04 Boys - Summer Splash

moveyourfeet wrote:

And why is a 3-3 tie worth double a 0-0 tie? What makes that so special? My point, regardless of what team made it and what team did not, is that it is ridiculous.

0-0, both teams receive 4 points. 3-3, both teams receive 6 points. That is not double.

Move on. Tournaments are not dropping the 10 point system.

You may not like the scoring system but it was done correctly and has been done that same way since I played as a kid. As long as you know how they do it when you sign up for the tournament I don't think you can complain much. You know it is important to score three goals in a game and preserve the shutout.

Does anyone else think its at least a little funny that MYF was still up at 12:45am posting on this?  Put yourself in the shoes of those poor parents that had to settle for a 3-3 tie. Imagine the emotional roller coster they all had to endure as the lead shifted back and forth several times or perhaps as their team collapsed and gave up as many as 3 late goals after seemingly having the game under control?  Those 6 points that each of their teams received for the tie was at least compensation for that.  I mean, it is all about the parents right?  We are the ones that plan our weekends around these things, and are still talking about them long afterwards:)

[quote="moveyourfeet"]So a 3-3 draw gets 6 points, the same a team gets for a win? Yes I realize that there will be points added once the bonus points are in, but a team winning 2-1 gets 8 points. How is a tie worth 6 points?

And why is a 3-3 tie worth double a 0-0 tie? What makes that so special? My point, regardless of what team made it and what team did not, is that it is ridiculous.

Hypothetical:
Team A goes 2 wins and 1 loss in pool play. Team B ties 3 games.

Armed with that information, who advances (based on common sense)?
Seems really obvious to me.

[color=#ff0000]But Team A wins 2-1 twice and gets 8 points each time and then loses 1-0. Their total points are 16 at the end of Pool Play. Team B ties all three games 3-3 but yields 6 points each time for a total of 18 and then advances.[/color]

I know this is hypothetical, but that is lunacy, but it could really happen.

Take the same scenario and apply the 3 point system that everyone uses in Classic League, the MLS, EPL, etc.
Team A has 6 points, Team B has 3 points. Not even close.

I will go back to my original point..."Terrible Scoring System Applied"[/quote]

The bigger question is the logic behind this (above in red) and how it got past everyone? How exactly can one team have 2 wins and 1 loss and another team have 3 ties if they are in the same group?

The 2 hypothetical teams I believe are in different brackets and both competing for the wildcard slot I think.  Which opens up another can of worms....who says the two brackets are even equal?  What if the bracket with the team that ties 3 times contains the higher seeded teams for some reason, and the team that gets the 2 wins gets those two wins against weaker teams?

They both tied for 19 points in their own brackets. The points are correct.

The WTF? comes from how the team that was given the wildcard to advance had a worse GF/GA ratio than the other team they tied with.

From the clearly posted "Tournament Rules" section on the web site:

9. Tiebreaker system for teams advancing from preliminary games to play-offs will be as follows:
If two or more teams are tied in points after their mini-games are completed, the following tiebreaker procedures will be used to determine the team advancing:
a. Head to Head game results - winner will advance.
b. Most number of “shutouts” - team with most “shutouts” will advance.
c. Goal differential – team with highest goal differential against opponent
will advance (maximum of five (5) goal differential). (Example: A 7-0 game = 5-0 in calculating advancement; a 11-5 game = 10-5 in calculating advancement).
d. Fewest goals allowed - team with fewest goals allowed will advance.
e. Fewest accumulation of caution points, 1 point for yellow and 2 points for red.
f. Kicks from the mark, aka. Penalty Kicks
These tiebreaker procedures will be applied, in order, to the teams tied in points until one team is selected for advancement. In the event of a tie involving age brackets that contain flights with different numbers of scheduled games, then the same tie breakers are used with the exception that averaging to determine b, c, d, and e will be used.

It appears the team with the 1-1-1 record and 19 points had 1 shut out, and the team with the 2-0-1 and 19 points had 0 shut outs.  So no WTF justified.  Thems the rules.  As I said in my original post on this thread, "don't rely on luck". Maybe MYF's team should have stayed in original AG.  Might have been better competition for FCD Che who won the '04 AG easily it appears. Might have enabled the FCD Red team to play down in Silver where they should have been and given the winner of that division more competition.

winkipop77 wrote:From the clearly posted "Tournament Rules" section on the web site:

9. Tiebreaker system for teams advancing from preliminary games to play-offs will be as follows:
If two or more teams are tied in points after their mini-games are completed, the following tiebreaker procedures will be used to determine the team advancing:
a. Head to Head game results - winner will advance.
b. Most number of “shutouts” - team with most “shutouts” will advance.
c. Goal differential – team with highest goal differential against opponent
will advance (maximum of five (5) goal differential). (Example: A 7-0 game = 5-0 in calculating advancement; a 11-5 game = 10-5 in calculating advancement).
d. Fewest goals allowed - team with fewest goals allowed will advance.
e. Fewest accumulation of caution points, 1 point for yellow and 2 points for red.
f. Kicks from the mark, aka. Penalty Kicks
These tiebreaker procedures will be applied, in order, to the teams tied in points until one team is selected for advancement. In the event of a tie involving age brackets that contain flights with different numbers of scheduled games, then the same tie breakers are used with the exception that averaging to determine b, c, d, and e will be used.

It appears the team with the 1-1-1 record and 19 points had 1 shut out, and the team with the 2-0-1 and 19 points had 0 shut outs.  So no WTF justified.  Thems the rules.  As I said in my original post on this thread, "don't rely on luck". Maybe MYF's team should have stayed in original AG.  Might have been better competition for FCD Che who won the '04 AG easily it appears. Might have enabled the FCD Red team to play down in Silver where they should have been and given the winner of that division more competition.

You couldn't possibly be suggesting that reading the rules prior to the tournament is reasonable could you? Why on earth should anyone be expected to understand the rules under which they agreed to play? It's so much easier to rant and complain about the unfair system after the fact.

To the point about "Thems the rules", that is absolutely correct -- everyone has the same access to the rules, and nothing prevents folks from reading them.  The fact that tiebreakers vary from tournament to tournament is not new either.  All that said, it would be a great enhancement to GotSoccer if they could list the tiebreak rules right on each standings page for that tournament so that everyone would be clear and could avoid such frustrations.  Probably wishful thinking though -- I haven't seen too much feature innovation from that platform in a while now.

Too many people have missed my point. I can care less about my team versus your team versus we should have or they should have.

My post was about the scoring system. Plain and simple. It is what it is and we did what we did.

My point is that this used to be called a 10 point system, and as far as I know, it still is in many parts. But they were dishing out 12 points for some games. That makes some games more valuable than others.

How is a 3-3 tie far better than a 1-1 tie? A tie is a tie regardless of the score.

And how is a 3-3 tie given the same points as a team gets for a win?

My post was about the scoring system and the scoring system only. I don't understand why this devolves into what my team should have done or what time I'm up posting on here. Stay focused folks.

This isn't boxing. It isn't a 10 point must system. It's a 10 point PER TEAM max system.

And to answer your point about a 3-3 tie being better than a 1-1 tie, the system rewards offense more than defense. Pure and simple. More goals = more points.

Win all your games 1-0, you're gonna be behind a team that wins all it's games 3-0.

And you always get at least 8 points for a win unless you've figured out a way to win without scoring at least one goal. 6 points for the win plus 1 point per goal plus 1 for a shutout.

1-0 = 8 points
2-0 = 9 points
3-0 = 10 points
2-1 = 8 points
3-1 = 9 points
3-2 = 9 points

Do no, there's so situation where someone gets as many points for a tie as another team got for a win. Scoring system won't allow it.

Teams get 6 points for a win.

Like I've said before, I do realize you get points for other things which will give you more than 6 points, but it clearly states 6 points for a win. Same as a 3-3 tie. Seems ridiculous to me.

So you count points for goals in a tie but not in a win?

Not very intellectually honest.

moveyourfeet wrote:Teams get 6 points for a win.

Like I've said before, I do realize you get points for other things which will give you more than 6 points, but it clearly states 6 points for a win. Same as a 3-3 tie. Seems ridiculous to me.

With all due respect MYF, by your reasoning... a 4-3 loss is worth the same 3 points to the losing side as a tie which is worth 3 points. In other words, with this system, that most tournaments use, you have to count the goals for it to make sense. If not then we should just go to a system where it's 6 points for a win, 3 points for a tie and 0 points for a loss which is kind of boring, imo.

DragonStryker wrote:So you count points for goals in a tie but not in a win?

Not very intellectually honest.

I've never said that. I have no idea what you are trying to say.

Take the hypothetical results I posted before and put them into any and all other scoring systems and the results fall the same way. But in this system used by this tournament, the results are quite skewed. I just think it's ridiculous.

You're wrong pure and simply. There is no scenario possible where a team that ties a game gets the exact same points as a team that wins a game. Period. It's impossible.

DragonStryker wrote:You're wrong pure and simply. There is no scenario possible where a team that ties a game gets the exact same points as a team that wins a game. Period. It's impossible.

You really need to go back and read. Never did I say that a team gets the exact same points for a tie that they do for a win.

I said that there is a scenario in which you can get 6 points for a tie, which is the same points a team gets for a win (This is a true statement).
I also said, multiple times, that I am aware that the winning team will get extra points for goals scored when they win and possibly a shutout.
But they do get credited with 6 points for a win (not counting bonus points).

I think I have made this perfectly clear throughout this thread. Sorry you are not able to follow along.

moveyourfeet wrote:

How is a 3-3 tie far better than a 1-1 tie? A tie is a tie regardless of the score.

And how is a 3-3 tie given the same points as a team gets for a win?

You are not providing a fair comparison. Your first question is "How is a 3-3 tie far better than a 1-1 tie?" If you want to play it that way, then in either situation, you would only give the teams 3 points and take scoring out of the equation.

However, in your second comparison, "And how is a 3-3 tie given the same points as a team gets for a win?" In the tie situation, you are counting goals and the points for a tie but in the win situation, you are only counting the points for the win and disregarding the goals. How is that even remotely fair?

If you want to apply your first example and take goals out of the equation, in the second scenario, the tie gets 3 points and the win gets 6. Do you want to reward goals for the tie? Then let's give them 6 points and give the winning team 8 points assuming it's a 1-0 game.

For the points to be equal between a tie game and a winning game, the tie game would have to be 5-5 and the winning game a 1-0. Unlikely a tie game goes 5-5 but not impossible.

It strikes me as telling that no one so far agrees with your assessment that this scoring system is somehow unfair.  I've been around North Texas Soccer for more than 10 years now and this so-called "10 point system" has been exactly the same that entire time.  It didn't just change for this tournament.  A 3-3 tie has always been awarded 6 points for each team (3 for the actual tie and 1 for each goal, not to exceed 3).  It is NOT the same points awarded for a win.  In the tie, 3 points were awarded for the tie (not 6).  The teams got 3 extra points for the goals.  In the win scenario, the winner gets 6 points for the win, double the amount of points for the tie, plus 1 for each goal scored, again not to exceed 3.  If the winner does what they need to under the points system and shuts out a team and scores at least 3 goals, they are rewarded with 10 points, almost double what the hypothetical teams in the 3-3 tie get at 6. I have a feeling, though, that no matter how many times people try to explain it to you, you just won't ever get it (or at least will never admit that you do).  As another poster said, "them's the rules" and they always have been no matter how much you try to say otherwise.

For his sake, we should let this thread die.

Apparently, he never heard the quote by Will Rogers, “When you find yourself in a hole, quit digging.”