scholarly journals When neither team wants to win: A flaw of recent UEFA qualification rules

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 526-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
László Csató
Keyword(s):  
Dominant Strategy ◽  
Football Match ◽  
Strategy Proof ◽  
Incentive Incompatibility ◽  
Dropping Points

Tanking, the act of deliberately dropping points or losing a game in order to gain some other advantage, is usually seen as being against the spirit of sports. It can be even more serious if playing a draw is a (weakly) dominant strategy for both teams in a match, since this may lead to collusion. We show that such a situation occurred in a particular football match. As our generalisation reveals, the root of the problem resides in the incentive incompatibility of certain UEFA qualification rules. The governing bodies of major sports should choose strategy-proof tournament designs because of several reasons. First, they may lead to the elimination of a third, innocent team. Second, incentive incompatible rules may discourage both teams from scoring goals, and the players could be interested in improving other match statistics than the number of goals.

scholarly journals Obviously Strategy-Proof Mechanisms

2017 ◽  
Vol 107 (11) ◽  
pp. 3257-3287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shengwu Li
Keyword(s):  
Dominant Strategy ◽  
Choice Rule ◽  
Social Planner ◽  
Dominant Strategies ◽  
Behavioral Interpretation ◽  
Information Set ◽  
Strategy Proof ◽  
Better Than

A strategy is obviously dominant if, for any deviation, at any information set where both strategies first diverge, the best outcome under the deviation is no better than the worst outcome under the dominant strategy. A mechanism is obviously strategy-proof (OSP) if it has an equilibrium in obviously dominant strategies. This has a behavioral interpretation: a strategy is obviously dominant if and only if a cognitively limited agent can recognize it as weakly dominant. It also has a classical interpretation: a choice rule is OSP-implementable if and only if it can be carried out by a social planner under a particular regime of partial commitment. (JEL D11, D44, D82)

scholarly journals Strategy-Proof Compromises

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Postl
Keyword(s):  
Decision Rules ◽  
Dominant Strategy ◽  
Strategy Implementation ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Sufficient Condition ◽  
Necessary And Sufficient Condition ◽  
Ex Post ◽  
Strategy Proof ◽  
Necessary And Sufficient ◽  
Dominant Strategy Implementation

We study strategy-proof decision rules in the variant of the canonical public good model proposed by Borgers and Postl (2009). In this setup, we fully characterize the set of budget-balanced strategy-proof deterministic mechanisms, which are simple threshold rules. For smooth probabilistic mechanisms, we provide a necessary and sufficient condition for dominant strategy implementation. When allowing for discontinuities in the mechanism, our necessary condition remains valid, but additional conditions must hold for sufficiency. We also show that, among ex post efficient decision rules, only dictatorial ones are strategy-proof. While familiar in spirit, this result is not the consequence of any known result in the literature.

Pembelajaran Inovatif Ipa Di Sd/Mi Berorientasi Konstruktivistik (Contextual Teaching And Learning)

AKADEMIKA ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-229
Author(s):  
Elya Umi Hanik
Keyword(s):  
Elementary Schools ◽  
Learning Process ◽  
Real World ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Dominant Strategy ◽  
Learning Science ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Natural Phenomena ◽  
Full Knowledge ◽  
Contextual Teaching

This article discusses about the Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) as an innovation of learning science in elementary schools. In fact, the practical implementation of learning is still focused on the teacher as the main actor in which instruction is the dominant strategy in the learning process. Basically CTL is a concept of learning that helps educators link between what is taught with real-world situations of students and encourages them to make connections between the knowledge possessed and implemented in their lives. The concept of CTL applied in science teaching course could have implications, especially in learning to understand the natural phenomena that are not only conceptual. In consequence, students can receive full knowledge built through real experiences.

TURN TAKING STRATEGIES IN POLITICAL DEBATES

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 56-63
Author(s):  
Desi Dwi Natalia ◽  
Fajar Subekti ◽  
Ni Ketut Mirahayuni
Keyword(s):  
Dominant Strategy ◽  
Political Debates ◽  
Communication Mechanism ◽  
Turn Taking ◽  
Youtube Videos ◽  
Presidential Debate ◽  
Descriptive Qualitative

This article reports on two separate studies—Natalia (2019) and Subekti (2019)—on  communication mechanism in political debates. Specifically these studies focus on turn taking strategies adopted in political debates by political figures during their campaign for presidency or in dealing with specific issues. Both studies adopted Stenstrom’s (1994) classification of turn taking strategies which include three main strategies: taking the turn, holding the turn, and yielding the turn, each of which was further specified into more specific strategies. The data were two Youtube videos: first, Trump and Clinton First Presidential Debate 2016 (36 minutes 22 seconds [Natalia, 2019]) and second, BBC World Debate “Why Poverty”November 30,2012 (47 minutes 16 seconds, [Subekti, 2019]). Employing descriptive qualitative, with the aim of analyzing turn taking strategies adopted in the debates, both studies found interesting points: first, Stenstrom’s three strategies appeared in the debates; second, taking the turn strategy was the dominant strategy, followed by holding the turn strategy and the least used one was yielding to turn; and third, interruption which was a specific type of taking the turn strategy seems to be most often used in the debater’s attempt to maintain the turn and present their points and thus dominate the debate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document