Originally Posted by islandtennis
On another note, round robins have to be complete and not partial. With this rule team A and B play the exact same teams the exact same number of times. This is one reason why head to head has less relevance. In the NFL, two teams tied for their division have played different teams, therefore head to head has more significance.
Actually in our leagues, round robins are not always complete.
In certain cases like if there is 8 teams, we play everyone once, but then we split the division up into 2 4 team halfs and you play the other 3 teams in your "half" another time around. (so that equals 10 matches)
But they made a rule that if you end up in the bottom (loser's) half of the flight, you CAN not win your division or go onto the playoffs no matter what crazy math anomaly would occur so I suppose that still amounts to your 4 eligible contenders playing the same exact teams the same number of times.
Otherwise I agree with you, individual wins should be more important then head to head because of your reasoning.
Besides that though, these "individual wins" are ACTUAL TENNIS MATCHES, they are not merely points like in a baseball game, or touchdowns or baskets or anything.... So they should be a lot more important, at the least they should be the 2nd thing you'd consider.
(if you want to do team wins first at all which in some cases like a playoff make sense, but in some cases like a local league it's a matter of preference)