"The world of sports provides an ideal laboratory for modeling competition because game data are accurate, abundant, and accessible," answers the study in the journal Physical Review E. "Even after a long series of competitions, the best team does not always finish first."
Whoa Nellie. I didn't realize that Phys. Rev. E publishes these things.
The problem, say study authors Eli Ben-Naim and Nick Hengartner of the Los Alamos (N.M.) National Laboratory, is that the baseball season, at a mere 162 games, is too short. Instead, the number of games that would keep a lucky-but-lousy team from dethroning a statistically superior team is 265.
Oh no. No, no, no, no, no! As someone who lives barely 2 blocks from Wrigley Field (the Chicago Cubs baseball home field for those who don't know baseball), the last thing I want is for a longer baseball season - even if it means the possibility of the Cubs finally winning the damn thing in a gazillion years. :)
In any case, I really don't see the point of all this. An underdog, or a team/person that isn't the most talented or the best, have won it all in many sports. It simply is a matter of who performed the best on that particular day. So I'm not sure why baseball should be any different.