I've seen a few different ways of deciding.
1. The higher place team gets the prize.
2. Use rock-paper-scissors to decide.
3. If only one of the tied teams has attended the presentation, give them the trophy.
4. The organisers just announce the winner based on their own opinions
5. Let the team that was mistakenly already given the trophy keep it (don't ask).
In general, I think it's okay to leave the spirit award as a tie. If there is a token prize that can't be easily split between two teams, methods 2 or 3 are fine for deciding who to give it to.
In the case where it's a decent trophy for an important tournament, I can see the merit of having a well-known convention to decide it. Method 1 does fit the bill. Everyone knows what to expect, even if it is a little arbitrary.
Presumably, the theory behind method 1 is that it's more difficult to be spirited and good at the sport than to be a spirited loser. I would think there'd be more of an argument to be made for it being more difficult to keep good spirit in close games over blow-outs, rather than just finishing position. But working that out could be too much trouble between a final and a presentation.
And of course some teams give high scores willy-nilly while other teams only give low scores. Calculating which of the tied teams played those teams that were stingy with spirit scores could be the most accurate method.
I hear recently this call was made based on the team with the better single game spirit score. Or possibly it was the opposite; the team with the more consistent spirit scores. I think there are arguments for either but neither are great arguments.
There are so many variables at work, all at the mercy of the subjective judgements of teams filling out a spirit score sheet that it would be difficult, based on some factor or other, to say for sure that one team is slightly more spirited. Its probably best to just stick with the most straight-forward 'higher placed team gets the trophy' convention.
Any thoughts?
Thought 1: Two posts in one day. You must have been bored this evening Séamus!
ReplyDeleteThought 2: Compare like with like when possible. Where tying teams have played the same teams, compile secondary spirit scores from these games.
Thought 3: Obviously thought 2 wouldn't work in tournaments using the old-fangled "nominate three teams" approach, in which case you may as well do rock-paper-scissors or something else arbitrary.
1. yes, I guess.
ReplyDelete2. another danger is that in an effort to 'compare like with like' you're then focussing on a very small number of games. Like if the 2 tied teams had but one common opponent, the games against that opponent are effectively a 'casting vote'. But one team may have had a blow out against them, while the other had a close game.
And this common opponent may not have very consistent spirit. And I think if there's one thing that helps your spirit in a game, it's playing a spirited opponent.
I can see the sense in it, certainly, but there are so many variables that I'm not sure it's worth it.
3. I definitely prefer the new style.
Yep, very true. 2 seemed to be some kind of tie-breaker based specifically on spirit scores (unlike usual methods used), that is less complicated to calculate than a team's spirit score variance, or some weighted coefficient of blowout-ness. There are of course loads of variables at play - you could even think about controlling for things that impact a game's flow like pitch quality or wind strength or rain, that could in turn affect spirit outcomes, but it seems easiest to ignore these and hope they just cancel out on average (which they should if they're random events). Probably getting a bit philosophical about it at this stage though.
ReplyDeletehighest place team should win it, that's how BULA did it for worlds and those lads love spirit.
ReplyDeleteThe higher individual score (or it's opposite) is totally arbitrary and neither can really be argued over the other. In one case a team may have gotten 1 really high score, but that means they also got a lower score to balance it out.
Or just announce it as a tie and give the prize on any old criteria as you suggested.
In conclusion I think I just agreed with every point you made.
You said Don't ask, but I really want to ask.
ReplyDelete5. Let the team that was mistakenly already given the trophy keep it (don't ask).
Also, I think in general i agree with the higher placed team gets it. Spirit scores are never going to be 100% accurate,
At WCBU we lost out to the Swiss in a tied Spirit score 'cause they finished ahead of us. For some reason it kind of rankled with me. I dont really know how to settle it - the 'giving it to the higher placed team' approach is at least consistent and locked into place.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think he's refering to the Spirit mess up at World Juniors in Heilbronn last year. Ireland were belatedly announced as Spirit winners/co-winners after the (apparently very cool!) trophy was sent home with another team...
Finally, how often does it happen? Ive seen it happen once on 11 years... Pretty specific post Seamouse!
Why did it rankle? Did you think you guys were more spirited, but they somehow had more generous opponents? Or was it just an unexpected tiebreaker from your point of view?
ReplyDeleteI was indeed referring to WJUC2010.
I guess this is quite specific, although I'd be very surprised if it hasn't happened more than once in all the tournaments you've played in. Particularly back in the days of 'everyone just vote for who you think should win the Spirit prize'. In my mind, the chances of a tie seem reasonable.
I don't think a system for selecting one team over another in the case of a tie is necessary. Just name both teams as joint winners.
ReplyDeleteThe main reward is being recognised as the (joint) most spirited team, right? The prize is secondary. As you said - if the prize is easily divisble, then split it between the two teams. If it's not, then only one person on the 'winning' team can take it home anyway, so most of the individual players are unaffected.
you're absolutely right.
ReplyDeleteThat should be option 1 every time. They could surely have done something like that in beach worlds 2004? And just given the 1 trophy that can't be split anyway to the Swiss based on their higher finishing position.