Major Complaint: Playoff results too random

[Schaefling]

I have played in close to thirty years worth of playoffs with my three teams and I must protest the game code for the playoffs.

To me the results generated in the playoffs are simply much too random. It seems to me inferior teams clearly should have a chance to beat superior teams but the probability should not be fifty percent which is what it looks like to me as there appears to be no correlation between regular season perfomance and post season performance. There also seems to be no benefit whatsoever to resting your players during the season which is routinely done in real life so your players will be sharp for the playoffs. And giving your pitchers an extra day of rest during the playoffs also has no benefit which is totally bogus.

What this all boils down to is less decisionmaking for the gamer which really hurts both realism and game play. I know this game cannot match the ability of games like Strat-O-Matic to give managers virtual total control over their teams but for God's sake our management decisions should have some effect in the playoffs.

I am particularly upset about the way great pitchers get exhausted during the playoffs. Resting them does not matter. Sooner or later they get totally bombed even if they are Pitcher of the Year with 25 wins and a 1.50 era.

Please! Please! Please Fix This! Please make our decisions count and please reward managers who break their backs to create really solid teams.

There is nothing more frustrating than losing to a team who won over thirty fewer games than your team only to discover it's a computer team and has not been managed at all during the playoffs which only reinforces my belief that what we do with our teams in the playoffs makes no difference at all because of the total randomness of the results.

I'm sorry for the long post but this clearly is the biggest problem with the game. The whole point of the game is to get your team to the playoffs and to perform well in the playoffs. If your performance results in the playoffs dont even come close to matching the stated abilities of your players then I say what's the point?

[Particleman]

I find that the results are fairly consistent, I'n one of the public leagues I've been playing as Toronto, and their playoff results have been fairly consistent, in 8 seasons, 3 ALDS time Winner, 3 time AL Champion, 2 time World Champion. You can't expect to win the World Series every season, even if you have the best record in the regular season, when you play in the playoffs, you play much harder teams, so you may have a 700 win percentage, but your opponent also has 650, you can't both expect to win 7/10 against each other. Also my Seattle team in the NABL has had 3 consecutive first round losses, so that's been pretty consistent too, unable to upset past the first round. Also the results in the regular season could be affected by weakness in a division or toughness in a division, so I don't see why a 5-10 game difference in the regular season should decide who wins in the playoffs.

[dougummel]

I totally agree with Particleman. In one of the leagues I have been playing in for 10+ years, the Texas (Rangers) absolutely dominated their division for 4-5 years. The other 3 teams won 10-60 games for the entire season. Texas obviously posted some really good regular season records, however, when they reached the playoffs, they would always get knocked out in the first round. This is obviously realistic. It also happens in real life that some intangibles seem to affect the outcome of the World SEries (and even who gets there) more than good management or the best talent. (see Yankees last year)

I like the code as it is. Although it is frustrating to have the best record by far and not win the WS, that's the way it goes sometimes. Just keep plugging away and you will break through.

[Schaefling]

I appreciate your sympathy guys but it's not about how often I win. It's about what I believe to be a real problem with an otherwise great game. Playoff results are simply too random. Period.

This is particularly true of excellent starting pitchers who most definitely get bombed way too often in the playoffs. Just look at the actual individual game results.

As for my perfomance I have no complaints. My New York Mets team won 7 straight NL pennants and four world chamionships. My Cleveland team has two world championships and my Colorado team has a world championship. My teams have been in the playoffs every single year I have managed them.

I am talking about the way management decisions just dont seem to make any difference in the playoffs and the way there is no correlation between regular season perfomance and post-season performance. Some sort of reset seems to be coded into the game for the playoffs so that players start off fresh for the playoffs with totally random results which I dont like but could live with except for the way excellent starting pitchers bizarrely get worn out in the playoffs.

More feedback would now be appreciated as it is clear you guys clearly know how to play this game and play it well. Thanks.

[Particleman]

In the regular season, especially in leagues that have simmed for a lot of seasons, the ERAs of pitchers deflated a lot when facing the loads of teams with no batting talent. But most ot the teams that do make it into the playoffs, do have batting talent. Right now in one of my leagues I have 4 starting pitchers with ERAs below 2.00, they are good pitchers but if this were a league in which real life batters had not retired I think their ERAs would be a full point or more higher. I've noticed that the teams that do make the playoffs in these leagues do have lineups comparable to the average team before the retirements. And playoff upsets do happen in real life, the mets made it to the World Series last year, Oakland nearly knocked off the Yankees last season. And if regular season records were any indication Atlanta should have won more than 1 championship in the last decade.

[electro]

I have seen 120+ win teams lose to 90ish win teams in the playoffs every year and probably around half the time. I won 120+ for 7 straight years and got 1 World Series win.

[Clay Dreslough]

Schaefling,

I read your post and I understand what you're getting at. I have look at this problem before and tried to figure out two things:

1) Is this problem real or perceived. It's hard to tell with the small sample size I've looked at, but I can build a utility to chug all the leagues and look at the trends.

2) If it is real (i.e. Mogul is significantly different from real life), how do I best improve it?

I have thought about this before because I have had the same reaction you have, but when I look at the numbers it seems that the best teams don't always win in the playoffs. In any case, I am still looking for ways to improve this part of the game if it needs it. The playoffs are indeed the pinnacle of the game and should be realistic. I'm working on some basic things, like better ways to set your rotation for the playoffs, and for resting your players. But I'll also look at broader issues like whether there is too much randomness.

I could probably use some more data here if anyone feels like doing some web-surfing. For example, the home-team advantage is about 55% in pro baseball, and this is the percentage I try to simulate in Mogul. However, it's possible that this number is higher in the playoff atmosphere -- I just don't know.

So I'd be looking for numbers such as:

1) Since the invention of the wild card, what is their winning percentage in the playoffs? How often do they win the 1st round?

2) What is the home-field advantage in the post-season?

3) How do good pitchers perform in the post-season? How is this affected by days of rest etc.?

Clay

[Schaefling]

Electro's results are exactly what I'm talking about. He does not need to win every time but just purely from a stats point of view he should have done better in the playoffs and the 90ish win teams should have done worse.

There is a statistical anomaly here and it has nothing to do with poor perfomances by real life teams like Atlanta in the playoffs. On that note, I would also point out that Atlanta did not lose because of poor pitching perfomances in the playoffs. How about adressing the specific issue of great pitchers getting bombed in the playoffs.

If I have to lose I would much rather lose a 2-1 12 inning game (see Atlanta in real life) than watch my 25-3 number one starter give up 6 runs in the first inning of the 7th game of the ALCS and completely wipe out my chances with 8 more innings still to play! There's definitely something wrong there!!!

[Schaefling]

I just made my last post not knowing Clay had responded. I have to say that his post is very good news for the game. I will do what I can to help and put some time in helping get some of the information he is seeking. I hope other gamers will do the same.

[db248]

during the playoffs slow down the pace of the sim, at least in fast sim leagues - maybe 2 or 3 days an hour at most ... it would make the strategy decisions easier to work out, especially for pitching order ...

[dturkenk]

I ran the results of the playoffs from 1995 on, and I got the following results for the wild card teams:

Overall Record: 40-48, .455 Win pct
Division Series: 5-7 series .417 Win pct
23-26 games .469 Win pct
Championship Series: 2-3 series .400 Win pct
12-15 games .444 Win pct
World Series: 1-1 series .500 Win pct
5-7 games .417 Win pct


Division Winners during that time are 151-137 over that stretch for a .524 winning percentage.

I didn't have the numbers for the other questions you asked Clay, but I can look into getting them.

Dan

[Schaefling]

I took my three fastsim teams and compared them over eight straight years for each team. During this eight year stretch for each team they all won their divisions every time so these stats do not include any wild card teams. I should also mention I took this data from the History page of each team so I only have series statistics without totals for games won and lost during the playoffs in question. I do, however, list the average season record for all the teams for each of the eight year periods in question

Cleveland Indians 2003-2010 127-35 season average

8-6 playoff series record .571 won-lost percentage
lost four times in the first round
lost twice in the AlCS
won two world championships

Colorado Outlaws 2004-2011 118-44 season average
8-7 playoff series record .533 won-lost percentage
lost three times in the first round
lost three times in the NLCS
lost once in the world series
one a single world championship

New York Mets 2004-2011 112-50 season average
18-4 playoff series record .818 won-lost percentage
lost once in the first round
lost three time in the world series
won four world championships
won 7 consecutive NL pennants

I consider my New York Mets team to be the weakest of my three teams and coincidentally or not its season average reflects this.
Strangely enough it did the best of all three teams.

My Cleveland team which had an excellent season won-lost average over eight years and which was clearly my best team faired about the same as my Colorado team. As you can see Colorado and Cleveland both faired far worse than my New York team.

I believe my Cleveland team had the best record almost every one of those eight years in the AL and consistently had home field advantage in the first round but won only half the time in the first round and only half the time in the second round. Conversely my New York team which believe me was not nearly as good did much much better during a similar eight year stretch.

I know this is a small sampling but I believe it supports my belief that there is too much randomness in the BBMO playoffs.

[Clay Dreslough]

Thanks for typing that up.

Clay

[nysteinbrenner]

Here's an interesting stat though: Home teams in divisional playoff series from 1995-2000 are 30-19, a whopping .612 win percentage. And considering that the division winner gets the first two games at home in the divisional series against the wild-card, that would theoretically give a distinct advantage to the division titlist.

[db248]

well, one of them at least.

click here (http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/bp/1260819.html)

[Schaefling]

I read the article attached to db248's post. It indicated that there were some advantages to home-field advantage although the results indicating only a slight advantage to the home-team. To me this indicates that home field advantage and, therefore, season records should be an important factor but not an overwhelming one.

It was very interesting to read in the last paragraph of the article that the author felt resting players and choosing starting pitchers for the rotation were other important factors to be considered in the playoffs.