Earlier this year

results - who finishes where

so a question here on head to head results.

3 games between 2 particular tied teams at end of minor round.

Team A wins 2 of the games by 5 and 6 points respectively.

Team B wins 1 of the games by 15 points.

Team A - 2 wins and +11

Team B - 1 win and +15

So between the 2 - Team B is +4 and Team A -4 on the point spread but Team A has the result spread 2-1.

Who finishes higher if all things are equal ?

Surely team A with a greater winning % between the 2.

I am aware local comp criteria is positions = overall games played and games won % in grades of uneven amount of byes - but I thinking game winning % should go before points spread between tied teams.

If game winning % is equal between tied teams then point spread.

Just IMO.

Topic #49246 | Report this topic

Earlier this year

Points spread is only when the game count is equal and is used as a decider. Team A should finish higher but ultimately comes down to comp rules.

Reply #871973 | Report this post

Earlier this year

and hence my discussion - we use game % won for tables and then we go to point split for equal teams then points f/a as a distant last option (rarely needed.
I wonder why the old premiership points (i.e. 3pts win, 2 draw and 1 for a loss) even go up (maybe a Sportingpulse software set up and must have to automatically happen).

So if we use game % won as the first choice for table placings - surely head to head results should go on game % won first then points spread ?

If the only play twice and are 1 all - yes points spread is the next factor.

But if they play 3 or 4 times etc in minor round IMO should be % of games won then points spread.

Reply #871975 | Report this post

Earlier this year

Tables during the season won't be based on head to head as there will be a time when there is no head to head result.

End of season its head to head, then points difference between the tied teams etc.

The question was answered already. I assume you're refering to a specific competition which would help for context as some comps (such as the NBL) run different rules.

Reply #871976 | Report this post

Earlier this year

Depends on the rules of the competition.

Reply #871977 | Report this post

Earlier this year

Team C beats them both.

Reply #871979 | Report this post

Earlier this year

Isn't there an accepted criteria of options 'b', 'c', 'd', are only considered when 'a' is tied? Then 'b' is activated and so on.

I think that the way NBL results are displayed throughout the reg season is because they don't play even number of games in even time. By season's end, all have played even number of games and the system will (nearly) always go with the 1st option, games won.

In your OP, you described a 2/1 win/loss record, but the points-percentage favoured the team with 1 w. IMO, that has no bearing on who THE winner is. In the late, regular season it may matter as there may be several teams vying for that last spot in post-season. So 1st and 2nd options may be needed to separate ladder positions.

I add, that seeing how multi-game, finals series are decided once the majority of wins have been achieved, ie. 2 from 2 in a 3-games series, 3 from 3 (or 4) in a 5-gamer etc. The remaining games are not played at all.

Pretty sure that all FIFA associations, national and club comps, are on a points earned through goals scored as the 1st option. In internationals, I believe they even award double points for away-goals over home-goals.

Most sports use games-won as 1st criteria.

Reply #871980 | Report this post

Earlier this year

If you're talking NBL, then it's irrelevant, only percentage is used to split tied teams.

In comps that still use "head to head" then it's not that complicated, a team that has won 2 of 3 has clearly won the head to head. Points +/- only comes in if (as it used to be in the NBL) teams had played 4 games and won two each.

Where it gets exceptionally complicated (and one of the reasons NBL abandoned h2h) is when you have multiple teams tie. In which case it was usual for it 2 be considered a mini-table. The issue for the NBL was that it made the final result exceptionally complicated, with some ridiculous number of permutations possible with 1 round to go, and can (and IIRC did) deliver some counter-intuitive results. (eg team B has a losing record against team A, but finishes above them because they had a better record against team C)

Reply #871981 | Report this post

You need to be a registered user to post from this location. Register here.

Close ads
Beam Orders - a quick, simple order and payments site for your business.
Punch - insightful time tracking
Dunk.com.au - Custom basketball uniforms

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 6:37 pm, Sun 5 Dec 2021 | Posts: 905,882 | Last 7 days: 585