WBC Pool B tie breakers?

[RedRamage]

Later today 2-1 Mexico hosts 3-0 Italy. If Mexico win then we'll have three teams at 3-1:

Itally, who only lost to the Mexico.
Mexico, who only lost to USA.
USA, who only lost to Italy.

Anyone know what the tie breaker rules are then?

On a side note the WBC got the final pool games scheduled nicely for the most part.
Pool A's final game decides between Cuba and Canada will decide which of those teams advances, as well as which team is the pool winner and runner up.
Pool B's final game, as discussed will decide then same.
Pool C's final game was meaningless.
Pool D's final game between the DR and Venezuela will determine the winner vs. runner up.

[RedRamage]

So browsing youtube and I think found my answer. Unfortunately it's kinda complex but it seems it boils down to runs allowed divided by outs. Turns out a very similar situations is what played out in pool C for determining second place. 

This video does a REALLY good job of explain it so I highly recommend watching it a moment, then look at my numbers below.

 

So, if I'm doing my math right (and that's a HUGE if!) then:

Mexico - 0.101 (7 runs allowed over 69 innings.)
USA - 0.157 (17 runs over 108 innings)
Italy - 0.123 (10 runs over 81 innings)

So, if Italy wins, then USA is runner up and advances because USA beat Mexico head-to-head. But, if Mexico wins then it goes to the runs allow quotient, and if I'm understanding correctly things could get very interesting. If it's a super high scoring game, then that helps the US, but if it's low... particularly if Italy doesn't score a lot, then Mexico would win the first tie break and they'd be Pool B champs.

At this point I think they start over with the tie-breaker rules... that is they'll compare USA and Italy and the first tie breaker is head-to-head... that means USA it out.

So, we should be rooting for Italy tonight I guess... or at the very least if Mexico wins we want it to be a shoot out with lots and lots of scoring.

 

[Edman85]

I've got it in a spreadsheet, but it changes in extra innings.

[Edman85]

This only applies to a 9 inning game. Extra innings changes it.

[RedRamage]

Sweet @Edman85! I was thinking about fumbling around with this but wasn't sure if I'd get all the math right.

[Hongbit]

28 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

This only applies to a 9 inning game. Extra innings changes it.

Do you have any unread Twitter DM’s yesterday from a @USADerosa?

[RedRamage]

Column 1, Row 0... Need more runs!

[Hongbit]

Jon Berti from Troy HS helps out his birth country with a big homer 

[GalagaGuy]

Well that was easy, thanks Italy.

 

Edited Thursday at 12:27 AM by GalagaGuy

[RedRamage]

Now the only real danger is extended extra innings with low scoring. Seems unlikely.

[Sports_Freak]

So an Italy blowout and US advances?

[RedRamage]

If Italy wins, even if it's 15-14, the US advances. If Mexico wins, then it gets complicated.

[RedRamage]

Mexico loads the bases in the bottom of the 8th, but Italy gets out without allowing any runs. On to the 9th. At this point it would be nearly impossible for the US not to advance. It would require an amazing top of the 9th for Mexico to get back into the game. But even if that happened that helps the US because a high scoring game hurts both teams runs allowed quotient. Mexico would need to score a bunch AND it would need to go into extra innings AND it would need a LOT of extra innings AND Mexico would need to win for the US to be eliminated.

 

[GalagaGuy]

USA USA USA 🇺🇸

[casimir]

It’s baseball.  I’m used to MLB teams generally finish with records such that every team basically wins 2 out of 5 games or 3 out of 5 games or somewhere in between.  The margins on any daily game over a long period are thin.  So, look, all credit to Italy, they won the game.  But this tournament is such a small sample of what we’re used to as MLB fans.  I sometimes don’t know how to take an upset like this.

And then the other angle is how each game is played.  We don’t need to go any further than the pitching.  It’s handled completely differently and we al understand why that is.

I’ll admit my interest in this has grown with each tournament.  Sure, why not, it’s early March and I’m on withdrawal from baseball.  And the crowds, my goodness, the crowds for some of these games.  That’s really fun to see.  Sure, that buzz is tough to generate for lots of any random MLB game.  It’s apples and shoelaces.  But that’s one benefit to this shorter season tourney.

[Tiger337]

1 hour ago, casimir said:

It’s baseball.  I’m used to MLB teams generally finish with records such that every team basically wins 2 out of 5 games or 3 out of 5 games or somewhere in between.  The margins on any daily game over a long period are thin.  So, look, all credit to Italy, they won the game.  But this tournament is such a small sample of what we’re used to as MLB fans.  I sometimes don’t know how to take an upset like this.

And then the other angle is how each game is played.  We don’t need to go any further than the pitching.  It’s handled completely differently and we al understand why that is.

I’ll admit my interest in this has grown with each tournament.  Sure, why not, it’s early March and I’m on withdrawal from baseball.  And the crowds, my goodness, the crowds for some of these games.  That’s really fun to see.  Sure, that buzz is tough to generate for lots of any random MLB game.  It’s apples and shoelaces.  But that’s one benefit to this shorter season tourney.

The WBC is a way for fans to see international players who they would not otherwise see, but I can't take the competition seriously.  The primary goal of the Major League players is to prepare for the regular seaslon.  Even though some of them get excited about the WBC, I don't believe most of them are at peak performance in these games.  This is not the World Cup of baseball.  

[oblong]

I'm not interested at all in the WBC this time of year especially.  It'd be different if it were in the off season.  But it's just replacing spring training games.   It's not the olympics. 

[casimir]

2 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

The WBC is a way for fans to see international players who they would not otherwise see, but I can't take the competition seriously.  The primary goal of the Major League players is to prepare for the regular seaslon.  Even though some of them get excited about the WBC, I don't believe most of them are at peak performance in these games.  This is not the World Cup of baseball.  

Oh, please don't misunderstand, I only look at this as entertainment.  I don't consider this an end all be all as far as which country has the best baseball player.

[Tiger337]

46 minutes ago, casimir said:

Oh, please don't misunderstand, I only look at this as entertainment.  I don't consider this an end all be all as far as which country has the best baseball player.

yes, I understood

[chasfh]

I like the WBC, full stop

[RedRamage]

On 3/13/2026 at 9:32 AM, oblong said:

It's not the olympics. 

Funny you would word it that way because I was just thinking that the WBC is pretty much like the Olympics in terms of how I following it.

I honestly don't follow most of the sports played in the Olympics. I couldn't tell you who the top ranked downhill skiers are or the top curlers or long jumpers or gymnasts. I would never really care about results of a rowing competition or speed skating match normally. But when it comes to the Olympics I suddenly become mildly interested. I DO care if the US is winning these events. I DO care about the results. I may even tune in to watch some of the events if the US is involved and going deep into the contests.

And this is exactly how I'm following the WBC: Oh, the US played last night? Did they win? Are they going to advance to the next round? Oh, the US is in the semi-finals? Well, I don't have anything else major to do, maybe I'll turn the game on for a bit.

And while watching the game last night and being amazed as Witt Jr. defense and being able to cheer for it I think I realized where the enjoyment is coming from: This is an All-Star tournament. Now I know most of you just went: "Yeah, duh! Took you that long to figure it out?" But stay with me here: For those older folk like me, remember the All-Star Games of yesteryear? Remember when there was some serious pride in those games and the stars played all out for the AL or the NL to win? Remember when you might have actually cared who won beyond just "Well I'm a fan of an AL team so I guess I'd prefer the AL to win..." I may not have always watched the All-Star Game back then, but I did tune in if I had nothing better to do, and I certainly cared who won and actively rooted for the AL.

This what the WBC feels like to me. It's an All-Star Game but with players actually trying hard to win and being upset if they don't. And instead of it just being one game it's a tournament. I can enjoy that.

[Biff Mayhem]

So the US can get Italy or Venezuela. Part of me would like to see a rematch with Italy because it would be the revenge game. Venezuela has more brand recognition and would probably be the more competitive game. 
 

So, do I want better baseball or “the story”. I think the story would be over relatively quickly and I could go to bed on time. 

[casimir]

3 hours ago, Biff Mayhem said:

So the US can get Italy or Venezuela. Part of me would like to see a rematch with Italy because it would be the revenge game. Venezuela has more brand recognition and would probably be the more competitive game. 
 

So, do I want better baseball or “the story”. I think the story would be over relatively quickly and I could go to bed on time. 

What’s interesting is how the schedule plays out.  This early in the year, I would think a day off in between games would be an advantage.  Italy won the pool, but it places them into the semifinal with the final played the very next day.   USA loses the pool, but it placed them into the semifinal with a day off between that game and the final game.

[Shelton]

49 minutes ago, casimir said:

What’s interesting is how the schedule plays out.  This early in the year, I would think a day off in between games would be an advantage.  Italy won the pool, but it places them into the semifinal with the final played the very next day.   USA loses the pool, but it placed them into the semifinal with a day off between that game and the final game.

The schedule for this is pretty dumb. It will never happen this way, but I would suggest going away from the silly pool play for the teams we know are the best. We saw how teams didn’t really take it seriously. 
 

If they insist on doing it, I would have it every four years, in between the Olympics, and I would have 4-5 teams as automatic qualifiers. We don’t need the USA and DR teams to go through qualifying. Fill out the rest of knockout round with qualification games that happen in the spring for the lesser teams. Then replace all star week every four years with a week-long double-elimination tournament similar to the college World Series. 
 

the qualifying rounds could also be played at the end of the season as a complement to playoff games. People already don’t pay much attention to the smaller/lesser teams.

[casimir]

26 minutes ago, Shelton said:

The schedule for this is pretty dumb. It will never happen this way, but I would suggest going away from the silly pool play for the teams we know are the best. We saw how teams didn’t really take it seriously. 
 

If they insist on doing it, I would have it every four years, in between the Olympics, and I would have 4-5 teams as automatic qualifiers. We don’t need the USA and DR teams to go through qualifying. Fill out the rest of knockout round with qualification games that happen in the spring for the lesser teams. Then replace all star week every four years with a week-long double-elimination tournament similar to the college World Series. 
 

the qualifying rounds could also be played at the end of the season as a complement to playoff games. People already don’t pay much attention to the smaller/lesser teams.

Some talking head mentioned baseball should somewhat copy the NHL’s Four Nations tournament.  I’m not so sure that works quite as well for baseball.

Honestly I don’t know how you handle an international baseball tournament.  Maybe I’m just too used to a daily MLB schedule.  But what works for basketball and hockey in the Olympics (or Fpur Nations) is the actual scheduling of the tournament.  Neither of those sports is everyday, players are used to game day and then a day off or two.  It’s not out of the realm that pro leagues have back to backs, but it certainly isn’ the norm like baseball.

Olympic basketball occurs outside of the pro season, so it’s not necessary to stop the NBA.  Olympic hockey has so many NHL players playing for home nations that the NHL taking a break is necessary.  I suppose that might actually line up with baseball, I don’t know.  But then does MLB shorten the regular season by a couple of weeks in years that this occurs?  Would MLB owners be willing to forfeit scaled back gates and TV money because of this?