IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/jqsprt/v20y2024i2p67-86n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Opponent choice in tournaments: winning and shirking

Author

Listed:
  • Hall Nicholas G.

    (Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA)

  • Liu Zhixin

    (College of Business, University of Michigan, Dearborn, USA)

Abstract

We propose an alternative design for tournaments that use a preliminary stage, followed by several rounds of single elimination play. The conventional “bracket” design of these tournaments suffers from several deficiencies. Specifically, various reasonable performance criteria for the tournament are not satisfied, there is an unnecessary element of luck in the matchups of players, and there are situations where players have an incentive to shirk. To address all these issues, we allow higher ranked players at the single elimination stage to choose their next opponent sequentially at each round. We allow each player’s ranking either to remain static, or to improve by beating a higher ranked player (Guyon, J. 2022. “Choose your opponent”: a new knockout design for hybrid tournaments. J. Sports Anal. 8: 9–29). Using data from 2215 men’s professional tennis tournaments from 1991 to 2017, we demonstrate the reasonableness of the results obtained. We also perform sensitivity analysis for the effect of increasing irregularity in the pairwise win probability matrix on three traditional performance measures. Finally, we consider strategic shirking behavior at both the individual and group levels, and show how our opponent choice design can mitigate such behavior. Overall, the opponent choice design provides higher probabilities that the best player wins and also that the two best players meet, and reduces shirking, compared to the conventional bracket design.

Suggested Citation

  • Hall Nicholas G. & Liu Zhixin, 2024. "Opponent choice in tournaments: winning and shirking," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 67-86, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:20:y:2024:i:2:p:67-86:n:4
    DOI: 10.1515/jqas-2023-0030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/jqas-2023-0030
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/jqas-2023-0030?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vong, Allen I.K., 2017. "Strategic manipulation in tournament games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 562-567.
    2. Jennifer Brown & Dylan B. Minor, 2014. "Selecting the Best? Spillover and Shadows in Elimination Tournaments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 3087-3102, December.
    3. Jeff Horen & Raymond Riezman, 1985. "Comparing Draws for Single Elimination Tournaments," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 249-262, April.
    4. Christian Groh & Benny Moldovanu & Aner Sela & Uwe Sunde, 2012. "Optimal seedings in elimination tournaments," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 49(1), pages 59-80, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arlegi, Ritxar & Dimitrov, Dinko, 2020. "Fair elimination-type competitions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(2), pages 528-535.
    2. Csató, László, 2023. "How to avoid uncompetitive games? The importance of tie-breaking rules," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(3), pages 1260-1269.
    3. Stracke, Rudi & Sunde, Uwe, 2014. "Dynamic Incentive Effects of Heterogeneity in Multi-Stage Promotion Contests," IZA Discussion Papers 8368, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Sela, Aner, 2022. "Effort allocations in elimination tournaments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    5. Ritxar Arlegi & Dinko Dimitrov, 2023. "League competitions and fairness," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Netanel Nissim & Aner Sela, 2020. "The Third Place Game," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 21(1), pages 64-86, January.
    7. Sela, Aner, 2023. "Two-stage elimination games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    8. László Csató, 2020. "Optimal Tournament Design: Lessons From the Men’s Handball Champions League," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 21(8), pages 848-868, December.
    9. Rudi Stracke & Wolfgang Höchtl & Rudolf Kerschbamer & Uwe Sunde, 2015. "Incentives and Selection in Promotion Contests: Is It Possible to Kill Two Birds with One Stone?," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(5), pages 275-285, July.
    10. Guajardo, Mario & Krumer, Alex, 2023. "Format and schedule proposals for a FIFA World Cup with 12 four-team groups," Discussion Papers 2023/2, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    11. Jun Zhang, 2008. "Simultaneous Signaling In Elimination Contests," Working Paper 1184, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    12. Deck, Cary & Kimbrough, Erik O., 2015. "Single- and double-elimination all-pay tournaments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 416-429.
    13. Hörtnagl-Pozzo, Tanja & Kerschbamer, Rudolf & Oexl, Regine & Stracke, Rudi & Sunde, Uwe, 2023. "Heterogeneity in rent-seeking contests with multiple stages: Theory and experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    14. Chen Cohen & Ishay Rabi & Aner Sela, 2023. "Optimal seedings in interdependent contests," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 328(2), pages 1263-1285, September.
    15. Dmitry Dagaev & Alex Suzdaltsev, 2018. "Competitive intensity and quality maximizing seedings in knock-out tournaments," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 170-188, January.
    16. Krumer, Alex & Megidish, Reut & Sela, Aner, 2023. "Strategic manipulations in round-robin tournaments," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 50-57.
    17. Lackner, Mario & Stracke, Rudi & Sunde, Uwe & Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf, 2020. "Are competitors forward looking in strategic interactions? Field evidence from multistage tournaments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 544-565.
    18. Laica, Christoph & Lauber, Arne & Sahm, Marco, 2021. "Sequential round-robin tournaments with multiple prizes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 421-448.
    19. Ritxar Arlegi & Institute for Advanced Research in Business and Economics (INARBE) & Dinko Dimitrov, 2018. "Fair Competition Design," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 1803, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    20. Kovenock, Dan & Konrad, Kai A., 2006. "Multi-Stage Contests with Stochastic Ability," CEPR Discussion Papers 5844, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:20:y:2024:i:2:p:67-86:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.