Chance vs. Skill

[kimkrichbaum2]

I am frustrated with SOM on-line at this point. My frustration is not that I am losing some leagues, I can handle losing. But that it seems like that there is so much randomness and luck, I can't tell when I am truly making good or bad decisions, and when it is my luck. I have been in the playoffs once, and it was by my judgment, and by the common wisdom on this board, as far as I read it, my worst team (it was my first), I had high injury players, a pitching and releif staff not suited to my division, and I made enough moves that my salary cap was pretty far under 80 by the end, yet, I won my division with a pretty decent record. I have other teams which seemed much more intelligently put together that missed the playoffs.
The other fact that contributes to my "luck is king" line of thought, is that when I look at examples of teams that people post here as successes or models at a certain ballpark, I don't find them any better put together than the also-rans, it's seeming pretty random to me.
So one reason for this post is to ask the question of more expereinced managers, How dominant is luck vs. skill in this environment?

The other reason is I have an idea on how to do a rough but revealing test of the luck vs. skill question. If someone posted teams from say 5 auto leagues that have already run, with rosters but not records, and then aome of the better, more expereinced managers that post on this board looked at those teams and tried to guess which teams won their divisions. then we would have a reading of how much skill vs, luck dominates results. If good managers picked 100% of the winners, that would indicate it's almost all skill. and if they picked right about 25% of the time, it would seem the leagues are pure chance. Depending on how you figure, proportionally or straight line, either 50% or 62.5% is the midline. So if mangers were able to pick the winners between 50 and 62.5 % then I would guess luck and skill are about equal factors in outcome. If it was more than skill is a bigger factor, if less than luck is better. There are all kind of imperfections in this, but I think it would tell us something. Does anyone know how to do this study techinically? It would be interesting.

[Terry101]

Posting the teams themselves without the other teams in the division and the league and their ballkparks, well, I don't think that would do much. The same managers are winning- look at the Tour. The winning edges are small and sometimes subtle. Try putting the player settings and the managerial settings on autopilot (in other words don't ever do any adjustments during the season and let HAL run the team and see if that team would ever win a division. The answer is unlikely. Look at the winning managers who have played .520, .530 ball for 20-30 or 100 teams. Thats not luck. This is a continuation of an older post and on that thread there was some statistical evidence that the winning percentage is lower in 06 for experienced managers. Thats probably true. It is getting harder to win for a number of reasons. But, I believe, in the long run say 1000 games, a better manager will play over .500 ball.

[dinsdale]

[i:3a3a018c38]"The winning edges are small and sometimes subtle"[/i:3a3a018c38]

That is exactly right - as more and more managers become smarter about the game it is pretty much impossible to have a clearly superior team. So all teams are nearly equal on talent, the difference comes down to ballparks and matchups. The best managers usually have a great winning pct. at their home ballpark. But it depends so much on the other teams in your division and flat out luck does play a role. I know sometime in the past a group played 2 concurrent seasons with identical teams, some pitching rotation, the even tried to equalize out the injuries. As I recall the results were completely different.

[visick]

I totally agree with the guys above me...to an extent.


You still have only a 50% chance of getting a roll on your card. If you flip a coin 100X, the law of averages says you will get heads 50% of the time and tails the other 50%. But, you may have to flip that coins 1000X to get that result. Sometimes you can get heads 40% of the time or 60% of the time etc...

This cannot be disputed. You can have great players suited for your park, but if you only get 40% of the rolls, which could happen sometimes, you're gonna lose.

I've only won a championship 1X with these cards. This was on a team that I didn't think had a chance at the midway point in the season.
Then I've had teams where they were smoking ALL season, and then get swept in the 1st. round by the WC that had 10-12 fewer wins.

I've got a thread going about Chris Carpenter on the boards. I'm at a loss with this. Next time, I'm going to try and beat him with all righties, since the lefties and switchies I use can't do it.

[geekor]

Even if everything goes right... luck can still kill you.

For example, I had an ATG3 team end last week, tied for the best home record (Griffith, basically a Petco) and had the best run differential in the league. Oh yea, and I was 6 games back in my division, lost the WC by 1 game. Sometimes, not matter how good you build it, luck kills you!! :x

[durantjerry]

I would say to win consistently takes skill. I have a .500+ percentage and a championship in every SOMO game with 200 leagues played. I would say that obviously I have achieved some level of skill in the game. If you keep playing and you fail to make the playoffs one out of every three times, you have a sub-.500 record and don't win titles, you are probably not that good as opposed to just some unlucky soul. In the short run, luck will cost you though. I have only won three finals in fourteen playoff tries in 2006. While not terrible, my success rate in prior years was much higher. Could I have been lucky in earlier years to achieve a much higher percentage of successs than the norm? Probably( I also face tougher opposition more consistently in 2006). One thing I read in a post by that esteemed philosopher, Jeep Driver, is that the luck(and/or Hal miscues) happen to your opponent as well as to yourself, so to blame your problems on Hal or bad luck ignores the fact that the other players are dealing with the same challenges as you are.

[JOELKING]

Just a curious question, does it help by making moves during the season? via free agency?

[durantjerry]

I have won at least two titles over the years(one in 2006) with teams that were floundering until key dumps and auisitions were made. I have also won a few times taking a chance during the season and aquiring a really good player(a title with Pedro in 2006) that someone else dumped even though my team was one of the best already. I usually make a move somewhere from game 81 to game 120(50%-75%). By that time there is significant statistical evidence of needs and problem areas. I usually give the team a lot of rope to hang themselves, but if it looks like my original idea needs some tweeking and I still have a shot, I dump and aquire

[Jerlins]

And you really do have to pay attention to your team(s). I've found myself in 06 with too many teams at once, coming up with a decent team, only to find myself just quickly glancing at them once the season actually begins. I can't help myself, the fun is in the team building. But, during building the team, I've had pitching matchups built into my team, only to forget about what strategy I went into the season with, then looking at the box score only to find Nate Robertson pitching against a MM team in MM, with a team stacked with RH's, OUCH! I sometimes wonder how I even have a plus .500 anymore.

Luck? Surely there is plenty of it. Last week, Kerry Wood pitched 8 and 1/3 innings of 1 run ball at Safeco, against the likes of Floyd, Dunn, Ortiz, and B. Giles. Go figure!! But there's enough skill involved to offset these blips that happen now and then.

[JOELKING]

I think, there alot more luck then skill in this, then again i am not the most expereince player around, only started a few years ago. I once face John smoltz playing in my home park, with the likes of stack lineup of lefties, only thing he does against me one hits me. go figure, i still think its more luck, I cant say if i am lucky or more skilled, either way, i only won one ring and that was back in 2001 , sometimes i feel i put up strong team, and then my patiences runs out quick, now i started to wait abit, same results, anyways.