Let's give Bud Selig some credit.  Somehow the All-Star Game has become a three day sports talkfest.  Day one - the home run derby and celebrity game.  Day two - the game.  Day three - talk about the home field advantage stipulation. 

Longtime readers of IJWMFTT know that the Commissioner is, in my eyes, Emperor Bud.  Everything about him and his public persona exudes an "aw shucks" aura.  When he has to testify, he finds the worst sport jacket available.  It makes him look sympathetic.  Of course, for every "aw shucks" moment, he seems to get more power.  First it was the elimination of league offices.  Then it was the Mitchell report.  Then it was the "oh what the heck" extension he got from the owners after he told Dan Patrick on a weekly basis that his time was up.

Bud Selig is smarter than we think.  Bud Selig is more successful in his position than we think.  The wild card upset purists, but gave more fan bases hope in September.  Interleague play upset purists, but gave us a chance to see teams we had not seen before.  There has been labor strife, but that's nothing new.  What is new is fifteen years and counting without a work stoppage.

Despite all of those debatable points, what draws the most ire (judging by the day after yak), is the home-field advantage stipulation attached to the All-Star Game.  As Bud Selig pointed out on the four letter's morning program, "It's not like what we had was rocket science."  One league got it one year, and the other league got it the next year.

At IJWMFTT, we question the answers and anticipate the questions.  Why not just give it to the team with the best record?  Sounds easy enough, but how does one account for the unbalanced schedule.  Why not give it to the winner of interleague play?  Not bad.  Give the superior league and brand of baseball the advantage.  There is still that unbalanced schedule issue.  Take a team like Tampa, who is on the good side of average.  Now take a team like Washington, which is the worst in all MLB.  The AL would benefit in that scenario if the schedule fails to shake out a Dodgers/Royals match-up.

Of course, this isn't a perfect solution.  But you know who I blame?  I blame the fans.  I said it.  If you demand a result from the All-Star Game, then this is what you get.  The fans are hammering Bud Selig for listening to them!  

All that said, I wanted to examine just what it is we are playing for on Tuesday and griping about on Wednesday: 

• The team with home field advantage has won 58% of the World Series.
• 52% of World Series have gone to the final two games.
• Of the 33 deciding game sevens, there were sixteen home wins
• Of the 21 deciding game sixes (game eights for the nine gamers), there were eleven home winners.

 If you add the latter two together, then it's a toss-up.  That means that there is another 8% out there that needs some accounting.  Since these series went four or five games, is that a function of home field, or the better team winning?  The team with the better record has won 52 of 104 World Series.  Again, it's a coin-flip.  Perhaps the stars were aligned and the better team won in a year where it was their turn to have home field.  Here are some points to remember since the change in 2003: 

• The AL has won home field each time, and is 3-3 in the World Series.
• The AL had the team with the better record five out of six times. In other words, the NL has gone on the road and overcome the better team for their three series wins.
• 2005 and 2007 would have been NL turns to have home field. Both were AL sweeps, which likely meant that home field didn't matter in those seasons.

I'm sure when game seven is played in the cold, as opposed to a retractable roof, and it factors into the result, we'll hear about it.  To date, it hasn't mattered.  All it has served is to get us through the worst sports day of the year.