Originally Posted by spot
I don't think that simulation would be any more valuable than running a tournament of paper, rock scissors. There is no strategy that would beat all others, only ones that would work best against what other people choose to do. This is a classic game theory problem.
If all the teams are equal, you are right, over the long haul things will average out. But the issue being debated is the effect of playing only one's stronger players vs trying to get playing time for all players on the roster, even the weaker ones. And since you seem to have given a roster of 15, this question seems pertinent.
I certainly wouldn't expect a strategy that aims to get equal playing time to work the best against one that runs out the 8 strongest players all the time, regardless of what courts are played. The question is, how much of a deficit does this put the "equal playing time" team at and does it affect team won/lost or just individual court won/lost? This is the simulation that would be interesting to look at.