2-3-2 or 2-2-1-1-1

Pro Sports • 40 replies • 965 views
hoops23's avatar
hoops23
Posts: 15,696
Jun 19, 2012 8:39pm
GOONx19;1205084 wrote:The LDS round of baseball this year is back to 2-3 again. Horrible format. The higher seed could be in a 2-0 hole before they even get to play at home.
Just retarded. Should be 3-2 with the higher seed opening up at home.
dazedconfused's avatar
dazedconfused
Posts: 2,662
Jun 19, 2012 8:50pm
GOONx19;1205084 wrote:The LDS round of baseball this year is back to 2-3 again. Horrible format. The higher seed could be in a 2-0 hole before they even get to play at home.
that format burned the indians in 96 against the orioles. hated it then and still hate it now. although it seems kind of crazy, i'd rather the team with the better record just host the entire division series (like they do for the college super regionals)
GOONx19's avatar
GOONx19
Posts: 7,147
Jun 19, 2012 8:51pm
Even if the higher seed won two on the road and swept, I'd be pissed as a fan that we only got one home game for the series.
Classyposter58's avatar
Classyposter58
Posts: 6,321
Jun 19, 2012 10:19pm
The 2-3-2 greatly benefits the higher seeded team. If you split games 1 & 2 and only go 1-2 on the road you still have 2 games at home in a row to win. The thing about 2-2-1-1-1 is that the lower seed has a better chance of winning at home (Game 6). Basically Miami has almost no chance to win on their home court
DeyDurkie5's avatar
DeyDurkie5
Posts: 11,324
Jun 20, 2012 12:18am
Classyposter58;1205305 wrote:The 2-3-2 greatly benefits the higher seeded team

Completely disagree. All it takes is the away team to win one of those games, and they are set up to win the whole tourney. 3 straight home games in an atmosphere like the finals trumps 2 home, 3 away, 2 home.
Tiger2003's avatar
Tiger2003
Posts: 15,421
Jun 20, 2012 12:26am
GOONx19;1205104 wrote:Even if the higher seed won two on the road and swept, I'd be pissed as a fan that we only got one home game for the series.

Huh?
wildcats20's avatar
wildcats20
Posts: 27,794
Jun 20, 2012 12:30am
ernest_t_bass;1204716 wrote:If so, that's gay. Not like these franchises can't afford it.
Fairly certain it's not about the money with the travel.
Azubuike24's avatar
Azubuike24
Posts: 15,933
Jun 20, 2012 12:32am
Tiger2003;1205840 wrote:Huh?
He's saying if your team wins the first 2, you only get 1 more home game in that series.

However, it also means you win the series and would get to start another series.

The only people who would care would be the ones raking in $$$. As a fan, I just want to win and a sweep is always a benefit.
GOONx19's avatar
GOONx19
Posts: 7,147
Jun 20, 2012 1:09am
Azubuike24;1205843 wrote:He's saying if your team wins the first 2, you only get 1 more home game in that series.

However, it also means you win the series and would get to start another series.

The only people who would care would be the ones raking in $$$. As a fan, I just want to win and a sweep is always a benefit.
Right, obviously I'd be very happy to be moving on. I just think the whole format is dumb.
wildcats20's avatar
wildcats20
Posts: 27,794
Jun 20, 2012 1:19am
If you have home field/court advantage, the first games in the series should ALWAYS be played at your place.

MLB really fucked it up IMO.


By letting the team who doesn't have home field advantage have the first 2 games, actually gives them home field advantage.

I don't know the stats, but I would assume the home team wins more in baseball than most sports. I'm probably wrong, but who knows...
hoops23's avatar
hoops23
Posts: 15,696
Jun 20, 2012 1:38am
Classyposter58;1205305 wrote:The 2-3-2 greatly benefits the higher seeded team. If you split games 1 & 2 and only go 1-2 on the road you still have 2 games at home in a row to win. The thing about 2-2-1-1-1 is that the lower seed has a better chance of winning at home (Game 6). Basically Miami has almost no chance to win on their home court
So OKC is benefiting from this set-up right now, right?
Rotinaj's avatar
Rotinaj
Posts: 7,699
Jun 20, 2012 8:44am
hoops23;1205881 wrote:So OKC is benefiting from this set-up right now, right?
Of course. GREATLY!
J
JU-ICE
Posts: 259
Jun 20, 2012 1:57pm
[LEFT]http://blog.newsok.com/thunderrumblings/2012/06/16/an-historic-look-at-the-nba-finals-2-3-2-format/

Nuggets on all things NBA Finals in the 2-3-2 format era.[/LEFT]
  • The NBA Finals have been knotted up through two games 12 times since the 2-3-2 format began in 1985. The team that starts the series with home-court advantage has gone on to an 8-4 record in those instances.
  • Since the 2-3-2 format began, only two home teams have swept Games 3, 4 and 5. The 2004 Pistons did it against the Lakers, and the 2006 Heat did it against Dallas.
  • Since the 2-3-2 format began, three road teams have swept Games 3, 4 and 5. The Pistons did it in 1990 over the Blazers, the Bulls did it 1991 over the Lakers and the Lakers did it against the Sixers in 2001.
  • In the 12 times that a Finals series has been knotted at one game apiece, the most common result in the middle three games is for the home team to win Games 4 and 5, which has happened four times. The next most frequent occurrence is for the home team to lose all three games, which has happened three times. The home team, in the middle three games, has won only Game 4 twice, won Games 3 and 4 once, won Games 3 and 5 once and won all three just once.
  • Since the 2-3-2 format began, there have only been four series that have gone seven games.
  • The most common duration of a Finals series in the 2-3-2 era is six games, which has happened 14 times.
  • There have been four sweeps in the Finals under the 2-3-2 format.
  • Five Finals series have lasted just five games under the 2-3-2 format.
  • The winner of Game 3 when a Finals series under the 2-3-2 format is tied at one has gone on to win the championship 11 of 12 times.
Ironman92's avatar
Ironman92
Posts: 49,363
Jun 20, 2012 3:10pm
BR1986FB;1204674 wrote:8-6-7-5-3-0-9

I like.
Ironman92's avatar
Ironman92
Posts: 49,363
Jun 20, 2012 3:11pm
JU-ICE;1206302 wrote:[LEFT]http://blog.newsok.com/thunderrumblings/2012/06/16/an-historic-look-at-the-nba-finals-2-3-2-format/

Nuggets on all things NBA Finals in the 2-3-2 format era.[/LEFT]
  • The NBA Finals have been knotted up through two games 12 times since the 2-3-2 format began in 1985. The team that starts the series with home-court advantage has gone on to an 8-4 record in those instances.
  • Since the 2-3-2 format began, only two home teams have swept Games 3, 4 and 5. The 2004 Pistons did it against the Lakers, and the 2006 Heat did it against Dallas.
  • Since the 2-3-2 format began, three road teams have swept Games 3, 4 and 5. The Pistons did it in 1990 over the Blazers, the Bulls did it 1991 over the Lakers and the Lakers did it against the Sixers in 2001.
  • In the 12 times that a Finals series has been knotted at one game apiece, the most common result in the middle three games is for the home team to win Games 4 and 5, which has happened four times. The next most frequent occurrence is for the home team to lose all three games, which has happened three times. The home team, in the middle three games, has won only Game 4 twice, won Games 3 and 4 once, won Games 3 and 5 once and won all three just once.
  • Since the 2-3-2 format began, there have only been four series that have gone seven games.
  • The most common duration of a Finals series in the 2-3-2 era is six games, which has happened 14 times.
  • There have been four sweeps in the Finals under the 2-3-2 format.
  • Five Finals series have lasted just five games under the 2-3-2 format.
  • The winner of Game 3 when a Finals series under the 2-3-2 format is tied at one has gone on to win the championship 11 of 12 times.

Read it 5 times