Allocation vs vote off?

bringing a league over from a different site, wondering which of the two arbitration systems seems to be the favorite, if any? or pros/cons of each?

I strongly prefer allocation over vote off (I actually would never play in a vote off league again). My impression is that something like 90%+ of Ottoneu leagues are allocation leagues.


I’ve never played in a vote-off league before and am not sure I see the appeal. @walt526, care to elaborate on what you did not like?

I’d also be curious to hear thoughts from others on what they do like about that sort of arbitration system.


It’s a combination of really liking the allocation system and having had a bad experience with a vote off league.

At least in the vote off league I played, about half the league didn’t seem to understand how to be effective/strategic with their vote off vote. For example, a par value star (e.g., Mookie Betts, IIRC) was voted off, which just created an opportunity for his original team to win him back at auction with a discount since the bidding went up to around par value. On the other end of things, my $5 Jesus Aguilar in 2018-19 was voted off, but with the discount I wound up getting him back for less than $5 as well. Rather than act as a way to prevent good teams from hoarding talent, it actually worked to the advantage of several teams. I think you really need to have a majority of the league properly understand the objective and mechanism, which at least in my limited experience wasn’t the case.

The problem of “user error” from allocation is less of a concern, because there are limited consequences of players making bad allocations. For example, if par value Betts or whoever gets overallocated and thus released, then he’ll just be a FA and not really disrupt the league economy. On the other hand, if the league over-allocates on a player like a 2018-19 $5 Jesus Aguilar, then either he’ll be released (unlikely coming off of a 35 HR season) or the allocation will be actually effective if he’s kept. Errors in allocation are more about missing better opportunities to increase the salary of a would-be long-term asset.

But more importantly, it’s just more fun because you can spread the pain so to speak. And the game theory behind it is more interesting in my opinion than a single vote for vote off.


I agree with @walt526. While I haven’t played in a vote off format, I don’t see the appeal. Allocation brings far more strategy to it, it gives players a salary closer to their playing value, and, importantly, it is the best hedge against a long-term dynasty at the top. That’s not to say managers can’t repeat, three-peat, four-peat, etc. But, it gets harder to do with allocation than vote off. There is more roster turnover because of it.