It’s a ritual as old as the game itself. The players are warmed up, the pucks are gathered, and the organizer stands at center ice, facing the most delicate and politically charged task of the week: making the teams.
Everyone knows the feeling. There’s the quiet anxiety of hoping you’re not picked last, the frustration of knowing you’re about to play in another lopsided game, and the inevitable arguments that erupt when one team is clearly stacked. As an organizer, I spent years trying to master this art, knowing that a single bad decision could sour the mood for the entire night.
Creating balanced teams is crucial for a fun, competitive, and sustainable pickup game. Over the years, organizers have developed several methods to tackle this challenge, ranging from pure chance to complex systems. Let’s break them down.
The Manual Methods (And Their Inherent Flaws)
These are the classic, go-to methods you’ll see at rinks and courts everywhere.
1. Random Draw (e.g., Sticks in the Middle) This is the purest form of chance. Everyone throws their stick into a pile, and an organizer blindly tosses them to either side to form two teams. It’s simple, quick, and emotionally neutral—no one’s feelings get hurt because skill isn’t a factor in the selection. The major downside? It frequently results in wildly unbalanced teams, especially when your group has a wide range of skill levels.
2. Captain’s Pick The old gym-class favorite. Two captains are chosen, and they take turns picking players for their squad. This method is fast and usually results in teams that are at least somewhat balanced. However, it’s notorious for causing hurt feelings. Being the last person standing on the ice waiting to be picked is a universally unpleasant experience that can damage camaraderie.
3. Pairing Off Similar Skill Levels This is a more thoughtful approach and a personal favorite of many experienced organizers. The idea is to pair up players of similar ability and then place them on opposite teams. The two best players are split, then the next two, and so on. This is a great strategy for maintaining balance, but it can get complicated when you have major skill outliers—like a former pro or a complete rookie—who are hard to pair off effectively.
“Advanced” Manual and Game Theory Methods
For organizers willing to put in a bit more thought, these methods offer a higher degree of fairness.
4. Manual Rating System This is the spreadsheet-lover’s method. Each player in your group is assigned a point value based on their skill level (e.g., 1-5 points). To make teams, you simply add up the point values of the players on each side until they are equal. While this can be very effective, it requires a significant amount of upfront work and relies on the organizer’s subjective (and hopefully unbiased) judgment.
5. “I Cut, You Choose” This is a classic solution drawn from game theory. One person (the “cutter”) divides all the players into two teams that they believe are perfectly even. A second person (the “chooser”) then gets to decide which of those two teams they want to be on. This brilliantly incentivizes the cutter to make the teams as balanced as humanly possible, because they know they’ll be stuck with whichever team the chooser doesn’t want.
The Ultimate Solution: Data-Driven, Unbiased Automation
All of these manual methods suffer from the same fundamental problems: they are time-consuming, prone to human bias, and can still lead to arguments. This was the single biggest frustration that led me to create HappyRoster.
Our app solves the fair teams problem with objective data and automation. Here’s how:
- It Tracks Real Performance: The app logs the results of every game, tracking each player’s wins and losses over time to generate a dynamic, data-driven skill rating.
- It Eliminates Bias: With the click of a button, our algorithm analyzes the skill ratings of everyone playing that week and instantly generates the most balanced teams possible.
- It Keeps Things Fresh: The system can also be configured to ensure players aren’t always stuck with the same teammates week after week, keeping the social dynamic interesting.
By taking the decision out of the organizer’s hands, you eliminate any accusations of favoritism, you spare players the anxiety of a public draft, and you guarantee a competitive, enjoyable game for everyone, every single time.