EPTPreviously I wrote a blog post about TSL’s RevivaL and the circumstances surrounding his elimination from Code A. In that post, I discussed the GSL rule which dictates that the four players who finish last in their groups during the Code S RO32 are paired against four newcomers from the preliminaries in the RO48 of Code A. All players who lose in the RO48 are eliminated from GSL entirely and must once again pass through the preliminaries. Unfortunately, RevivaL is not the only player forced to start over from scratch after an unlucky trek in Code A.
The current structure was introduced at the beginning of the November 2011 season. After the initial group stage of Code S, the eight players finishing last in their groups are placed into the first round of Code A along with forty other players. They are each paired against players from the preliminaries rather than each other or players from the Up & Down matches. The likely goal was to dismiss stagnant Code S players who were no longer top tier players, but had been able to tread water in the generous structure previously used. In this respect, the rule functions well — a player who is swept in his group should not have an easy path to make the next season’s Code S, and a subsequent loss to an unknown is reasonable grounds for dismissal from Code A.
On the other hand, over half the players coming through the preliminary will not be facing Code S players. The few unfortunate enough to do so shoulder an incredible burden in comparison. Though it may be reasonable from the perspective of the Code S player, it’s unreasonable that a Code A novice is expected to beat someone who simply had a bad day in Code S to earn a berth in next season’s Code A.
Since this format has been put in place, there have been four seasons of Code A. Of those 30 matches, the Code S players have won 25 (two results were excluded as they involved players who received direct seeds into GSL). Here is a list:
NOVEMBER 1W 7L 13%
YuGiOh(S) over MinSeOk
asd(S) over GuineaPig
Clide(S) over Creator
Bomber(S) over RainBOw
NaDa(S) over Ven
SuperNoVa(S) over VINES
Curious(S) over TheStC
Cezanne over Ensnare(S)
SEASON1* 2W 4L 33%
Fin(S) over cOre
YuGiOh(S) over Sculp
Brown(S) over Lure
JYP(S) over Life
Avenge over IdrA(S)
Heart over Bomber(S)
SEASON2 2W 6L 25%
DongRaeGu(S) over RevivaL
BBoong(S) over GGanDoL
Puzzle(S) over True
Polt(S) over Sound
GuMiho(S) over dreamertt
aLive(S) over SocceR
Lure over InCa(S)
GhostKing over NaDa(S)
SEASON3 0W 8L 0%
HerO(S) over JookTo
TheStC(S) over Punisher
GuMiho(S) over Ready
SuHoSin(S) over Crank
Sniper(S) over AnNyeong
Oz(S) over JKS
Leenock(S) over TAiLS
YuGiOh(S) over Harrier
Code S washouts are still some pretty stiff competition. Losing a single match to one of these players does not signify a player is not Code A material. In order to further illustrate my point, I collected results from the first round matches that pair up players from the preliminaries against players who entered Code A through the Up & Down matches (in November there were also Code A holdovers from the previous season — in the current structure, any player that isn’t demoted from Code A is eligible for Up & Down matches). I excluded matches where the player earned his Code A spot outside of the preliminaries (wildcards/other tournaments).
vs. UP&DOWN/CODE A
November 8W 5L 62%
Season 1 8W 5L 62%
Season 2 5W 7L 42%
Season 3 3W 9L 25%
Overall 24W 26L 48%
vs. CODE S
November 1W 7L 13%
Season 1 2W 4L 33%
Season 2 2W 6L 25%
Season 3 0W 8L 00%
Overall 5W 25L 17%
This is a dramatic difference. Though a few dozen games is hardly enough data to draw concrete findings, it does suggest that it’s a strong disadvantage to be paired against the Code S player. Since this curse is randomly cast on four of the twenty or so qualifying players each season, it’s reasonable to say that it’s not a fair rule. Considering how difficult it is to simply pass through the Code A preliminaries, being unjustly demoted from Code A is a bad beat indeed.
Results obtained from Liquipedia.
