EPTOn April 30 2011 07:50 ComusLoM wrote:
Dunno why but I read this as masturbation.
Great writeup as always.
Dunno why but I read this as masturbation.
Great writeup as always.
ur not alone
[GSL] "Maturation" GSL May Midway Report - Page 4
| Forum Index > News |
|
Reptilia
Chile913 Posts
ur not alone | ||
|
Scribble
2077 Posts
On May 01 2011 02:05 omegan wrote: then eliminated players would still be playing like the NASL. Nobody wants to see meaningless games involving eliminated players. Huh? Eliminated players still play in the current format to determine who has 2 chances in up/down and who has 1. And at least with a round robin you don't get knocked out playing the same person twice. Also, what eliminated players are still playing in NASL? Top 2 from each group advances to playoffs, and the remaining 40 are ranked with 11-30 getting a shot at 5 more playoff spots. | ||
|
andrea20
Canada441 Posts
The MSL format is a hard 5 games, while the GSL format may have 5 or 6. Both may cause one player to miss another in the group. | ||
|
Scribble
2077 Posts
On May 01 2011 04:50 andrea20 wrote: The reason they don't do round robin is that two players may end up 2-1 and two may end up 1-2. Plus there's six games minimum, and if the 2-1/1-2 split happens, they'll have to play even more games. The MSL format is a hard 5 games, while the GSL format may have 5 or 6. Both may cause one player to miss another in the group. They could just go by the head-to-head to settle tie-breakers. | ||
|
Musou
1375 Posts
On May 01 2011 05:59 Scribble wrote: They could just go by the head-to-head to settle tie-breakers. And what happens if someone goes 3-0 and the other three are 1-2 or someone goes 0-3 and the others are 2-1? You can't use head to head, because each of them will have beaten another person. Look at the previous OSL formats which were round-robin. There have been cases of tiebreakers that lasted for 5+ hours because people kept tying. | ||
|
Scribble
2077 Posts
| ||
|
Hakker
United States1360 Posts
i read the title as 'Masturbation' v.v | ||
|
Deekin[
Serbia1713 Posts
On May 01 2011 13:24 Hakker wrote: i'm way too high right now i read the title as 'Masturbation' v.v HAHAHA I did the same and was supposed to write it down! Could actually be a fitting title. Like the games are so good you could masturbate watching them  | ||
GOM.Sam
Korea (South)210 Posts
| ||
|
Jepsyn
Canada364 Posts
| ||
|
Loophole
United States867 Posts
| ||
|
The Final Boss
United States1839 Posts
On April 30 2011 07:50 ComusLoM wrote: Dunno why but I read this as masturbation. Great writeup as always. I definitely misread your comment as "Dunno why but I read this while masturbating" or something to that effect. Made me chuckle. | ||
|
sylverfyre
United States8298 Posts
On May 02 2011 01:12 Loophole wrote: Silly bias towards Huk. They need to rework their system because Huk went 0-2 and didn't advance? If Huk had beaten Inca, he would have gotten the chance to play Rain. Instead he lost, twice, and he goes home. Can people watch the games AND read his comments about this bracket? Point 1 of why Huk is "second best in the group": Huk was the only player in the group who even played reasonably solidly against July. Point 2: Inca's play against Huk was good, but his play against Rain was a mockery, and he never had to play July as a result of the format. Point 3: Rain was horrid too, but as a result of the format Huk never got a chance to play against him. Silly bias against Huk. Watch games and judge based on something besides score and you'll see why Huk was praised by the OP. Also, Huk v Inca is seriously getting old. :| | ||
|
The Final Boss
United States1839 Posts
On May 02 2011 01:28 sylverfyre wrote: Can people watch the games AND read his comments about this bracket? Point 1 of why Huk is "second best in the group": Huk was the only player in the group who even played reasonably solidly against July. Point 2: Inca's play against Huk was good, but his play against Rain was a mockery, and he never had to play July as a result of the format. Point 3: Rain was horrid too, but as a result of the format Huk never got a chance to play against him. Silly bias against Huk. Watch games and judge based on something besides score and you'll see why Huk was praised by the OP. Also, Huk v Inca is seriously getting old. :| I didn't watch those games (no pass....) but I still got the feeling that the writer of this had a serious bias towards HuK. I'm sure that other players have been eliminated from groups under similar circumstances and nobody really cares. Just because HuK didn't advance doesn't mean that suddenly the whole group system needs to change. | ||
|
Adventurekid
Sweden505 Posts
| ||
|
Musou
1375 Posts
On May 02 2011 01:28 sylverfyre wrote: Can people watch the games AND read his comments about this bracket? Point 1 of why Huk is "second best in the group": Huk was the only player in the group who even played reasonably solidly against July. Point 2: Inca's play against Huk was good, but his play against Rain was a mockery, and he never had to play July as a result of the format. Point 3: Rain was horrid too, but as a result of the format Huk never got a chance to play against him. Silly bias against Huk. Watch games and judge based on something besides score and you'll see why Huk was praised by the OP. Also, Huk v Inca is seriously getting old. :| And yet regardless of the system, Huk would have likely failed out of the bracket. We all know July was the clear favorite in the group, so assuming the MSL format, it would have been the following outcome:+ Show Spoiler + July > Rain Inca > Huk July > Inca (Winner's match) Huk > Rain (Loser's match) Inca > Huk (Final match) July, Inca advance since Inca is a much stronger PvP player than Huk. OSL format round robin:+ Show Spoiler + July > Rain July > Huk July > Inca ---- July advances 3-0 then one of the following scenarios: Inca > Huk Inca > Rain Huk > Rain Inca advances 2-1, Huk out 1-2, Rain out 0-3 Inca > Huk Rain > Inca Huk > Rain Three way tie and they play each other round robin style (Inca vs Huk, Huk vs Rain, Rain vs Inca over and over) until one person wins twice. Most likely person to win against both other players is Inca imo. Huk has basically no chance vs Inca while all the other matchups are pretty volatile. I don't doubt that despite how badly Rain played that he could take half the games off Huk. This is also the primary reason why round robin format is terrible and should not be used. Games could potentially go on for hours if you have players that always lose to one player but beat another. In the Korean Air OSL S1 of 2010, there was a 3-way tie that lasted for over 5 hours and Effort's mouse even broke before he finally won twice. Inca > Huk Rain > Inca Rain > Huk Rain advances 2-1, Inca out 1-2, Huk out 0-3 Definitely the least likely realistic scenario. I can't see Rain taking 2 games off Huk and Inca in a row without it being a fluke. Huk > Inca Huk > Rain Rain ? Inca Huk advances 2-1, Rain/Inca out with score of 1-2/0-2. Possibility so low it shouldn't even be considered. Having this happen would basically be like July dropping a game against any of these 3. Sure, upsets happen and that's what makes watching so much fun. Unfortunately, they're extremely rare, which is why they are called upsets. The MSL format tries to ensure that the strongest 2 players go through with the fewest games played, but it has a flaw in assuming that anyone who wins a game is better than their opponent, so it guarantees advancement for at least one of the players who wins their first game. If two upsets happen, one of the weaker players in the group may advance. The OSL format tells the most about absolute skill in a group assuming that upsets don't happen multiple times in a row, but has the disadvantage of potentially lasting forever (or at least until one of the players gives up, pretty much). There is no perfect solution. In fact, if GOM extended each set played into a Bo3 instead of Bo1 against each player, I still feel like Huk would have been eliminated. Even if we assume Huk would beat Rain 100% of the time, I think most people would agree that Inca would beat Huk 100% of the time as well. Inca vs Rain was a terrible matchup (though I have changed my opinion on that after seeing Inca's Ro16 performance against Virus. He was pretty dominating there) and at the time I would say neither player was a favorite over the other, so it'd be a coin flip. Because of that, in every realistic scenario, Huk would be eliminated 1-2 by beating Rain and losing to Inca. | ||
|
Steamroller
Finland756 Posts
On May 02 2011 02:58 The Final Boss wrote: I didn't watch those games (no pass....) but I still got the feeling that the writer of this had a serious bias towards HuK. I'm sure that other players have been eliminated from groups under similar circumstances and nobody really cares. Just because HuK didn't advance doesn't mean that suddenly the whole group system needs to change. I agree with you. Huk fucked up and his grade B- is too good. Just amazing that he didn't also mention Huk having Top 2 control of the group lol. | ||
|
Encrypto
United States442 Posts
| ||
|
Adicon
United States22 Posts
A system that allows that to occur should definitely be looked at. I feel like the current system puts far too much weight into single games and luck of the draw on whom will be matched up with whom. | ||
|
Kalpman
Sweden406 Posts
On April 30 2011 07:50 ComusLoM wrote: Dunno why but I read this as masturbation. Great writeup as always. +1 | ||
| ||
