• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 01:37
CEST 07:37
KST 14:37
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
RSL Season 1 - Final Week4[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall10HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0
Community News
Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation17$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced7Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles6[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China10Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL70
StarCraft 2
General
RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings We need to be discussing a new patch right now! Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation RSL Season 1 - Final Week
Tourneys
$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament WardiTV Mondays
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion A cwal.gg Extension - Easily keep track of anyone ASL20 Preliminary Maps BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Script to open stream directly using middle click
Tourneys
Small VOD Thread 2.0 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues Last Minute Live-Report Thread Resource! [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread The PlayStation 5 Nintendo Switch Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Accidental Video Game Porn Archive Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Men Take Risks, Women Win Ga…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 537 users

What do you think about the return of Extended Series at M…

Forum Index > Polls & Liquibet
Post a Reply
Normal
Antylamon
Profile Joined March 2011
United States1981 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-06-24 01:05:38
June 24 2013 01:04 GMT
#1
Look at me I got first comment

I'm so important
Verator
Profile Joined June 2010
United States283 Posts
June 24 2013 02:06 GMT
#2
Really don't think it deserves the hate it gets, all it does is favor players who know how to win, and don't slack off early in the tournament.
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence. -- Bertrand Russell
Nuclease
Profile Joined August 2011
United States1049 Posts
June 24 2013 02:13 GMT
#3
It's like the best of one in OSL. Extended series have been proven time and time again to degrade the quality, integrity, and excitement of tournaments, yet MLG brings them back.

This is why I will not really be watching MLG anymore. Thanks for making my decision easy, Sundance and crew.
Zealots, not zee-lots. | Never forget, KTViolet, Go)Space. | You will never be as good as By.Flash, and your drops will never be as sick as MMA.
Deckard.666
Profile Joined September 2012
152 Posts
June 24 2013 02:20 GMT
#4
Everyone is going to disapprove w/o knowing it doesn't affect the finals.

I really don't know how can people hate that rule so much when the only thing it does is bring fairness for the players.
banjoetheredskin
Profile Blog Joined November 2012
United States744 Posts
June 24 2013 03:00 GMT
#5
Would someone be kind enough to explain how this extended series works?
Writer#1 CJ fan | http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/508947-wcs-dreamhack-austin-interviews
MajuGarzett
Profile Blog Joined June 2011
Canada635 Posts
June 24 2013 04:13 GMT
#6
On June 24 2013 12:00 banjoetheredskin wrote:
Would someone be kind enough to explain how this extended series works?

If two players face each other in the tournament any future encounters between those two players is a best of five starting with the result of the first best of three instead of a regular best of three.
Buddy168
Profile Joined June 2012
United States157 Posts
June 24 2013 05:43 GMT
#7
I like trains.

But not extended series.
"You're being a useless fucking asshole" - Day[9]
QCD
Profile Joined September 2012
Suriname81 Posts
June 24 2013 06:30 GMT
#8
On June 24 2013 11:13 Nuclease wrote:
It's like the best of one in OSL. Extended series have been proven time and time again to degrade the quality, integrity, and excitement of tournaments, yet MLG brings them back.

This is why I will not really be watching MLG anymore. Thanks for making my decision easy, Sundance and crew.


So you're going to completely miss out on MLG because of a bracket style you disagree with? Doubtful, nice bluff however.

I think if they're going to do this it should be bo7.
Azelja
Profile Joined May 2011
Japan762 Posts
June 24 2013 08:12 GMT
#9
On June 24 2013 11:20 Deckard.666 wrote:
Everyone is going to disapprove w/o knowing it doesn't affect the finals.

I really don't know how can people hate that rule so much when the only thing it does is bring fairness for the players.


That's highly debated and I don't see the "fairness" in the rule at all, but that's for a different thread.
Yes, I know it doesn't affect the finals, still voted for disapprove because the system's bullshit, imo.
Tyrran
Profile Blog Joined January 2010
France777 Posts
June 24 2013 08:45 GMT
#10
I like the extended series

Seriously.
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.
Headnoob
Profile Joined September 2010
Australia2108 Posts
June 24 2013 10:52 GMT
#11
At least i don't have to watch MLG now.
Psychonian
Profile Joined March 2012
United States2322 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-06-24 11:32:28
June 24 2013 11:31 GMT
#12
Yes because this was an extended series
Trans Rights
figq
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
12519 Posts
June 24 2013 13:57 GMT
#13
MLG kills puppies and little WhiteRas. So sad.
If you stand next to my head, you can hear the ocean. - Day[9]
Greendotz
Profile Joined October 2011
United Kingdom2053 Posts
June 24 2013 15:34 GMT
#14
I don't think there's actually anything wrong with the idea, it sounds fair to me. Either way I'm totally neutral on the subject. Perhaps it's strongest point is that in the finals we may not have that awkward monument when the losers bracket guy wins a set and we then have to play another set to determine the winner
LoKi-
Profile Joined May 2011
United States121 Posts
June 24 2013 15:50 GMT
#15
It's interesting that this is so polarized. I personally don't mind it (I like it, really, but I don't feel too strongly either way). Could somebody please provide me with an argument against it, other than "it's unfair?" Because it seems to me that it's completely fair to retain the previous Bo3's standings when the same players meet again - it encourages solid play throughout the entire Bo3 because even losing 2-1 is better than losing 2-0. It also seems to add some excitement/story to the games when you can tell so clearly that these two players have met before in this tournament, and it actually matters fairly significantly.
Ichabod
Profile Joined May 2010
United States1659 Posts
June 24 2013 18:31 GMT
#16
On June 25 2013 00:50 LoKi- wrote:
It's interesting that this is so polarized. I personally don't mind it (I like it, really, but I don't feel too strongly either way). Could somebody please provide me with an argument against it, other than "it's unfair?" Because it seems to me that it's completely fair to retain the previous Bo3's standings when the same players meet again - it encourages solid play throughout the entire Bo3 because even losing 2-1 is better than losing 2-0. It also seems to add some excitement/story to the games when you can tell so clearly that these two players have met before in this tournament, and it actually matters fairly significantly.

The argument I frequently hear is that it reduces the level of excitement if it happens in the finals. The finals all of a sudden become slightly less decisive just because the players met in round 1 or something. It is my understanding that the MLG Anaheim bracket will be two 64-man brackets, so an extended series cannot occur in the finals.

I am not that opposed to it, but it seems slightly odd for MLG to be so ardently stubborn about it, even though they phased it out of their other games (It hasn't been in their MOBA titles, and I don't think it is in CoD, but I could be wrong on that count.) It is a little bit irritating that MLG doesn't simply state its rationale for extended series, some explanation would undoubtedly be preferable to "blame John Nelson."


I think there was a thread a while ago where someone analyzed the statistical effect that extended series has on a bracket. I believe his simulations resulted in the agent with the greatest chance to win, winning more often than without extended series.

+ Show Spoiler +
Something like this: 60-40 players A and B. 36% chance that A wins 2-0, 28.8% that A wins 2-1, 19.2% chance that B wins 2-1, 16% chance that B wins 2-0
DavoS
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States4605 Posts
June 24 2013 22:28 GMT
#17
I don't mind extended series, but the fact that MLG brackets force these repeat matches as often as possible makes it really annoying
"KDA is actually the most useless stat in the game" Aui_2000
a9arnn
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
United States1537 Posts
June 24 2013 22:45 GMT
#18
I didn't particularly care if they brought it back/didn't. I'm confident former LighT ain't gonna be dropping down into the LB for it to matter ;D!
VOD finder guy for sc2ratings.com/ ! aka: ogndrahcir, a9azn2 | Go ZerO, Stork, Sea, and KawaiiRice :D | nesc2league.com/forum/index.php | youtube.com/watch?v=oaGtjWL5mZo
ValhallaDude
Profile Joined June 2011
United States24 Posts
June 25 2013 00:08 GMT
#19
I don't see why so many people have this purely emotional aversion to the extended series.

If a player beats another player earlier on in the tournament and goes on to win all matches and he faces that player again in the finals, why would it not be an extended series?

Why does the player who wins get a double jeopardy and the player who loses get a second chance?

We don't try people for the same crime twice. This should be no different.

shimbal
Boucot
Profile Blog Joined October 2011
France15997 Posts
June 25 2013 03:20 GMT
#20
What I don't like and I find "unfair" in this system is that it gives an advantage to a player who is at the same stage of the tournament as his opponent. Both players have lost a series. Why would a player suffer such a disadvantage because he lost to the "wrong" player ? That's why I dislike extended series.
Former SC2 writer for Millenium - twitter.com/Boucot
vrok
Profile Joined August 2009
Sweden2541 Posts
June 25 2013 05:37 GMT
#21
On June 24 2013 11:20 Deckard.666 wrote:
Everyone is going to disapprove w/o knowing it doesn't affect the finals.

I really don't know how can people hate that rule so much when the only thing it does is bring fairness for the players.

Extended series is the complete opposite of fairness. And it doesn't matter that it doesn't affect the finals anymore, it still affects the tournament and it's still bad.
"Starcraft 2 very easy game" - White-Ra
frostalgia
Profile Joined March 2011
United States178 Posts
June 25 2013 08:05 GMT
#22
In the past a lot of matches don't happen on stream, so sometimes we don't get to see why someone starts Finals ahead 2-0.
I don't think it's a problem if every match of the tournament is streamed.

I still think allowing any player a 2-0 headstart is too much, it kills the momentum of the Finals by starting it halfway through.
Allowing a 1-0 headstart is understandable.. but 2-0? Come on. It sucks when the Finals consist of just 2 games.

Extended Series should see more 2 game Finals than 5-7 game Finals.
This is because if a player easily beats another early on, and that player comes back to make it to the Finals, it is more likely the deficit will be too much if a player down 0-2. Compared to a Bo7, a comeback win is near impossible, as the 2-0 player just has to win two games.

I vowed to never watch a Finals where a player starts up 2-0 again, I remember how lame the last one was.
I am not sure why MLG insists on a rule that the majority agrees takes the fun out of the Finals.
Not only is it not fair to suck the momentum out of a player who is trying to make a comeback, but there is no example of this rule being used anywhere in a legitimate StarCraft tournament besides MLG from my memory.
Even the old IPL double-Bo5 was more preferable.

First no more Open bracket, now back to Extended Series for what seems like no real reason.
This lack of consistency and direction is making me care much less about MLG by the day.
Good thing Blizzard stepped it up with WCS, and brought NASL back in the picture.
At least it's still a real tournament.
we are all but shadows in the void
laerteis
Profile Joined August 2012
United States78 Posts
June 25 2013 08:07 GMT
#23
Extended series: bad. Don't do it. It's like pissing on the floor in your kitchen. Don't do it. It's gross and bad.
support Axiom eSports http://www.axiomesports.com/
Zato-1
Profile Blog Joined March 2009
Chile4253 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-06-25 14:59:26
June 25 2013 12:44 GMT
#24
I dislike the extended series because it brings a "memory" to the format that isn't helpful. A handful of players make it to an advanced round, only one of them is 2-0 and another one is 0-2 before the round even started because they happened to have been matched up against each other instead of against someone else... it's convoluted and silly.

EDIT: Another way of seeing this would be: The player who won 2-0 earlier on was already rewarded for that victory, in the round where he won. With extended series, wins/losses in the early rounds may (or may not, depending on who you're matched up against later on) count as wins/losses for later rounds as well... which is another way of reaching the conclusion that extended series is convoluted and silly.
Go here http://vina.biobiochile.cl/ and input the Konami Code (up up down down left right left right B A)
7mk
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
Germany10157 Posts
June 25 2013 15:07 GMT
#25
Not sure why they would bring it back after they had finally nailed it with the right format in one of their last MLGs
beep boop
Elucidate
Profile Blog Joined May 2012
205 Posts
June 25 2013 16:38 GMT
#26
Sometimes they are great, sometimes they are just confusing as all get out. It'd be nice if the system could be cleaned up a little or replaced with something that has a similar idea/motivation but goes about it in a different way.
Welcome to Aslan's Country. Sanctuary Cat on DotA 2.
Hermanoid
Profile Joined March 2011
Sweden213 Posts
June 25 2013 18:49 GMT
#27
The extended series made MLG special. I'm a greedy spectator and I like the reintroduction.
xyzåäö
Schandro
Profile Joined May 2011
57 Posts
June 25 2013 19:28 GMT
#28
It' 100% bad, and it's embarrasing that they still use it
renlynn
Profile Joined May 2011
United States276 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-06-25 22:51:07
June 25 2013 22:47 GMT
#29
On June 25 2013 00:50 LoKi- wrote:
It's interesting that this is so polarized. I personally don't mind it (I like it, really, but I don't feel too strongly either way). Could somebody please provide me with an argument against it, other than "it's unfair?" Because it seems to me that it's completely fair to retain the previous Bo3's standings when the same players meet again - it encourages solid play throughout the entire Bo3 because even losing 2-1 is better than losing 2-0. It also seems to add some excitement/story to the games when you can tell so clearly that these two players have met before in this tournament, and it actually matters fairly significantly.


it's arbitrary, because whether you run into the same person or someone you have no history with is mostly based on luck.

it's unfair, because even if that person did beat you, you have both lost the same number of times (or otherwise placed at the same rank) to be where you are. so you should be on even footing.

it leads to anticlimatic games. and also some very stupid moments where casters try to unravel the tortured logic of how the finals works for the audience.

it amazes me that these same arguments get rehashed every fucking time extended series gets brought up and there are still fuckwits at mlg who assume that anyone who disagrees simply doesn't understand extended series.
EvilTeletubby
Profile Blog Joined January 2004
Baltimore, USA22253 Posts
June 26 2013 05:35 GMT
#30
I'm surprised this poll is as close as it is.
Moderatorhttp://carbonleaf.yuku.com/topic/408/t/So-I-proposed-at-a-Carbon-Leaf-concert.html ***** RIP Geoff
mihajovics
Profile Joined April 2011
179 Posts
June 26 2013 07:42 GMT
#31
extended series was terrible because of how the loser bracket system worked (this is why it made such terrible finals)

if 2 players meet at a later stage of the tournament, when both won X games and lost Y, they should have an equal chance to advance.
individual scores against each other should only serve as a tiebreak.

(why aren't there any round robin or swiss tournaments? it would be nice, especially in WCS qualifiers, it would add much needed consistency)
xtyxtbx
Profile Joined December 2011
United States53 Posts
June 26 2013 09:16 GMT
#32
Totally think this is fair. If i already beat a player in a bo3 and have to vs him again later on just to get cheesed twice or some cheesy strat and lose is completely unfair. I think I should have a little advantage over the other player.
Health of marine with combat sheild = 55. Ht's storm damage = 80. What blizzard?
Fubi
Profile Joined March 2011
2228 Posts
June 26 2013 09:57 GMT
#33
On June 26 2013 18:16 xtyxtbx wrote:
Totally think this is fair. If i already beat a player in a bo3 and have to vs him again later on just to get cheesed twice or some cheesy strat and lose is completely unfair. I think I should have a little advantage over the other player.

What strat used is irrelevant; what if the first winner got his 2 wins from cheesing twice, does it make it unfair?

Also, I don't think anyone is saying extended series is unfair at a final; the player coming from winner's bracket should get an advantage because he has not lost a single series yet in the tournament while the player from the loser bracket has, so the first player to lose TWICE in the tournament should be the first one out (hence the name double elimination).

It is unfair however, at any other point of the bracket; Say player A beat player B in the winner's bracket; and later, player A faces player B again in loser's (not at the grand final). In order for this to happen, player A MUST at some point lost to another player in the winner's bracket, while player B beat every player since his lost against player A.

At this point when they meet again, both player A and player B have lost ONE series in the entire tournament and both have arrived at the exact same point in the tournament; this by definition of a tournament, means both players have performed equally well. It makes no sense then, from the interest of fairness, to give player A 1-2 games advantage.
Slunk
Profile Blog Joined February 2010
Germany768 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-06-26 11:22:47
June 26 2013 11:21 GMT
#34
On June 26 2013 18:57 Fubi wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 26 2013 18:16 xtyxtbx wrote:
Totally think this is fair. If i already beat a player in a bo3 and have to vs him again later on just to get cheesed twice or some cheesy strat and lose is completely unfair. I think I should have a little advantage over the other player.

What strat used is irrelevant; what if the first winner got his 2 wins from cheesing twice, does it make it unfair?

Also, I don't think anyone is saying extended series is unfair at a final; the player coming from winner's bracket should get an advantage because he has not lost a single series yet in the tournament while the player from the loser bracket has, so the first player to lose TWICE in the tournament should be the first one out (hence the name double elimination).

It is unfair however, at any other point of the bracket; Say player A beat player B in the winner's bracket; and later, player A faces player B again in loser's (not at the grand final). In order for this to happen, player A MUST at some point lost to another player in the winner's bracket, while player B beat every player since his lost against player A.

At this point when they meet again, both player A and player B have lost ONE series in the entire tournament and both have arrived at the exact same point in the tournament; this by definition of a tournament, means both players have performed equally well. It makes no sense then, from the interest of fairness, to give player A 1-2 games advantage.


This logic is flawed. Player A has gone on longer without losing than player B, since he knocked him in the lower bracket. Also, the extended series ensures that player B does not advance over player A with a losing map score. If in the upper bracket player A won 2-0 and in the lower bracket player B won 2-1, this means that player B went 2-3 against player A and still would advance over player A, which is not fair at all.
I am not saying that extended series is an awesome idea, but the reason behind it is definitely logical and it does not deserve the shit it gets at all.
seaofsaturn
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States489 Posts
June 26 2013 12:28 GMT
#35
Are they still doing the double bracket thing to avoid it in the grand finals? That was the only issue I think, in the regular brackets it's fine.
Photoshop is over-powered.
convention
Profile Joined October 2011
United States622 Posts
June 26 2013 17:05 GMT
#36
On June 26 2013 20:21 Slunk wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 26 2013 18:57 Fubi wrote:
On June 26 2013 18:16 xtyxtbx wrote:
Totally think this is fair. If i already beat a player in a bo3 and have to vs him again later on just to get cheesed twice or some cheesy strat and lose is completely unfair. I think I should have a little advantage over the other player.

What strat used is irrelevant; what if the first winner got his 2 wins from cheesing twice, does it make it unfair?

Also, I don't think anyone is saying extended series is unfair at a final; the player coming from winner's bracket should get an advantage because he has not lost a single series yet in the tournament while the player from the loser bracket has, so the first player to lose TWICE in the tournament should be the first one out (hence the name double elimination).

It is unfair however, at any other point of the bracket; Say player A beat player B in the winner's bracket; and later, player A faces player B again in loser's (not at the grand final). In order for this to happen, player A MUST at some point lost to another player in the winner's bracket, while player B beat every player since his lost against player A.

At this point when they meet again, both player A and player B have lost ONE series in the entire tournament and both have arrived at the exact same point in the tournament; this by definition of a tournament, means both players have performed equally well. It makes no sense then, from the interest of fairness, to give player A 1-2 games advantage.


This logic is flawed. Player A has gone on longer without losing than player B, since he knocked him in the lower bracket. Also, the extended series ensures that player B does not advance over player A with a losing map score. If in the upper bracket player A won 2-0 and in the lower bracket player B won 2-1, this means that player B went 2-3 against player A and still would advance over player A, which is not fair at all.
I am not saying that extended series is an awesome idea, but the reason behind it is definitely logical and it does not deserve the shit it gets at all.

The problem has never been whether it's fair or not (it clearly is "fair" since everyone is given the rule). The reason people hate it is how annoying it is to watch your favorite player X gets knocked down by Y. Now you need to not just hope X wins, but you also have to hope that he doesn't run into Y again throughout the tournament. Because it is so unlikely for someone to beat someone 4-1 or 3-1 (which is what is required after getting knocked down). So X has a great shot at getting to the finals, ONLY IF he does not run back through Y. I hate it because it complicates things so much with who I want to win, because if MC loses in this round, then he will drop down to the bracket demuslim is in (and he beat demuslim earlier), so now I need to hope MC wins this round, but lose next round, or he has to win the round after that but then lose the following round.

Or what I also find really really stupid, is suppose you have Z playing the winner of X and Y. Suppose Z already beat X. Now if X beats Y, Z gets a free ride to the next round. However, if Y beats X, then Z actually has to play a game. It's just so strange for Z to be benefited so much by someone else winning. If one person wins, he starts up 2-0, if the other wins it starts at 0-0. Really dumb.
jalstar
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States8198 Posts
June 26 2013 20:26 GMT
#37
Double elimination is a bad format to begin with. It's not used in real sports except for the college world series
+ Show Spoiler +
109, fuck yeah


and then it's used in a Bo1 format, where if you lose 2 Bo1s you are out. In MLG you can lose like 16 individual matches and win because all that matters is Bo3s. The alternative of extended series is to have 2 Bo3s, where one player can win the first Bo3 2-0 and lose the second Bo3 1-2 and get eliminated despite being 3-2 overall. So double elimination doesn't work in a format that's more than best of 1. Extended series "fixes" things by making it so you can only be eliminated by someone who has a positive head-to-head record with you, but then it's not really double elimination, as you can end up losing 3 or more best of 3's and still win the tournament.

Basically double elim doesn't work with or without extended series, and big open brackets like MLG should use a Swiss system.
letmegopls
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
105 Posts
June 27 2013 12:57 GMT
#38
why the hell would you put a "don't know/don't care" option? if you don't know/don't care, you obviously don't vote
Jaded.
Profile Joined June 2013
United States125 Posts
June 27 2013 16:06 GMT
#39
The extended series doesn't make sense for game played later on in the tournament (Quarter,Semis). The skill pool of the tournament is already fairly low with the exception being the Kespa players and a few of the koreans (HerO and Jaedong) and I for one won't be tuning in at least until the quarters since I'm not really interested in foreigners and low tier koreans playing each other. That being the case why would you potentially cheapen the Quarters and Semis by reducing the amount of games played? In a scenario where someone from the loser's has to win 2 BO3s you're guaranteed at least 2 games (winner wins first BO3 2-0) where as with extended series you could potentially just get one game.
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. What I'm saying is that there are known knowns and there are known unknowns but there's also unknown unknowns, things that we don't know that we don't know
MaxField
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States2386 Posts
June 28 2013 19:33 GMT
#40
I don't really see any issue with it.
Sure there are going to be some issues in a few cases where whats his face is pissed about a certain issue, but all in all i don't think it really affects the tourney that much.
And even if it does in some peoples opinion, I feel it is not the basis for boycotting/not watching the entire tourney....
"Zerg, so bad it loses to hydras" IdrA.
Tanngrisnir
Profile Joined December 2011
Sweden131 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-06-28 20:56:24
June 28 2013 20:54 GMT
#41
What most people dont know/understand is that extended series actually makes it less likely that the best player in a field actually wins the tournament compared to in a normal double elemination bracket format.

Im not pulling this out of my ass and saying this based on some asumptions im personally making. This statement is based on mathematics and advanced theory that I am not going to post as a comment here.

Ill tell you the conclusion and basics of it is this:
Consider every starting-slot in a double elemination bracket occupied by a precentage instead of a player.
The combined precentages of all players will be 100% so the starting precentage for every single bracketslot will be 100/<numberofslots> since we are not considering any games outside of our own bracket, nor having seeds etc this is how it will be.

Now the precentage represents a players chance of beeing the best player within the field. (Assuming this is what we are trying to determine with our bracket, and the more accurate we determine this the better our bracket system is.).

Now imaging these precentages playing eachother and advancing in the bracket.
The numbers will drop and rise as they progress into the bracket depending on their results.

How do we determine how effective our bracket is at finding the best player within a field of players?
By the precentage that the Winner of the bracket ends up with. If we had a system that would give every eliminated player a precentage of 0% and the Winner of the bracket 100% then this would be the perfect bracketsystem.

This does not exists!

However, I can tell you that the double elemination bracket with extended-series system would produce a significantly lower precentage in the Winner-slot then a normal double elimination bracket would.
Wich to me indicates that extended series doesn't make sense for a bracket with the purpose to determine the best player within a field as accurate as possible to use extended series.


Lets look at some logistics using the same precentag-bracketmap as you imagined previously.
Now I will use a slot deep in the lower bracket for a demonstration and I will be using the "lower-backet semi-finals" (in a double elimination bracket there is only 1 semi-final in the lower bracket, and the Winner of this game will play the loser of the upper-final in the lower-final.).

The precentage assigned to the player in this slot will ALWAYS be ROUGHLY the same, the path taken to get there will vary extremly slightly and the ammount is so small that it's irrelevant.

Now lets think about what that means!
It means your precentage will always be the same if you reach this point of the tournament and it doesnt matter if you lost round 4 upper and won a few games in lower, or you lost round 6 to get placed in the lower-finals. So why would you sometimes give one player a lead over the other player in lower-semis based on if they have played eachother earlier in the bracket or not? Remember you are playing precentages and the player behind the precentages doesn't actually matter.

In this example one player lost in round 4 upper match, while the other won his round 4 upper match, it shouldnt matter to WHO you lost in round 4 upper (since they are all the same precentage.) when you are in lower-semis.


Remember that the purpose of the bracket IS to determine the best player within a field as accurate as possible.
Remember that the best player in a field is the player thats favored over the most other players in the field, this isn't often every player in the field.
Remember that the purpose of the bracket ISN'T to determine as accurate as possible who is favored in any given player collision.

We can clearly see that the purpose of the extended series rule clearly deviates from the general purpose of a bracket and also produces a "less legit" champion.

Now, If people consider exnteded series more entertaining then using a normal more fair rule-system then I can see this beeing used but I simply can not imagine that the audience like exntended series better. I think the implementation of extended series comes from an uneducated asumption that it would produce a more fair and legit bracket while actually it is the drastic opposite!
God of thunder, god of pain!
ninjabartender
Profile Joined March 2011
United States1 Post
June 28 2013 21:24 GMT
#42
I don't like extended series because if a player beats another player then the player that won the first game shouldn't have any trouble winning again
sparC
Profile Joined June 2010
Germany162 Posts
June 28 2013 22:46 GMT
#43
i dont like the idea that if player A beats player B and then later player A has a significantly higher chance to progress vs. player B than vs player C.

or imagine B beats C and then loses to A. and before that C beat D. what kind of fucked up series are ahead?
so C meets D in lower bracket and is more likely to advance because he has this possibly huge point advantage.
after that C plays vs B again, this time from far behind.

so then player B comes out of the loser's bracket and "fought" his way back (yeay he won one game) and then he doesn't have to pay the price that others did when facing A again in the finals? either way it's bullshit.

you think the player should have an advantage because he won vs another player before in the tournament?
he already has one, the pressure is on the opponent.
Luisa_2
Profile Joined August 2011
Germany200 Posts
June 29 2013 13:01 GMT
#44
I don't mind extended series too much tbh, but I also can see why people don't.
I'm just curious why they decided to put it back in...
"Tasteless,why did the Colossus fall over?" "Why?" " Because it was imbalanced"
trada
Profile Joined August 2012
Germany347 Posts
June 29 2013 13:43 GMT
#45
its not a big deal imo. it rarely happens throughout the whole tournament and I can definitely see its purpose
~
bludragen88
Profile Joined August 2008
United States527 Posts
June 30 2013 06:35 GMT
#46
I hesitate to resurrect this because it's such a polarizing topic, but I feel like one of the things extended series wants to do is reward someone for winning 2-0 instead of 2-1 (and to prevent a net 3-2 record against a player leading to elimination). I still think that could be solved with a 1-0 start in BO5 for a previous 2-0 result and an even BO3 for a previous 2-1. I think this leaves a lot more room for either player to win - needing to go 3-1 (or 4-1) is just really unlikely.
If the goal is to prevent someone from winning first and then losing to the same player feeling unlucky for losing at the wrong time, then MLG really needs to have losers go to different brackets to reduce the chance of meeting again.
To whoever suggested a swiss system, I think it'd be super cool to try a tournament like that but you'd need to play at least 10 2 game rounds to get any kind of separation at the top - you might even need 15 before it stops being just as chaotic (if not more) as MLG style double elim.
I just thought I'd throw my bad ideas out there now since we're finally in range of extended series tomorrow morning.
Witten
Profile Joined January 2011
United States2094 Posts
June 30 2013 15:14 GMT
#47
On June 25 2013 09:08 ValhallaDude wrote:
I don't see why so many people have this purely emotional aversion to the extended series.

If a player beats another player earlier on in the tournament and goes on to win all matches and he faces that player again in the finals, why would it not be an extended series?

Why does the player who wins get a double jeopardy and the player who loses get a second chance?

We don't try people for the same crime twice. This should be no different.



I don't think you understand what double jeopardy is... The finals of MLG will be between the winners of two different brackets, so it'll obviously make no sense to have extended series cause there will be a 0% chance that they could have met earlier. The aversion people have to extended series in the finals is that is puts the person in losers in an even more precarious position. Aside from that, it eliminates the possibility of the always exciting "bracket reset". In a Grand Finals, the person in losers (regardless of whether they ever met the person in Winners before the finals) is required to win two series instead of one. Because it's double elimination, the person in Winners only has to win one series out of two, giving them a massive advantage but still allowing the person in Losers to have a chance by outplaying his opponent. This is more fair and, more importantly, more exciting for viewers than someone coming in to a series down 2-0 from the start. It shouldn't matter who they lost to in Winners or what score they did, it just matters that they lost. That's why they are in Losers.
Brood War Forever / NA's premiere Shadow Shaman player / Courier Collector / Bot Game Champion / Highly amateur Mystical Ninja Goemon Speedrunner
FlorisXIV
Profile Joined December 2008
Netherlands15 Posts
June 30 2013 15:18 GMT
#48
So, apparently, the extended series rule is in effect during the MLG spring championships? I don't see any mention of it on the Liquipedia tournament page.

Round 8 spoiler
+ Show Spoiler +
So, let's say Jaedong beats Naniwa ,his match against Dear will continue from 0-2?
If brute forse doesn't solve your problems you're not using enough!
cladoliver
Profile Joined December 2012
Brazil38 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-06-30 19:16:06
June 30 2013 19:15 GMT
#49
yes, polt is 2-0 against naniwa already
MonarK
Profile Joined January 2013
United States3 Posts
June 30 2013 21:16 GMT
#50
I just liked MLG back when it would be a RO32 in the Championship series. Im not a huge fan of the RO128 with a bunch of random American players. I was thinking about going to Anaheim a long time ago, but i decided not to go since of the weird format. :/
Fuell
Profile Joined February 2011
Netherlands3111 Posts
July 01 2013 06:25 GMT
#51
annoying.. takes the hype off, but its fair
fOu/Zenith/NEX/WeRRa/SlayerS
Bertholdz
Profile Joined July 2013
23 Posts
July 01 2013 10:41 GMT
#52
The naniwacase yesterday shows the problem with extended series He did lose to Polt and the result was that he had to win three matches to get a place in the semi-finals, with Polt only having to win one more match. Despite the three strong wins he was still punished in the semi for his first loss which strongly limited his chances and made it less exciting because of the desperate situation of having to win 4-1. In other words a double punishment for a loss that is unreasonable.

This is cold facts, nothing to debate further really. Extended have proved unfair.
mihajovics
Profile Joined April 2011
179 Posts
July 01 2013 11:14 GMT
#53
On June 29 2013 05:54 Tanngrisnir wrote:
...I think the implementation of extended series comes from an uneducated asumption that it would produce a more fair and legit bracket while actually it is the drastic opposite!


well said!
also I think MLG does it just to be different than other tournaments
Silvanel
Profile Blog Joined March 2003
Poland4725 Posts
July 01 2013 15:18 GMT
#54
Yeah, it crossed my mind that they do it just for publicity. The loss to the integrity of the tournament is not so large, and here we are talking about MLG. And we will be talking about it long after the tournament.

I dont mind, extended series in final of double elimination bracket (they have two doble elim brackets as part of in MLG final bracket right?). What worries me is extnded seires before fnal, when one play has advantage over the other, while they both are in losers bracket. Is it possible in current form of MLG rules? If so thats bad.
Pathetic Greta hater.
Havik_
Profile Joined November 2011
United States5585 Posts
July 01 2013 17:26 GMT
#55
I really don't see the big deal about it. The only thing they should have done was make the finals a Bo7 instead of a Bo5 since Hyun didn't lose a series at the tournament yet. Extended series is fine.
"An opinion is only as good as the evidence that backs it up."- William O'Malley, S.J.
BombaySensei
Profile Joined March 2011
United States282 Posts
July 01 2013 17:53 GMT
#56
it's totally fair, people will always qq about it when their favorite player loses in an extended series (even though it is better proof that the better player won than a bo3).

deal with it
EE-God, our Dono and Savior (also our sensei)
LowEloPlayer
Profile Blog Joined March 2012
United States205 Posts
July 02 2013 00:35 GMT
#57
The advantage of not getting knocked down to the loser's bracket is that you don't have to play the matches in the loser's bracket. What's the point of giving you even more of an advantage? You're going up to the guy who just fought tooth and nail through the loser's bracket and then they have a disadvantage going into a series? On a match by match level, every matchshould be equal. No questions asked. Let the better player win. The extended series, if anything, just makes it so the better player doesn't always win because if somebody had an easy road to the finals and didn't get knocked down to the loser's bracket they could win against someone who is better but had a much harder road and did get nkocked down.
hmm... let's think about it
Jonoman92
Profile Blog Joined September 2006
United States9103 Posts
July 03 2013 23:21 GMT
#58
Never been a fan of extended series. I prefer each series being its own independent event. No need to link them together because you happen to be playing against the same guy again.
Sindar
Profile Joined April 2013
6 Posts
July 04 2013 09:41 GMT
#59
Extended series so good idea. What about making extended series between two or three following turnaments...
iEatWoofers
Profile Joined August 2011
Switzerland108 Posts
July 04 2013 10:32 GMT
#60
If the players meet up again it should just be a normal game. I don't think it's very fair to give a player such a huge advantage, and to be honest, it's boring as well. Other tournaments don't do that either.

Imagine this in the GSL finals "oh player X has a lead because he beat player Y in the RO32. Player Y now has to win 4 games in a row, while player X only need to win twice". Everyone would flip their shit.
OrD_SC2
Profile Joined February 2012
United States247 Posts
July 04 2013 22:43 GMT
#61
Ultimately I feel this is a "meh..." decision. If we want to create story lines in eSports that mean something we have to decide on a format and stick with if for more than a few months at a time.

GSL is a great example of this - its gone through MANY changes and yet because when the make major changes they keep them for multiple seasons (normally) and thus we don't have to add eight different *'s onto every pro's stat sheet.
Baldie disapproved of my last status, TT
CycoDude
Profile Joined November 2010
United States326 Posts
July 05 2013 02:59 GMT
#62
i don't know why people cry about this. if you beat someone in a best of three, and meet that same person again, they have to beat you in two best of threes, because you haven't fallen into the losers bracket yet. it's DOUBLE ELIMINATION. they've already lost once, you've lost ZERO times. it's not hard to understand.

so is that the issue, or is the issue that double-elimination is not as good as some other method?
Klyberess
Profile Joined October 2010
Sweden345 Posts
July 05 2013 07:19 GMT
#63
On July 05 2013 11:59 CycoDude wrote:
i don't know why people cry about this. if you beat someone in a best of three, and meet that same person again, they have to beat you in two best of threes, because you haven't fallen into the losers bracket yet. it's DOUBLE ELIMINATION. they've already lost once, you've lost ZERO times. it's not hard to understand.

so is that the issue, or is the issue that double-elimination is not as good as some other method?

If you're in the winner's bracket, you DON'T play against someone in the loser's bracket. Why do you complain that WE don't understand the system, when you clearly have no idea how it works yourself? Ugh... Apparently it IS hard to understand.
EmpireHappy <3 STHack <3 ByunPrime
Noobity
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
United States871 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-07-05 16:02:50
July 05 2013 16:00 GMT
#64
I think extended series is fine in a lower bracket scenario before the top 16. Seeing how this is very rarely the case, it's probably for the best that it's dropped.

However, this does kind of cheat a player who has not lost a set when they face a player that has. Maybe if each MLG just starts to be 2 side by side tournaments, where the winner of 1 will play the winner of the other, creating a true best of whatever final, with extended series being used in each individual bracket but not the final? Or maybe 4 individual mini tournaments where the winner of the winners bracket and the winner of the losers bracket go to the round of 8 and then it's single elim from there?

Or just make getting to the finals as the winner's bracket winner have it's own bonus prize money? I actually like that last idea.

On July 05 2013 16:19 Klyberess wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 05 2013 11:59 CycoDude wrote:
i don't know why people cry about this. if you beat someone in a best of three, and meet that same person again, they have to beat you in two best of threes, because you haven't fallen into the losers bracket yet. it's DOUBLE ELIMINATION. they've already lost once, you've lost ZERO times. it's not hard to understand.

so is that the issue, or is the issue that double-elimination is not as good as some other method?

If you're in the winner's bracket, you DON'T play against someone in the loser's bracket. Why do you complain that WE don't understand the system, when you clearly have no idea how it works yourself? Ugh... Apparently it IS hard to understand.


Happens in the finals kinda often. If huk beats demuslim in the semis of the winners bracket, and then demuslim beats incontrol in the losers bracket finals, then it's huk vs demuslim in the finals where huk's already beaten demuslim once.

I think that's the kinda thing he's getting at.
My name is Mike, and statistically, yours is not.
polysciguy
Profile Joined August 2010
United States488 Posts
July 05 2013 18:03 GMT
#65
On June 25 2013 12:20 Boucot wrote:
What I don't like and I find "unfair" in this system is that it gives an advantage to a player who is at the same stage of the tournament as his opponent. Both players have lost a series. Why would a player suffer such a disadvantage because he lost to the "wrong" player ? That's why I dislike extended series.

this
also think about it, if the series becomes a best of 5, the player that won the previous series only has to win 1 game to move on, if it becomes a best of seven, the losing player has to win 3-4 games and is only allowed to drop a single match. when if they face any other player they only have to win 2 games.
glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever---napoleon
Klive5ive
Profile Blog Joined January 2008
United Kingdom6056 Posts
July 05 2013 21:04 GMT
#66
Extended series doesn't make any sense in a game where there are 3 match-ups - if you ranked matchups by ELO and averaged you can show mathematically that the player from lower bracket is likely to be the better player! (as he has won more games). You could improve the likelihood of better players winning by adding the extra matches towards the end of the tournament instead of randomly where players meet previous opponents.
Also from an organisational point of view it messes up the timings by making the length of each series more variable.

There is no "plus" except extra games... but you could add them in better places.
Don't hate the player - Hate the game
Befree
Profile Joined April 2010
695 Posts
July 06 2013 00:13 GMT
#67
Perhaps we should go all the way with this philosophy and add some sort of transitive form of the extended series. Where if A 2-0 B, A 2-1 C, Perhaps B vs C in the lower bracket should begin at 3-2?? I mean why not? Clearly this only adds fairness! Why should C not receive an advantage for taking a game off A. B is just a little newbie who couldn't even beat A in a single match. Where C actually showed his worth in the winner's bracket. What was even the point in C taking a game off A if little newbie B who couldn't gets equal footing in the B vs C encounter?!

I formally propose this Transitive Extended Series model for future MLGs. Fairness will prevail!

Or wait... Why are we even restricting this to their little subset of 3?? Why should A's games vs B, C, D, E not also be organized in such a way to relate them to F's games vs G, H, I, J? A 2-0's BCDE and F 2-1's GHIJ. And A vs F begins at 0-0?? What the fuck?? Certainly we can relate their two paths in a fair way? Now sure you might say "but genius creator of the TES model, what if GHIJ were a bunch of American noobs and BCDE were a bunch of top Koreans? We can't compare those results as if a win vs 2-0 vs B is the same as a 2-0 vs G!" Indeed you are correct, and that's why our model will also utilize an ELO system! Using the ELO of A's and F's previous opponents we can accurately weight the significance of each of their previous wins, and using this we can come up with an initial score for their series that truly will capture the accomplishments each has made so far in the tournament.

But hold on you might say. Hold on sir because there's still injustice left in this MLG tournament. For example what if A beat B in the last 10 competitive matches against each other. Surely if B were to 3-2 A it would be an anomaly, an injustice against the A and the tournament as a whole! ...Dammit, you're right! We've completely ignored history in our model. Without that, we definitely cannot optimize this tournament for fairness. Okay... Well the inclusion of ELO certainly helps to a degree in terms of taking into account the history of players in our tournament, but it definitely doesn't go far enough. Our model needs to include every match in the last year... no... 2 years... no, that's not enough! Our model must include every single competitive match each player in our tournament has every played! Once we take that into account, we can then correctly weight who deserves to win every match and maybe then we can reach the level of absolutely fair results...

Oh no, but what about non-competitive matches! Does the ladder game Flash won against Supernova last night not mean anything?!! How can we ignore that! We can't.. Clearly we must work with Blizzard and collect ladder data on every player and inject that into our model as well... Ah but what about melee games off the ladder?... Yes, I suppose we'll need those too. And really since we're on the subject of custom games, what if Flash beats Supernova at 5 games of Desert Strike in a row?! Sure it's not using melee ruleset but it has similar themes to our MLG competitive matches. It should also be included in our system, even if just to a small degree....

I think we've got it now guys. We just need every single game played by every player on StarCraft. And then the tournament will be truly optimized for justice... This will really be a milestone for competitive gaming, as well as humanity as a whole.

WAIT

Oh my god, how was I so foolish?! Our thinking, it has been so focused on purely StarCraft and purely match results, I think we're missing the human factor in this all. What about that game of Star Battle that Flash was in on that day when he had just had lunch and was feeling a little sick from it and he lost to Supernova. I mean we're COMPLETELY ignoring the factors outside of the game there! Or what about that guy who said "you suck" to Suppy before he started that MLG match. Clearly Suppy's mind was put in a different state than his opponent by this outside factor he couldn't control. Was that win to his opponent really as valuable as a clean win would have been?? NO! If we're gonna do this right, we're gonna need to factor in every emotion they feel... Well, more than that, we need every single stimuli they have ever been exposed to to be included in our model... Only at this point can we calculate the correct initial score for beginning a series. Only then we'll we be able to weight in such a way that justice always prevails.

But certainly through these calculations, we can find to within an extremely tiny error (basically negligible) who should win. So why even put them through it? Because that tiny negligible chance that they have of deserving their win deserves a chance!! That's what the MLG is about! We can't ignore any factor due to its seemingly insignificant existence.

A true utopia of competitive E-sports awaits us with MLG as our guide. Oh what a beautiful world it will be. And more importantly, what a fair one.
Terrasmith
Profile Joined February 2013
47 Posts
July 06 2013 10:41 GMT
#68
I think the extended series doesn't quite make sense in a bracket format. Mind games and external factors have a huge effect on the progression of a series, and players react differently to pressure. So it really doesn't make sense for a Ro8 match to start imbalanced because three or four rounds back one player was hot and another slightly off. There are too many intangible factors that change between the two series for extended series to be fair.
Garoodah
Profile Joined January 2012
United States56 Posts
July 06 2013 18:36 GMT
#69
Im pretty neutral only because it favors players who put their best builds into a tournament early, and the ones with superior play. The being said its somewhat deterring watching players fall out of a tournament after working so hard in the losers bracket only to lose again in an extended series. Its a tough decision but the more I think about it the more I think its bad for tournament play.
"Oh man we've got GG-lords"
KalWarkov
Profile Blog Joined December 2011
Germany4126 Posts
July 06 2013 22:45 GMT
#70
it doesnt make any sense whatsoever.

it rly hurts my brain that 32% vote for "approve"
DiaBoLuS ** Sc2 - Protoss: 16x GM | Dota2 - Offlane Immortal | Wc3 - Undead decent level | Diablo nerd | Chess / Magnus fanboy | BVB | Agnostic***
KalWarkov
Profile Blog Joined December 2011
Germany4126 Posts
July 06 2013 22:47 GMT
#71
On July 05 2013 11:59 CycoDude wrote:
i don't know why people cry about this. if you beat someone in a best of three, and meet that same person again, they have to beat you in two best of threes, because you haven't fallen into the losers bracket yet. it's DOUBLE ELIMINATION. they've already lost once, you've lost ZERO times. it's not hard to understand.

so is that the issue, or is the issue that double-elimination is not as good as some other method?


well, then why do you only have to win 2 bo3s if you already played and lost against that specific player?
you should either play 2 bo3s vs EVERYONE who lost ZERO games till that point, or just fucking play a normal bo3 since u crawled all the way up to that point from a LB, and you had to go through a lot more opponents.
DiaBoLuS ** Sc2 - Protoss: 16x GM | Dota2 - Offlane Immortal | Wc3 - Undead decent level | Diablo nerd | Chess / Magnus fanboy | BVB | Agnostic***
Cheerio
Profile Blog Joined August 2007
Ukraine3178 Posts
July 07 2013 09:06 GMT
#72
Why not go all the way and take the entire face-to-face history between the players? Best of 57 ftw. Fairness guaranteed.
If you are a better player go out there and prove it.
TrippSC2
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
United States209 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-07-07 14:52:21
July 07 2013 14:49 GMT
#73
I voted approve, but I wish I could switch to the middle-of-the-road answer.

I like ES in the context of two players that are meeting in a Winners bracket vs Losers bracket finals. ES is more interesting and straight-forward to explain as a format than doing the 1 BoX to force another BoX.

MLG doesn't use ES well, imo. If both players are in the same Losers bracket, they deserve to go in on equal footing.

Also, in the past, they've double handicapped the Losers bracket player in the above situation which leads to an unfair and confusing format. Stuff like the Loser bracket player must win a Bo9 (Bo3 + Bo5) starting down 2-0 to extend the series further to a Bo13, which is just ridiculous.

Personally, I miss the pool play that used to happen at MLG. Fairness aside, I enjoyed watching that format more than an enormous bracket.
Acrofales
Profile Joined August 2010
Spain17974 Posts
July 08 2013 17:46 GMT
#74
Extended series are retarded. Both players got knocked down to the lower bracket. Doesn't matter by whom. Series should start on equal footing.
Normal
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 4h 23m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nina 217
StarCraft: Brood War
Leta 796
Zeus 568
PianO 351
HiyA 266
Nal_rA 93
sorry 83
NaDa 62
GoRush 61
JulyZerg 53
Aegong 41
[ Show more ]
Noble 34
Rock 11
ivOry 6
LuMiX 5
Dota 2
monkeys_forever767
NeuroSwarm121
League of Legends
JimRising 816
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K1172
Super Smash Bros
Westballz39
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor147
Other Games
summit1g10886
shahzam975
ViBE197
Trikslyr38
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick39371
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 13 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH368
• Hupsaiya 64
• practicex 28
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Upcoming Events
RSL Revival
4h 23m
SHIN vs Clem
Cure vs TBD
FEL
6h 23m
FEL
10h 23m
Gerald vs PAPI
Spirit vs ArT
CSO Cup
10h 23m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
12h 23m
Bonyth vs QiaoGege
Dewalt vs Fengzi
Hawk vs Zhanhun
Sziky vs Mihu
Mihu vs QiaoGege
Zhanhun vs Sziky
Fengzi vs Hawk
DaveTesta Events
12h 23m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
1d 4h
RSL Revival
1d 4h
Classic vs TBD
FEL
1d 9h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 12h
Bonyth vs Dewalt
QiaoGege vs Dewalt
Hawk vs Bonyth
Sziky vs Fengzi
Mihu vs Zhanhun
QiaoGege vs Zhanhun
Fengzi vs Mihu
[ Show More ]
Wardi Open
2 days
Replay Cast
3 days
WardiTV European League
3 days
PiGosaur Monday
3 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
The PondCast
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Epic.LAN
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
HSC XXVII
NC Random Cup

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Acropolis #3
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters

Upcoming

CSL Xiamen Invitational
CSL Xiamen Invitational: ShowMatche
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Underdog Cup #2
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.