|
Why would Oz fans think this is better? Bo7 is harder for Oz which ever way you look at it.
In a normal PL game jaedongs minions has to win one game for him to seal the deal. In a Bo7 they have to win two.
How is 5 of 15 games easier to win than 2 of 5? Becuase NO, unlike most of you saying in here. Jaedong won't be playing two ace matches if the game only goes to 5 games in both meetings.
If Oz wins or loses the first game 4-0, 4-1 or 4-2 Jaedong will have played one game in it. If they then go to ace in the second he will play two in that and possibly the super ace. He will then have 4 games played out of atleast 12.
So if Jaedong plays either 4 out of 12 or 5 out of 15 he plays exactly one third of the games. In a normal PL game he would play 2 out of 5. That is more than one third of the games. Thus the team is less reliant on jaedong and more on their other players.
People need to stop saying this format favours Oz because it clearly does not.
Edit: Techically he can play 4 out of 13 or 14 aswell if one of the matches goes to 5 or 6 games but that would only make it less likely for Oz to win because he then plays even less.
|
LOL something came up in my mind.
What if the super ace match was a 2v2?
Therefore, promoting as you all say, teamwork. Which is supposed to be the essence of the ProLeague. Am i right?
LOL
|
SKT gets to field all their players now. GO BISU/FANTASY/BOXER/OOV/CANATA/THEZERG HWWWWAIIIITTTTTIIIIIIIIIINNNNG
|
Yeah, I don't care. There's good things and bad things to it.
|
2 bo7s? I like it. And yeah, StarBrift is right. The regular format is much easier for Oz.
|
all the people who voted 'no' are probably CJ, KHAN, or STX fans lol
|
As an avid SKT1 hater, it all depends on whether SKT1 wins it or not. I will be very happy with the format if SKT1 loses as a result of it.
|
I think that its unfair and not even exciting but I clicked yes... damn you Jaedong.
|
Braavos36388 Posts
On August 03 2009 03:12 StarBrift wrote:
Why would Oz fans think this is better? Bo7 is harder for Oz which ever way you look at it.
In a normal PL game jaedongs minions has to win one game for him to seal the deal. In a Bo7 they have to win two.
How is 5 of 15 games easier to win than 2 of 5? Becuase NO, unlike most of you saying in here. Jaedong won't be playing two ace matches if the game only goes to 5 games in both meetings.
If Oz wins or loses the first game 4-0, 4-1 or 4-2 Jaedong will have played one game in it. If they then go to ace in the second he will play two in that and possibly the super ace. He will then have 4 games played out of atleast 12.
So if Jaedong plays either 4 out of 12 or 5 out of 15 he plays exactly one third of the games. In a normal PL game he would play 2 out of 5. That is more than one third of the games. Thus the team is less reliant on jaedong and more on their other players.
People need to stop saying this format favours Oz because it clearly does not.
Edit: Techically he can play 4 out of 13 or 14 aswell if one of the matches goes to 5 or 6 games but that would only make it less likely for Oz to win because he then plays even less.
Well, its not really about the % of games played, its about chance to win the entire set
In a normal Bo7 Oz has to win 2 out of 5 non Jaedong games to get it to ace so Jaedong can win. In this new format, they still have to win 2 out of 5 non Jaedong games, but they have two tries to do it. If they do this on either Day 1 or Day 2, then they get a super ace that Jaedong plays.
However, just because its easier for Oz doesn't mean its a worse format. 2 Bo7s is better than one, and the super aces are some of the most intense, insane games I've ever watched.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
Its good for the fans but does a really bad job of determining which team is "better"
|
I think it's kindof dumb that a team can win with less wins if they get 4-0'd and then somehow come back and 4-3 and win the super ace match. They'd have 5 total wins and the other team would have 7, but they win? Lame.
I am a Khan fan, though.
|
On August 03 2009 01:52 GGQ wrote:
No. It's a bad format for proleague, which shouldn't put such emphasis on a single star player.
Somewhat agree, but as far as the ESPORTS goes, star players are what get people to tune in, so I can see why they run winnersleague and these super ace things, because they favor big star clash-of-the-titans style matchups that people want to see. That's why they have individual league seeds, and why they set up the league prelims in favor of the more well known players.
Stars make 'sports' what they are, because without them nobody cares. I probably would barely even know that cycling was a sport if it weren't for Lance Armstrong, and I'm sure golf wouldn't be as popular as it is without Tiger. (From a US point of view, anyway.)
edit: But yeah, it's kind of an unfair format for 'team' league. I can understand why they do it though.
|
|
|
I dont really care either way, but heres a idea for thous that favor depth:
Super ACE Bo3! each team gets there 3 best players, puts them in game 1,2, or 3 and then best of 3 games win! that sounds fun. It would be a long day of games though...
|
On August 03 2009 01:52 GGQ wrote:
No. It's a bad format for proleague, which shouldn't put such emphasis on a single star player.
This
|
Bo3 Superace would be best.
|
On August 03 2009 04:09 Mikilatov wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2009 01:52 GGQ wrote:
No. It's a bad format for proleague, which shouldn't put such emphasis on a single star player. Somewhat agree, but as far as the ESPORTS goes, star players are what get people to tune in, so I can see why they run winnersleague and these super ace things, because they favor big star clash-of-the-titans style matchups that people want to see. That's why they have individual league seeds, and why they set up the league prelims in favor of the more well known players. Stars make 'sports' what they are, because without them nobody cares. I probably would barely even know that cycling was a sport if it weren't for Lance Armstrong, and I'm sure golf wouldn't be as popular as it is without Tiger. (From a US point of view, anyway.) edit: But yeah, it's kind of an unfair format for 'team' league. I can understand why they do it though.
It's not that I disagree with putting any extra emphasis on star players. I wouldn't want to get rid of ace matches altogether. It's about putting too much emphasis on a single player, and where to draw the line. As Hot_Bid explained earlier, two Bo7s give Oz two chances to hand the whole thing off to JD. Of course, Oz deserves credit as a team for producing and supporting a monster like JD, but I think the current format is weighted too heavily towards a star player.
One suggestion, off the top of my head, is to have the super-ace be a bo3 ace matches where each player can only be sent out once.
|
In basketball, two teams will play a bo5.
Inevitably, at the ends of those games (unless blowout) ... the star player will get the ball.
How is this different than a Super Ace?
|
I think it depends, if your team wins because of it or not. 
But in all honesty I would say no, having a team game hinge on one match is not so great.. v.v
|
i just rather seem them go to a 3rd day and another whole bo7 if its tied 1-1 after the first two days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
