Analysing a built-in advantage in asymmetric darts contests using causal machine learning

Daniel Goller

doi:10.1007/s10479-022-04563-0

Abstract

We analyse a sequential contest with two players in darts where one of the contestants enjoys a technical advantage. Using methods from the causal machine learning literature, we analyse the built-in advantage, which is the first-mover having potentially more but never less moves. Our empirical findings suggest that the first-mover has an 8.6% points higher probability to win the match induced by the technical advantage. Contestants with low performance measures and little experience have the highest built-in advantage. With regard to the fairness principle that contestants with equal abilities should have equal winning probabilities, this contest is ex-ante fair in the case of equal built-in advantages for both competitors and a randomized starting right. Nevertheless, the contest design produces unequal probabilities of winning for equally skilled contestants because of asymmetries in the built-in advantage associated with social pressure for contestants competing at home and away.

Highlights

Contest designers put a lot of effort in designing contests in various fields
The average effect for the starting contestants, amounts to 8.65% points higher winning probability for the match. This effect is in line with what we would expect owing to the technical advantage implicit in the contest design
The study discovered an average effect of about 8.6% points higher winning probability induced by the built-in advantage (BIA) in the sequential darts contest with two players

Summary

Introduction

For operational research in sports contests, fairness for the contestants and attractiveness for the spectators are the main restrictions (Arlegi & Dimitrov, 2020; Szymanski, 2003; Wright, 2014). We investigate the fairness of an unbalanced, one match sequential contest with two competitors in the sport of darts. This contest has a built-in advantage (BIA) for the first moving contestant, who has an advantage in potentially more, but never less situations within a match.. We analyse a simple question: Is the two player, sequential contest with BIA a fair contest, or are there specific groups of individuals who are systematically disadvantaged by the contest design? This contest has a built-in advantage (BIA) for the first moving contestant, who has an advantage in potentially more, but never less situations within a match. In this study, we analyse a simple question: Is the two player, sequential contest with BIA a fair contest, or are there specific groups of individuals who are systematically disadvantaged by the contest design?

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion