Making the Rules of Sports Fairer

The rules of many sports are not fair-they do not ensure that equally skilled competitors have the same probability of winning. As an example, the penalty shootout in soccer, wherein a coin toss determines which team kicks first on all five penalty kicks, gives a substantial advantage to the first-kicking team, both in theory and in practice. We show that a so-called Catch-Up Rule for determining the order of kicking would not only make the shootout fairer but is also essentially strategyproof. By contrast, the so-called Standard Rule now used for the tiebreaker in tennis is fair. We briefly consider several other sports, all of which involve scoring a sufficient number of points to win, and show how they could benefit from certain rule changes which would be straightforward to implement

Making the Rules of Sports Fairer

The rules of many sports are not fair—they do not ensure that equally skilled competitors have the same probability of winning. As an example, the penalty shootout in soccer, wherein a coin toss determines which team kicks first on all five penalty kicks, gives a substantial advantage to the first-kicking team, both in theory and practice. We show that a so-called Catch-Up Rule for determining the order of kicking would not only make the shootout fairer but also is essentially strategyproof. By contrast, the so-called Standard Rule now used for the tiebreaker in tennis is fair. We briefly consider several other sports, all of which involve scoring a sufficient number of points to win, and show how they could benefit from certain rule changes, which would be straightforward to implement

Making the Rules of Sports Fairer

The rules of many sports are not fair—they do not ensure that equally skilled competitors have the same probability of winning. As an example, the penalty shootout in soccer, wherein a coin toss determines which team kicks first on all five penalty kicks, gives a substantial advantage to the first-kicking team, both in theory and practice. We show that a so-called Catch-Up Rule for determining the order of kicking would not only make the shootout fairer but also is essentially strategyproof. By contrast, the so-called Standard Rule now used for the tiebreaker in tennis is fair. We briefly consider several other sports, all of which involve scoring a sufficient number of points to win, and show how they could benefit from certain rule changes, which would be straightforward to implement

A comprehensive theoretical analysis of soccer penalty shootout designs

The standard rule of soccer penalty shootouts has received serious criticism due to its bias towards the team kicking the first penalty in each round. Therefore, the rule-making body of the sport has decided in 2017 to try alternative designs. This paper offers an extensive overview of eight penalty shootout mechanisms, one of them first introduced here. Their fairness is analysed under three possible mathematical models of psychological pressure. We also discuss the probability of reaching the sudden death stage, as well as the complexity and strategy-proofness of the rules. In the case of stationary scoring probabilities considered here, it remains sufficient to use static rules in order to improve fairness. However, it is worth compensating the second-mover by making it first-mover in the sudden death stage. Our work has the potential to impact decision-makers who can save valuable resources by choosing only theoretically competitive policy options for field experiments.Comment: 23 pages, 3 figures, 4 table

Fair Use and the Fairer Sex: Gender, Feminism, and Copyright Law

Copyright laws are written and enforced to help certain groups of people assert and retain control over the resources generated by creative productivity. Because those people are predominantly male, the copyright infrastructure plays a role, largely unexamined by legal scholars, in helping to sustain the material and economic inequality between women and men. This essay considers some of the ways in which gender issues and copyright laws intersect, proposes a feminist critique of the copyright legal regime which advocates low levels of copyright protections, and asserts the importance of considering the social and economic disparities between women and men when evaluating the impacts and performance of intellectual property laws

Principles of Stakes Fairness in Sport

Fairness in sport is not just about assigning the top prizes to the worthiest competitors. It is also about the way the prize structure itself is organised. For many sporting competitions, although it may be acceptable for winners to receive more than losers, it can seem unfair for winners to take everything and for losers to get nothing. Yet this insight leaves unanswered some difficult questions about what stakes fairness requires and which principles of stakes fairness are appropriate for particular competitions. In this article I specify a range of different principles of stakes fairness (ten in total) that could regulate sporting competitions. I also put forward a theoretical method for pairing up appropriate principles of stakes fairness with given sporting competitions. Specifically, I argue that the underlying rationales for holding sporting competitions can provide useful guides for identifying appropriate principles of stakes fairness. I then seek to clarify and work through some of the implications of this method for a sample of real world controversies over sporting prize structures. I also attempt to refine the method in response to two possible objections from indeterminacy and relativism. Finally, I compare and contrast my conclusions with more general philosophical debates about justice

Spartan Daily, May 2, 1939

Volume 27, Issue 129https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/spartandaily/2919/thumbnail.jp