IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ioebdp/108.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Theoretische Analyse der Strategienwahl unter der Zwei- und Drei-Punkte-Regel im Fußball

Author

Listed:
  • Geyer, Hannah

Abstract

The paper theoretically analyses the effect of the introduction of the three-point-rule on the strategies in a soccer match. Therefore the expectation values for the goal difference at the end of the game under different strategies both for matches between equally strong teams and (more realistically) for matches between teams with varying quality levels are simulated. It can be shown that the rule change in tied games between equally strong teams leads to a more offensive manner of play, while in matches between teams with varying quality levels the weaker team plays in any case more offensive, while the stronger team only plays more offensive if the gap between the quality of the teams is not too big. If one team leads in matches with homogenous teams the leading team now changes later from an offensive manner of play to a defensive manner. In matches with heterogeneous teams with the better team in lead this team changes its manner of play earlier from offense to defence and if the weaker team leads it changes its strategy earlier.

Suggested Citation

  • Geyer, Hannah, 2008. "Theoretische Analyse der Strategienwahl unter der Zwei- und Drei-Punkte-Regel im Fußball," IÖB-Diskussionspapiere 1/08, University of Münster, Institute for Economic Education.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ioebdp:108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/25573/1/55861891X.PDF
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Isabelle Brocas & Juan D. Carrillo, 2004. "Do the “Three-Point Victory†and “Golden Goal†Rules Make Soccer More Exciting?," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 5(2), pages 169-185, May.
    2. Erwin Amann & Ralf Dewenter & Julian Emami Namini, 2006. "The Home-Bias Paradox in Football," IASE Conference Papers 0629, International Association of Sports Economists.
    3. José Correia Guedes & Fernando S. Machado, 2002. "Changing rewards in contests: Has the three-point rule brought more offense to soccer?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 607-630.
    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. Geyer, Hannah, 2008. "Auswechselverhalten im Fußball: Eine theoretische und empirische Analyse," IÖB-Diskussionspapiere 5/08, University of Münster, Institute for Economic Education.
    2. Lee Yoong Hon & Rasyad A. Parinduri, 2016. "Does the Three-Point Rule Make Soccer More Exciting? Evidence From a Regression Discontinuity Design," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 17(4), pages 377-395, May.
    3. Julio del Corral & Juan Prieto-Rodríguez & Rob Simmons, 2010. "The Effect of Incentives on Sabotage: The Case of Spanish Football," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 11(3), pages 243-260, June.
    4. Alexander Dilger & Hannah Geyer, 2009. "Are Three Points for a Win Really Better Than Two?," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 10(3), pages 305-318, June.
    5. Vincenzo Alfano & Lorenzo Cicatiello & Giuseppe Lucio Gaeta & Michele Gallo & Francesca Rotondo, 2021. "Three is a Magic Number: Evidence on the Effects of the Application of the Three-Point Rule in Italy’s Serie A," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(3), pages 329-356, April.
    6. Ralf Dewenter & Julian Emami Namini, 2013. "How to Make Soccer More Attractive? Rewards for a Victory, the Teams' Offensiveness, and the Home Bias," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 14(1), pages 65-86, February.
    7. Dilger, Alexander & Froböse, Gerrit, 2018. "Effects of the three-point rule in German amateur football," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 3/2018, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    8. Giancarlo Moschini, 2010. "Incentives And Outcomes In A Strategic Setting: The 3‐Points‐For‐A‐Win System In Soccer," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(1), pages 65-79, January.
    9. Richard Duhautois & Romain Eyssautier, 2016. "La victoire à trois points dans le football a-t-elle rendu les équipes plus offensives ?," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 67(6), pages 1245-1254.
    10. Ricardo Manuel Santos, 2014. "Optimal Soccer Strategies," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(1), pages 183-200, January.
    11. Peter-J. Jost, 2021. "“The ball is round, the game lasts 90 minutes, everything else is pure theoryâ€," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(1), pages 27-74, January.
    12. Liam J.A. Lenten & Jan Libich & Petr Stehlík, 2013. "Policy Timing and Footballers' Incentives," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 14(6), pages 629-655, December.
    13. Federico Fioravanti & Fernando Tohmé & Fernando Delbianco & Alejandro Neme, 2021. "Effort of rugby teams according to the bonus point system: a theoretical and empirical analysis," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 50(2), pages 447-474, June.
    14. Sylvain Béal & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal & Sylvain Ferrières, 2016. "An axiomatization of the iterated h-index and applications to sport rankings," Working Papers hal-01394818, HAL.
    15. Juan D. Carrillo, 2007. "Penalty Shoot-Outs," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 8(5), pages 505-518, October.
    16. Ravindra Singh & Ajay Dwivedi & Shikha Gupta & Sumanjeet Singh & Seema Singh, 2022. "Elucidating the moderating role of personality traits in probing the linkage between digital entrepreneurship characteristics and perceived opportunities," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 12(1), pages 175-188, December.
    17. Rasyad A Parinduri & Yoong Hon Lee & Kung Ming Tiong, 2019. "The effects of bigger rewards in individual tournaments on efforts and risk taking: evidence from chess," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 71(4), pages 979-995.
    18. Marco Caliendo & Dubravko Radic, 2006. "Ten Do It Better, Do They?: An Empirical Analysis of an Old Football Myth," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 592, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    19. Kjetil K. Haugen, 2008. "Point Score Systems and Competitive Imbalance in Professional Soccer," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 9(2), pages 191-210, April.
    20. Kendall, Graham & Lenten, Liam J.A., 2017. "When sports rules go awry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(2), pages 377-394.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • L83 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Sports; Gambling; Restaurants; Recreation; Tourism

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:zbw:ioebdp:108. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ilmuede.html .

    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.