# If Bud Selig really wanted to get tough...

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-bud-selig-really-wanted-to-get-tough/315658>\
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion\
**Created:** [August 5, 2005, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-bud-selig-really-wanted-to-get-tough/315658 "2005-08-05T01:53:35Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\
**Post date:** [August 6, 2005, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-bud-selig-really-wanted-to-get-tough/315658/21 "2005-08-06T05:11:20Z")

</div>

> [@fotc](#):
>
> But if two teams played against each other that ended up both having a juiced up player, you said those games wouldn’t count. So at the end of the season it would be possible to have a couple of teams that had officially played only 158 games. How do you determine their standings against teams that played 162?

The same way you do now; winning percentage.

I know it’s not common knowledge, but position in standings is determined by winning percentage and nothing else. “Games behind” is a nice shorthand way of seeing what a team needs to do to catch up but it’s not how final standings are determined.

If Team A goes 92-70 and Team B goes 90-68, Team B wins.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-bud-selig-really-wanted-to-get-tough/315658.md?page=1)