The playoff chase at the end of each sports season is marked by close races, intense competition and the bane of all competitors’ existences – ties.

Ultimately, someone’s a winner in each case thanks to tiebreaking formulas that seek to create a best among equals.

This year’s LTC football race included a three-way tie for the final playoff spot among Bucksport, Orono and Rockland.

Bucksport was the hottest of the three, having won its last two games – including a 51-point victory at Rockland. Orono and Rockland dropped their last two games.

But each lost to the three teams above them, and each beat all four teams below them in the standings. Against each other, the teams had identical 1-1 records, so head-to-head results produced no winner, nor did any point system designed to compare strength of schedule or quality of victories.

Finally a coin flip among the three teams eliminated Bucksport before Rockland earned the playoff berth with its head-to-head win over Orono.

It’s a tough way for a season to end for Bucksport and Orono, but at least it reflected as much as possible play on the field throughout the season.

So is there a better way?

Some suggest bringing tied teams together for a series of abbreviated games to decide a survivor. But scheduling such an event within the current weekly schedule would fly in the face of studies that recommend a given amount of recovery time between games for high school players.

Some say bring point differential into the equation, but that might encourage running up the score against struggling programs that already endure their share of lopsided losses.

Some say use fewest points allowed during the season, but the same issue would arise as contending teams might be encouraged to leave first-team defenses in longer during blowout wins.

Perhaps there’s just no easy answer, save for hoping that this year’s scenario is the exception rather than the rule.

Equally frustrating is how some sports change their game to produce a winner when the normal flow of play produces stalemate.

Take Olympic hockey, which relies on a shootout to break ties. I can still hear the collective groan from north of the border when former Maine star Paul Kariya missed the final penalty shot of Canada’s 1994 gold-medal-match shootout, enabling Sweden to skate away with the top prize.

Soccer shootouts are no different. Ellsworth and Winslow played a high-quality Eastern B boys final Monday, but regulation play and two 15-minute overtimes produced a 1-1 tie.

So they went to penalty kicks, which Ellsworth won 4-2 by making all of its shots while two of Winslow’s tries went wide.

The Eagles won through superior execution in that phase of the game, and for that they should be applauded.

But to me a soccer shootout in a championship match is like deciding Game 7 of the NBA Finals with free throws, or a World Series game with a home run derby.

Certainly there are reasons for bringing any match to a conclusion, but as a basketball or baseball game can go on indefinitely in its original form before determining a winner, so, too, should contests in other sports.

The masters of the games generally do a good job of shaping their products to bring out the best in teams and athletes, but situations can arise with no clear solution when the playing field is at its most balanced – and that can leave competitors and fans alike fit to be tied.

Ernie Clark may be reached at 990-8045, 1-800-310-8600 or eclark@bangordailynews.net