This paper challenges the traditional seeding regime of round-robin tournaments that aims to create balanced groups. In particular, the design of the most prestigious European men’s handball club competition is compared to two alternative formats with equally strong groups via simulations. We find that it is possible to increase the quality of all matches played together with raising the uncertainty of outcome, essentially without sacrificing fairness. Our results have useful implications for the governing bodies of major sports.
BorlandJ.MacDonaldR. (2003). Demand for sport. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19(4), 478–502.
4.
BramsS. J.IsmailM. S. (2018). Making the rules of sports fairer. SIAM Review, 60(1), 181–202.
5.
CeaS.DuránG.GuajardoM.SauréD.SiebertJ.ZamoranoG. (2020). An analytics approach to the FIFA ranking procedure and the World Cup final draw. Annals of Operations Research, 286(1–2), 119–146.
6.
CoronaF.ForrestD.TenaJ. D.WiperM. (2019). Bayesian forecasting of UEFA Champions League under alternative seeding regimes. International Journal of Forecasting, 35(2), 722–732.
7.
CsatóL. (2019a). A simulation comparison of tournament designs for the World Men’s Handball Championships. International Transactions in Operational Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.12691
8.
CsatóL. (2019b). UEFA Champions League entry has not satisfied strategyproofness in three seasons. Journal of Sports Economics, 20(7), 975–981.
9.
CsatóL. (2020a). Fair tournament design: A flaw of the UEFA Euro 2020 qualification [Manuscript]. arXiv. 1905.03325.
10.
CsatóL. (2020b). The UEFA Champions League seeding is not strategy-proof since the 2015/16 season. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03637-1
11.
DagaevD.RudyakV. (2019). Seeding the UEFA Champions League participants: Evaluation of the reform. Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, 15(2), 129–140.
12.
DagaevD.SoninK. (2018). Winning by losing: Incentive incompatibility in multiple qualifiers. Journal of Sports Economics, 19(8), 1122–1146.
13.
DagaevD.SuzdaltsevA. (2018). Competitive intensity and quality maximizing seedings in knock-out tournaments. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, 35(1), 170–188.
14.
DixonM. J.ColesS. G. (1997). Modelling association football scores and inefficiencies in the football betting market. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 46(2), 265–280.
15.
DumanganeM.RosatiN.VolossovitchA. (2009). Departure from independence and stationarity in a handball match. Journal of Applied Statistics, 36(7), 723–741.
ForrestD.SimmonsR. (2002). Outcome uncertainty and attendance demand in sport: The case of English soccer. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician), 51(2), 229–241.
24.
GoossensD. R.BeliënJ.SpieksmaF. C. R. (2012). Comparing league formats with respect to match importance in Belgian football. Annals of Operations Research, 194(1), 223–240.
GrollA.HeinerJ.SchaubergerG.UhrmeisterJ. (2020). Prediction of the 2019 IHF World Men’s Handball Championship—An underdispersed sparse count data regression model. Journal of Sports Analytics. https://doi.org/10.3233/JSA-200384
27.
GuyonJ. (2015). Rethinking the FIFA World Cup TM final draw. Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, 11(3), 169–182.
28.
GuyonJ. (2018). What a fairer 24 team UEFA Euro could look like. Journal of Sports Analytics, 4(4), 297–317.
29.
HwangF. K. (1982). New concepts in seeding knockout tournaments. The American Mathematical Monthly, 89(4), 235–239.
30.
KarpovA. (2016). A new knockout tournament seeding method and its axiomatic justification. Operations Research Letters, 44(6), 706–711.
31.
KarpovA. (2018). Generalized knockout tournament seedings. International Journal of Computer Science in Sport, 17(2), 113–127.
32.
KoningR. H.KoolhaasM.RenesG.RidderG. (2003). A simulation model for football championships. European Journal of Operational Research, 148(2), 268–276.
33.
KrumerA. (2020). Testing the effect of kick-off time in the UEFA Europa League. European Sport Management Quarterly, 20(2), 225–238.
34.
KrumerA.LechnerM. (2017). First in first win: Evidence on schedule effects in round-robin tournaments in mega-events. European Economic Review, 100, 412–427.
35.
KrumerA.MegidishR.SelaA. (2017a). First-mover advantage in round-robin tournaments. Social Choice and Welfare, 48(3), 633–658.
36.
KrumerA.MegidishR.SelaA. (2017b). Round-robin tournaments with a dominant player. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 119(4), 1167–1200.
37.
KrumerA.MegidishR.SelaA. (2020). The optimal design of round-robin tournaments with three players. Journal of Scheduling, 23(3), 379–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10951-019-00624-8
38.
Lago-PeñasC.GómezA. M.ViañoJ.González-GarcaI.de Los á Fernández-VillarinoM. (2013). Home advantage in elite handball: The impact of the quality of opposition on team performance. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 13(3), 724–733.
39.
LalienaP.LópezF. J. (2019). Fair draws for group rounds in sport tournaments. International Transactions in Operational Research, 26(2), 439–457.
40.
LasekJ.GagolewskiM. (2018). The efficacy of league formats in ranking teams. Statistical Modelling, 18(5-6), 411–435.
41.
MaherM. J. (1982). Modelling association football scores. Statistica Neerlandica, 36(3), 109–118.
42.
MarchandÉ. (2002). On the comparison between standard and random knockout tournaments. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician), 51(2), 169–178.
43.
McGarryT.SchutzR. W. (1997). Efficacy of traditional sport tournament structures. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 48(1), 65–74.
44.
MeletakosP.BayiosI. (2010). General trends in European men’s handball: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 10(3), 221–228.
45.
MendonçaD.RaghavachariM. (2000). Comparing the efficacy of ranking methods for multiple round-robin tournaments. European Journal of Operational Research, 123(3), 593–605.
46.
Palacios-HuertaI. (2012). Tournaments, fairness and the Prouhet-Thue-Morse sequence. Economic Inquiry, 50(3), 848–849.
47.
PaulyM. (2014). Can strategizing in round-robin subtournaments be avoided?Social Choice and Welfare, 43(1), 29–46.
48.
RyvkinD. (2010). The selection efficiency of tournaments. European Journal of Operational Research, 206(3), 667–675.
49.
SahmM. (2019). Are sequential round-robin tournaments discriminatory?Journal of Public Economic Theory, 21(1), 44–61.
50.
ScarfP. A.YusofM. M. (2011). A numerical study of tournament structure and seeding policy for the soccer World Cup Finals. Statistica Neerlandica, 65(1), 43–57.
51.
ScarfP.YusofM. M.BilbaoM. (2009). A numerical study of designs for sporting contests. European Journal of Operational Research, 198(1), 190–198.
52.
SchwenkA. J. (2000). What is the correct way to seed a knockout tournament?The American Mathematical Monthly, 107(2), 140–150.
53.
SzymanskiS. (2003). The economic design of sporting contests. Journal of Economic Literature, 41(4), 1137–1187.
54.
TutzG.SchaubergerG. (2015). Extended ordered paired comparison models with application to football data from German Bundesliga. AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, 99(2), 209–227.
55.
VongA. I. K. (2017). Strategic manipulation in tournament games. Games and Economic Behavior, 102, 562–567.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
