than the other it is what he said... for purposes of trying to avoid strife and keep it as fair as possible, I think I'd probably go with a dice roll tp randomly assign the first wildcard, and then use the tiebreak for the second wildcard between the remaining teams.

Reason being, there's 3 ways you can interpret your tiebreak rules.

* If you interpret it that head to head not count unless even games played, then A gets first wildcard

* If you interpret it that head to head be used regardless, B gets first wildcard

* If you interpret it like the NFL and cut down to 1 team from each division, then C gets first wildcard.

Rather than choose one of those on grounds that no matter what they are, some team will object to and feel robbed over... go with random selection. They all have equal odds. Then whoever wins, it comes down to the two teams left and the tiebreakers you have will work to resolve that one.

I would hope most reasonable people would agree to that given that your league really doesn't have clear enough guidance on the tiebreak procedures.

 

[NJ]

I think its pretty simple that if you're going to have Divisions and use H2H as a tiebreaker then you simply MUST break ties in the division first. You should never be comparing 3 teams where 2 come from 1 division and 1 from another. You break all ties in the divisions and then compare the top teams from each division, and its not a matter of doing it the way the NFL does it, its the fact that if you do it any other way you will inevitably get into a situation where a team that finished 3rd in his division will advance to the playoffs ahead of a team that finished 2nd and that makes no sense at all and should never happen. If you're not going to break ties in the division first, then you need to do away with the divisions all together because it makes no sense to even have them.

 

[Utter Chaos]

While I agree with Ignoratio's post that if I had to say one method is more right than the other it is what he said... for purposes of trying to avoid strife and keep it as fair as possible, I think I'd probably go with a dice roll tp randomly assign the first wildcard, and then use the tiebreak for the second wildcard between the remaining teams.

Reason being, there's 3 ways you can interpret your tiebreak rules.

* If you interpret it that head to head not count unless even games played, then A gets first wildcard

* If you interpret it that head to head be used regardless, B gets first wildcard

* If you interpret it like the NFL and cut down to 1 team from each division, then C gets first wildcard.

Rather than choose one of those on grounds that no matter what they are, some team will object to and feel robbed over... go with random selection. They all have equal odds. Then whoever wins, it comes down to the two teams left and the tiebreakers you have will work to resolve that one.

I would hope most reasonable people would agree to that given that your league really doesn't have clear enough guidance on the tiebreak procedures.

Greg,What do you think of my suggestion in Post 28?

 

[GregR]

While I agree with Ignoratio's post that if I had to say one method is more right than the other it is what he said... for purposes of trying to avoid strife and keep it as fair as possible, I think I'd probably go with a dice roll tp randomly assign the first wildcard, and then use the tiebreak for the second wildcard between the remaining teams.

Reason being, there's 3 ways you can interpret your tiebreak rules.

* If you interpret it that head to head not count unless even games played, then A gets first wildcard

* If you interpret it that head to head be used regardless, B gets first wildcard

* If you interpret it like the NFL and cut down to 1 team from each division, then C gets first wildcard.

Rather than choose one of those on grounds that no matter what they are, some team will object to and feel robbed over... go with random selection. They all have equal odds. Then whoever wins, it comes down to the two teams left and the tiebreakers you have will work to resolve that one.

I would hope most reasonable people would agree to that given that your league really doesn't have clear enough guidance on the tiebreak procedures.

Greg,What do you think of my suggestion in Post 28?

You know I'm having trouble figuring out whether it has the same problem as the "give the highest scoring of the 3 next week the first wildcard"... where the opponent of that wildcard spot is effectively having to outscore 3 opponents.He still has to outscore 3 opponents to have what would be his normal shot at a full prize amount. But he also gets the shot at 1/3 of the prize for getting to beat just the lowest scoring of the 3. So maybe that balances?

It might end up being fair... honestly I'm tired enough my brain is spinning trying to prove it to myself. I might try selling them on the dice roll and use yours as a fall back position if nothing else. It's definitely creative and not a bad idea, if it ends up being fair.

 

[Val Rannous]

Our league has had this issue covered for over 20 years now - to quote the league rules:

(Note: Head to Head tiebreaks must be 100% total wins amongst all teams tied to be valid.)

Therefore, in our league, on the tie for the #1 Wildcard spot, 1st tiebreak is void (since no single team swept the competition). Going on to second tiebreak, Team A wins on total points. The #2 wildcard spot is now decided between teams B and C, 1st tiebreak goes to Team B by virtue of a 2-0 head to head record. So (by our rules) teams A and B would go.

 

[Sam Quentin]

h2h is a nonsensical tie-breaker with no redeeming entertainment value to make it worthwhile.

 

[Nucker101]

I prefer total points scored during the season as a tie breaker. H2H records is okay, but maybe the loss(es) came when one team had multiple starter on a bye week.

 

[[icon]]

1) Total points

2) All play

3) Head to head

4) Random coin flip.

 

[QuizGuy66]

I think its pretty simple that if you're going to have Divisions and use H2H as a tiebreaker then you simply MUST break ties in the division first. You should never be comparing 3 teams where 2 come from 1 division and 1 from another. You break all ties in the divisions and then compare the top teams from each division, and its not a matter of doing it the way the NFL does it, its the fact that if you do it any other way you will inevitably get into a situation where a team that finished 3rd in his division will advance to the playoffs ahead of a team that finished 2nd and that makes no sense at all and should never happen. If you're not going to break ties in the division first, then you need to do away with the divisions all together because it makes no sense to even have them.

Always break division ties first. -QG

 

[renesauz]

Again, bye weeks make H2H tiebreakers unfair from the word go. They should be 1 step up from a coinflip.

 

[GregR]

In addition to clearing up things in the future, consider getting rid of head to head in general.

In real football, head to head is an actual test of the two teams, where each team's defense directly impacts what the other team scores.

In fantasy, scores are about 99% independent. Short of the rare "I started a QB to cover his WR going off", each team would have scored the same in any given week regardless of who their opponent was. The schedule is essentially random there. While the team who scores the most on the season would tend to have the advantage in most cases that the week(s) randomly chosen for their game will favor him... it just makes a bad tiebreak. It's too arbitrary compared other tiebreakers that could be used, like total points or all play record, or even record if the two teams played each other every week.

 

[Mario Kart]

Again, bye weeks make H2H tiebreakers unfair from the word go. They should be 1 step up from a coinflip.

This can be remedied by having division games played in non-bye week weeks. Works nicely and gives the final three weeks of the season worth watching in the league.

 

[Sake-Bombers]

I think I'd figure out a way to let all three in playoffs this year, and then fix rule in offseason. Maybe do a three-way matchup in one of the playoff pairings. Essentially you are settling it in the field. And realistically, no one should complain if their team gets beat this week by a team that shouldn't even be there, because if there were a clear picture of who shouldn't be there you wouldn't be in this situation.

Then you make tiebreakers crystal clear so it fiesn't happen again in future.

 

[pecorino]

when i apply head-to-head among three teams, the tiebreaker is only granted if one team swept all of the other teams. needless to say, this almost always results in going to total points as the tiebreak, which nobody minds.