What’s the preferable way to win a 2-1 series?

[RavensNOsGuy]

Guess I try to look at the bigger picture, if you look at each series as a whole, if you are better in the +/- column at the end compared to the beginning, then it’s a W overall. We’ve been doing that a lot the last couple of seasons.

[dtk9119]

Was torn between 1 and 2, but chose 2 bc its better to have momentum going into the next series. That said, I can also see the argument of wanting a chance to sweep too.

[Aristotelian]

31 minutes ago, Malike said:

It's really not. Going into any series if you lose the first game, you have no shot at a sweep, so if you win the last two that's cool. If you win the first and lose the 2nd there is pressure of a rubber match game, if you win the first two, you always had a chance at a sweep, it's better to have that chance than not to, in my opinion. 

Lol, but we're talking about after the fact when you have lost the third game. At that point you no longer have a chance at the sweep. Why do you care if you lost Game 1, 2, or 3?

[ShoelesJoe]

Lose the first game, win the next two. You then go into the next series flying high. 

[bpilktree]

Option 1 for sure especially if it vs the Yankees Red Sox or Braves as those are teams co workers talk trash about all the time.  You win those first two it shuts them up early. If they win the first they are already talking about how they gonna sweep us.  They win second it is they gonna take the series.    

[bpilktree]

A fourth option would be lose the one the night before you have the next day off no matter what game it is.  Then you don’t have to hear the trash talking anyway. lol

[Orange]

Surprised I'm in the minority here... If you are definitely losing one and winning two, I'd rather be able to lose the first one and say "they snuck up on us" but then we righted the ship and ripped off two wins to close them out... Big Mo!!

[Philip]

 Odd question, but psychologically, it is better to lose the first and then come back and win the second two, because literally you’re starting at the bottom and improve.

Winning the first two sets you up for tremendous disappointment when you lose the third.

Just think about the Atlanta series and how everybody was so disappointed to lose the third game, but if we’d lost the first game and won, the second two people would be much less disappointed.

That ridiculous Toronto Series: if we had lost the first two and then won the second two people would be happier than us losing the second two, even though the outcome was the same.

[Greg Pappas]

I took the poll as being posited as: If you knew in advance that the outcome would be two wins and one loss, in which order would you prefer that to occur?  @Frobby can correct me if I'm off on that.

Edited Friday at 18:10 by Greg Pappas

[Moose Milligan]

I've been told that winning 2/3 every time and a 108 win pace is unacceptable.  

[HbgOsFan]

I chose the second option.  Resiliency.  Split the first two, but come up big in the deciding game of the three game set.

My other option was win one, lose one, win one and find out Gerrit Cole's rehab was blown to shreds.

[Greg Pappas]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

I've been told that winning 2/3 every time and a 108 win pace is unacceptable.  

Yes, 109 is the key... anything below that is just, well, meh. 

[Frobby]

59 minutes ago, Greg Pappas said:

Yes, 109 is the key... anything below that is just, well, meh. 

Well, the 108-win 1970 team won the World Series, while the 109-win team from 1969 did not.  So, I can be happy with 108 if there’s a WS trophy afterwards.  

[Malike]

3 hours ago, Philip said:

 Odd question, but psychologically, it is better to lose the first and then come back and win the second two, because literally you’re starting at the bottom and improve.

Winning the first two sets you up for tremendous disappointment when you lose the third.

Just think about the Atlanta series and how everybody was so disappointed to lose the third game, but if we’d lost the first game and won, the second two people would be much less disappointed.

That ridiculous Toronto Series: if we had lost the first two and then won the second two people would be happier than us losing the second two, even though the outcome was the same.

The only people disappointed were the fans, the players aren't nearly as emotionally weak as the fans. Not even in the same universe.

[Greg Pappas]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

Well, the 108-win 1970 team won the World Series, while the 109-win team from 1969 did not.  So, I can be happy with 108 if there’s a WS trophy afterwards.  

I was just joking with Moose about the 108 win pace.