|
On November 08 2010 04:22 dtz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2010 04:21 Ryzu wrote:On November 08 2010 04:20 Xeteh wrote:On November 08 2010 04:19 Redmark wrote:On November 08 2010 04:16 Ryzu wrote:
Why? Don't want an extended series, don't lose the first match. How is this fair at all? You're already punished for losing: it's called loser's bracket. Why should you be behind against someone you lost to but not against someone else, who if he had played you before may have won even harder? Because the other player hasn't lost yet? Its a double elimination tournament. Don't use logic here, I don't think many people are capable of critical thinking in these threads. Except that both Tyler and PainUser has lost once. Thus, they should be equal as players who are on their 2nd lives so to speak. The only advantage should be had by the Winner of Winner Bracket because he has not lost before.
The obvious counter-logic to that is let's say Tyler win's 2-1 against Painuser w/ that setup. The tournament ends with Tyler advancing with a record against painuser of 2-3. That aint right.
There is no perfect solution. People will always complain about any tournament format. Deal with it.
|
|
|
Hahaha.*Evil cackle*
I love the irony of this. Lookin at winners bracket, If Naz hadn't blunked Idra "all for the best of Team Liquid", The Gracken would've taken out The REAL Liquidkiller - Painuser early on. Then Tyler could've taken out Idra in WB RO8 and TL would be sitting prettier than now!
Maybe the SC Karma does work out.
+ Show Spoiler +Idra would have taken PU cos the latter seems as allergic to cheese as him. Lol.
|
hate these positions as toss v terran. drops and banshees so annoying. would like to see tt1 get a stargate just to control that air.
|
On November 08 2010 04:24 The KY wrote:
I do think extended series is bullshit. No reason for it, both players earned their place.
I agree. Offer double elimination, but still punish the player if they manage to get back.
|
On November 08 2010 04:19 Pudge_172 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2010 04:18 Gudeldar wrote:
If the finals are TT1 vs TLO does that mean the final will be a Bo7 with TT1 starting up 2? This isn't possible
Didn't realize that TLO lost to PU in the losers bracket.
|
On November 08 2010 04:23 neoenigma wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2010 04:21 Ryzu wrote:On November 08 2010 04:20 Xeteh wrote:On November 08 2010 04:19 Redmark wrote:On November 08 2010 04:16 Ryzu wrote:
Why? Don't want an extended series, don't lose the first match. How is this fair at all? You're already punished for losing: it's called loser's bracket. Why should you be behind against someone you lost to but not against someone else, who if he had played you before may have won even harder? Because the other player hasn't lost yet? Its a double elimination tournament. Don't use logic here, I don't think many people are capable of critical thinking in these threads. The rule isn't really logical. Painuser beat Tyler and advanced farther in the tournament. Forget those two now. Previous results do not matter. Tyler climbs up the losers bracket and earns a place against some unknown player yet to be knocked out. Painuser gets knocked out and plays Tyler. It's a new game. Both players earned that spot and deserve a unique beast of 3 series. That's how I see it.
That might be how you see it, but that's not how it actually happened, and that's not how a double elimination works...anywhere.
|
|
|
On November 08 2010 04:25 Firereaver wrote:
Hahaha.*Evil cackle*
I love the irony of this. Lookin at winners bracket, If Naz hadn't blunked Idra "all for the best of Team Liquid", The Gracken would've taken out The REAL Liquidkiller - Painuser early on. Then Tyler could've taken out Idra in WB RO8 and TL would be sitting prettier than now!
Maybe the SC Karma does work out.
That's a lot of assumptions. TL's still looking pretty good.
|
On November 08 2010 04:22 kojinshugi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2010 04:21 Ryzu wrote:On November 08 2010 04:20 Xeteh wrote:On November 08 2010 04:19 Redmark wrote:On November 08 2010 04:16 Ryzu wrote:
Why? Don't want an extended series, don't lose the first match. How is this fair at all? You're already punished for losing: it's called loser's bracket. Why should you be behind against someone you lost to but not against someone else, who if he had played you before may have won even harder? Because the other player hasn't lost yet? Its a double elimination tournament. Don't use logic here, I don't think many people are capable of critical thinking in these threads. It's homeopathic epistemology. The less sense you make the more potent your point is.
You made that up.  Admit it.
|
On November 08 2010 04:23 Ryzu wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2010 04:22 dtz wrote:On November 08 2010 04:21 Ryzu wrote:On November 08 2010 04:20 Xeteh wrote:On November 08 2010 04:19 Redmark wrote:On November 08 2010 04:16 Ryzu wrote:
Why? Don't want an extended series, don't lose the first match. How is this fair at all? You're already punished for losing: it's called loser's bracket. Why should you be behind against someone you lost to but not against someone else, who if he had played you before may have won even harder? Because the other player hasn't lost yet? Its a double elimination tournament. Don't use logic here, I don't think many people are capable of critical thinking in these threads. Except that both Tyler and PainUser has lost once. Thus, they should be equal as players who are on their 2nd lives so to speak. The only advantage should be had by the Winner of Winner Bracket because he has not lost before. Not so, since PainUser was the player to take Tyler down originally.
So if Jinro had lost against PainUser instead, Jinro vs Tyler will start from 0-0 while as it is now Painuser vs Tyler starts from 2-0.
I dunno about you but i think that whoever lost the WB Semifinal between PainUser and Jinro should both have the same advantage ( or not at all) against Tyler.
Does that not make for some inconsistency?
|
Yes it is? With most double elimination tournaments, you're out when you lose two series.
|
On November 08 2010 04:22 kojinshugi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2010 04:21 Ryzu wrote:On November 08 2010 04:20 Xeteh wrote:On November 08 2010 04:19 Redmark wrote:On November 08 2010 04:16 Ryzu wrote:
Why? Don't want an extended series, don't lose the first match. How is this fair at all? You're already punished for losing: it's called loser's bracket. Why should you be behind against someone you lost to but not against someone else, who if he had played you before may have won even harder? Because the other player hasn't lost yet? Its a double elimination tournament. Don't use logic here, I don't think many people are capable of critical thinking in these threads. It's homeopathic epistemology. The less sense you make the more potent your point is.
best post i've ever seen on Team Liquid :D
|
what do people mean nazgul blunked idra? why is idra called grack? lol
|
I love this banshee play Jinro is doing. Keep them alive! They can help in the real battles too.
|
|
|
god I love jinro's play, need to see that raven be effective here
|
On November 08 2010 04:25 Firereaver wrote:Hahaha.*Evil cackle* I love the irony of this. Lookin at winners bracket, If Naz hadn't blunked Idra "all for the best of Team Liquid", The Gracken would've taken out The REAL Liquidkiller - Painuser early on. Then Tyler could've taken out Idra in WB RO8 and TL would be sitting prettier than now! Maybe the SC Karma does work out. + Show Spoiler +Idra would have taken PU cos the latter seems as allergic to cheese as him. Lol.
Not to mention the mass blink stalkers would have been better if used on day 3 so less zerg have time to review it, (Guarantee Machine looked at those games)
|
The reason why the extended series is bad is because you have already been punished by being sent to the losers' bracket and having a much tougher route to the Grand Finals. What's what the losers' bracket is for, punish the player for losing. Then you are going to punish the player again by putting him way behind in a series and needs to work twice as hard to further advance for a match that already happened.
|
On November 08 2010 04:25 Zaka wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2010 04:24 The KY wrote:
I do think extended series is bullshit. No reason for it, both players earned their place. I agree. Offer double elimination, but still punish the player if they manage to get back.
It should be punishment. It's the result of already having lost to that player. Without that punishment, there would be no benefit to having not lost, or to having already beaten a player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
