7ec17e417d
After an LLWS simulation, a team locked into the 5th-6th tier and one locked into the 7th-8th tier both showed 20 points EV. They should show 25 and 15. The simulator and calculateEV were both right. A team locked into the 5-6 tier comes out of llws-simulator at probFifth = probSixth = 0.5, and against DEFAULT_SCORING_RULES (100/70/50/40/25/25/15/15) that is 25 — matching calculateBracketPoints, which already knows llws_20 splits 5-8 into two tiers. The Admin -> Expected Values page just wasn't using that table. It hardcoded its own stale copy: const SCORING = [100, 70, 45, 45, 20, 20, 20, 20] as const; 0.5*20 + 0.5*20 = 20 for either tier. It is not LLWS-specific. Four places carried that same stale table, and it stayed invisible because a standard single-elimination bracket puts all four quarterfinal losers in one tier worth avg(25,25,15,15) = 20 — the same number. It only diverges for the templates that split 5-8 (llws_20, afl_10) and those with a distinct 3rd/4th (llws_20, fifa_48, where 45/45 should be 50/40). Two of the four *persist* EVs computed that way, so the wrong values reached the database: - expected-values.tsx displayed EV, the total, and the sort order - expected-values.server manual EV entry, written to expected_value - golf-skills.tsx simulation EVs + snapshots, written - surface-elo.tsx simulation EVs + snapshots, written All four now use the shared DEFAULT_SCORING_RULES. probability-updater had a fourth inline copy with the right values; it is folded in too so there is one table left. The page's 340 total-EV invariant is unchanged — both tables sum to 340. A second path collapses the same two tiers, this time in real fantasy points. calculateBracketPoints falls back to the flat avg([5,6,7,8]) when bracketTemplateId is null, and four call sites resolved the template by taking an arbitrary scoringEvents row for the sports season — unordered, and not filtered to rows that actually carry a template. A season can own several events (a bracket plus schedule events, or a re-created bracket beside a stale one), so a null row wins at random and llws_20 is lost. New getBracketTemplateIdsForSportsSeasons in models/bracket-template.ts filters to events with a template and takes the most recent, the same rule llws-simulator uses to pick its bracket event; standings, calculateTeamScore, calculateTeamProjectedScore and getDraftedParticipantsWithPoints all go through it. Tests: evFromProbs pinned to 25 / 15 / 20-for-a-single-5-8-tier and the 340 invariant; the new lookup against a mixed set of events; and two llws-simulator tests that play out a full U.S. side so a team really is locked into each tier and must come out at exactly 50/50 across it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01EmUdy42Rpgx9qZTnpQwirz
64 lines
2.5 KiB
TypeScript
64 lines
2.5 KiB
TypeScript
import { describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
|
||
|
||
/**
|
||
* The Expected Values admin page renders EV from the stored probability columns.
|
||
*
|
||
* It used to carry its own hardcoded scoring table (100/70/45/45/20/20/20/20), which
|
||
* flattened positions 5–8 to 20 points each. For a standard single-elimination bracket
|
||
* that was invisible — all four quarterfinal losers share one tier worth
|
||
* avg(25,25,15,15) = 20 anyway — but for the templates that split 5–8 into two tiers
|
||
* (llws_20, afl_10) it reported a team locked into 5th–6th and a team locked into
|
||
* 7th–8th as the same 20 points. These pin it to the shared DEFAULT_SCORING_RULES.
|
||
*/
|
||
|
||
vi.mock("../admin.sports-seasons.$id.expected-values.server", () => ({
|
||
loader: vi.fn(),
|
||
}));
|
||
|
||
import { evFromProbs } from "../admin.sports-seasons.$id.expected-values";
|
||
|
||
const ZERO = {
|
||
probFirst: "0", probSecond: "0", probThird: "0", probFourth: "0",
|
||
probFifth: "0", probSixth: "0", probSeventh: "0", probEighth: "0",
|
||
};
|
||
|
||
describe("evFromProbs", () => {
|
||
it("gives a team locked into the 5th–6th tier 25 points, not 20", () => {
|
||
expect(evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probFifth: "0.5", probSixth: "0.5" })).toBe(25);
|
||
});
|
||
|
||
it("gives a team locked into the 7th–8th tier 15 points, not 20", () => {
|
||
expect(evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probSeventh: "0.5", probEighth: "0.5" })).toBe(15);
|
||
});
|
||
|
||
it("still gives a single 5th–8th tier (4 QF losers) 20 points", () => {
|
||
const ev = evFromProbs({
|
||
...ZERO,
|
||
probFifth: "0.25", probSixth: "0.25", probSeventh: "0.25", probEighth: "0.25",
|
||
});
|
||
expect(ev).toBe(20);
|
||
});
|
||
|
||
it("keeps 3rd and 4th distinct rather than a flat 45 each", () => {
|
||
expect(evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probThird: "1" })).toBe(50);
|
||
expect(evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probFourth: "1" })).toBe(40);
|
||
});
|
||
|
||
it("preserves the 340 total-EV invariant across a full set of unit columns", () => {
|
||
const perPosition = [
|
||
evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probFirst: "1" }),
|
||
evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probSecond: "1" }),
|
||
evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probThird: "1" }),
|
||
evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probFourth: "1" }),
|
||
evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probFifth: "1" }),
|
||
evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probSixth: "1" }),
|
||
evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probSeventh: "1" }),
|
||
evFromProbs({ ...ZERO, probEighth: "1" }),
|
||
];
|
||
expect(perPosition.reduce((sum, ev) => sum + ev, 0)).toBe(340);
|
||
});
|
||
|
||
it("returns 0 for a participant with no probability mass", () => {
|
||
expect(evFromProbs(ZERO)).toBe(0);
|
||
});
|
||
});
|