|
Stay on-topic please. Off-topic arguments derailing the thread will not be tolerated. Next spam post about eagles = ban. We get it, you're funnyTake the eagle stuff herestop with the bw vs wc3 bullshit please |
On April 04 2011 21:54 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2011 21:41 Technique wrote:
Well it's either that or single elim... Anything else is not fair to the winner of the winner bracket. Sure it is: he has had to play less matches and has had less stress in getting there and is thus at a mental advantage without requiring a physical advantage too. A further question is whether mathematical fairness should be put ahead of spectator enjoyment. Given the goal of all major starcraft 2 tournaments to attract spectators for this up and coming eSport, this setup is a major turn-off: nobody wants to watch a "rigged" final, however much Naniwa deserved it to be rigged!
It would actually be a mental disadvantage if you had just beaten some1 in hard games (in the winner bracket final) and then in the final he's right there again... if you don't beat him again he will win the tournament eventho it's then 1-1 really, and you are left as the only 1 who did not get a second chance.
|
On April 04 2011 21:54 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2011 21:41 Technique wrote:
Well it's either that or single elim... Anything else is not fair to the winner of the winner bracket. Sure it is: he has had to play less matches and has had less stress in getting there and is thus at a mental advantage without requiring a physical advantage too. A further question is whether mathematical fairness should be put ahead of spectator enjoyment. Given the goal of all major starcraft 2 tournaments to attract spectators for this up and coming eSport, this setup is a major turn-off: nobody wants to watch a "rigged" final, however much Naniwa deserved it to be rigged!
Well in this case he had to play more matches to get to the final than kiwikaki did despite beating him because he had to come through the open tournament and kiwikaki got the speed route through by winning his group.
|
On April 04 2011 21:54 Acrofales wrote:
Sure it is: he has had to play less matches and has had less stress in getting there and is thus at a mental advantage without requiring a physical advantage too.
A further question is whether mathematical fairness should be put ahead of spectator enjoyment. Given the goal of all major starcraft 2 tournaments to attract spectators for this up and coming eSport, this setup is a major turn-off: nobody wants to watch a "rigged" final, however much Naniwa deserved it to be rigged!
I think that is generally the problem with tournament formats; fairness and spectator excitement are diametrically opposed to each other. The most fair format is a one group regular season kind of thing, where everybody is playing each other twice, you get points for wins and whoever got the most points is the winner. (Just like in european soccer leagues) However, thats also the most boring format possible, while the most exciting one (in my eyes), a single elimination, is pretty harsh for the players because you can lose to a very good player in the first round and are done. So every format has to be some kind of compromise. I think the MLG one was rather good, except for that stupid extended series where players get punished and rewarded for meeting the same player twice.
|
On April 04 2011 22:16 blackone wrote:
I think that is generally the problem with tournament formats; fairness and spectator excitement are diametrically opposed to each other.
I don't think single elim is unfair. The biggest issue is one side of the bracket being much more stacked than the other, but it's usually not a huge problem if you have good seeding.
MLG's format is bad for everything except making sure that the same players place in the top16 every time. For the finals specifically though I don't think it matters if you have 2 Bo3 or an extended Bo7, it's bad either way. Group play with single elim is the way to go. That way everyone gets the same number of games to the finals and you can have a Bo7 game on equal terms.
|
On April 04 2011 22:24 eot wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2011 22:16 blackone wrote:
I think that is generally the problem with tournament formats; fairness and spectator excitement are diametrically opposed to each other. I don't think single elim is unfair. The biggest issue is one side of the bracket being much more stacked than the other, but it's usually not a huge problem if you have good seeding. MLG's format is bad for everything except making sure that the same players place in the top16 every time. For the finals specifically though I don't think it matters if you have 2 Bo3 or an extended Bo7, it's bad either way. Group play with single elim is the way to go. That way everyone gets the same number of games to the finals and you can have a Bo7 game on equal terms.
no one here is going to agree that single elimination is the way to go.
|
On April 04 2011 22:27 howerpower wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2011 22:24 eot wrote:On April 04 2011 22:16 blackone wrote:
I think that is generally the problem with tournament formats; fairness and spectator excitement are diametrically opposed to each other. I don't think single elim is unfair. The biggest issue is one side of the bracket being much more stacked than the other, but it's usually not a huge problem if you have good seeding. MLG's format is bad for everything except making sure that the same players place in the top16 every time. For the finals specifically though I don't think it matters if you have 2 Bo3 or an extended Bo7, it's bad either way. Group play with single elim is the way to go. That way everyone gets the same number of games to the finals and you can have a Bo7 game on equal terms. no one here is going to agree that single elimination is the way to go.
Can you clearify please. Are you saying most people think single elimination is the way to go or that no one is going to argue that it is? Because I don't really find any of those statements true.
|
Group stage and then single elim = the best format.
|
On April 04 2011 22:27 howerpower wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2011 22:24 eot wrote:On April 04 2011 22:16 blackone wrote:
I think that is generally the problem with tournament formats; fairness and spectator excitement are diametrically opposed to each other. I don't think single elim is unfair. The biggest issue is one side of the bracket being much more stacked than the other, but it's usually not a huge problem if you have good seeding. MLG's format is bad for everything except making sure that the same players place in the top16 every time. For the finals specifically though I don't think it matters if you have 2 Bo3 or an extended Bo7, it's bad either way. Group play with single elim is the way to go. That way everyone gets the same number of games to the finals and you can have a Bo7 game on equal terms. no one here is going to agree that single elimination is the way to go.
Really? It's the most used format
GSL, IEM, Dreamhack, TSL etc.
|
Yep.
Open Qualifier Tourney (or ladder or whatever) --> Group Stage --> Single Elimination.
Everything else feels stupid as soon as the same 2 guys play each other again...
If you want a "true" measurment of skill, then a Tourney is just not the correct way to go and therefore to try to forcie it on to a tournament format will never feel "right". If you want a purely skill-based winner make a league with TONS of games between all the Players and never even have a final/playoff (like football leagues do it).
|
Every sport uses single elim. Only MLG seems to have this double elim thing.
Seeding, group stages, single elim. Easy to understand and fair. Everyone does it.
|
United States4130 Posts
On April 04 2011 21:54 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2011 21:41 Technique wrote:
Well it's either that or single elim... Anything else is not fair to the winner of the winner bracket. Sure it is: he has had to play less matches and has had less stress in getting there and is thus at a mental advantage without requiring a physical advantage too. A further question is whether mathematical fairness should be put ahead of spectator enjoyment. Given the goal of all major starcraft 2 tournaments to attract spectators for this up and coming eSport, this setup is a major turn-off: nobody wants to watch a "rigged" final, however much Naniwa deserved it to be rigged!
What? That would be bullshit. That would mean if Naniwa loses a game further along in the brackets he would get punished harder for it. You can't say "oh well you go to loser's bracket but you can continue" and then the other person gets "oh well you progressed much further in your bracket... but you lost so that's it." Mathematical fairness obviously wins out.
I do think it's annoying that the format seems to give the seeds such a major advantage. But on the other hand, it didn't seem to stop people from advancing.
|
however, double elim usually rewards the better players, both have their pros and cons.
|
|
|
On April 04 2011 22:42 zeru wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2011 22:27 howerpower wrote:On April 04 2011 22:24 eot wrote:On April 04 2011 22:16 blackone wrote:
I think that is generally the problem with tournament formats; fairness and spectator excitement are diametrically opposed to each other. I don't think single elim is unfair. The biggest issue is one side of the bracket being much more stacked than the other, but it's usually not a huge problem if you have good seeding. MLG's format is bad for everything except making sure that the same players place in the top16 every time. For the finals specifically though I don't think it matters if you have 2 Bo3 or an extended Bo7, it's bad either way. Group play with single elim is the way to go. That way everyone gets the same number of games to the finals and you can have a Bo7 game on equal terms. no one here is going to agree that single elimination is the way to go. Eh, wrong. Single elimination the way dreamhack/gsl had it is the best format imo.
It depends on how many games there is for each elimination serie. Sadly many big lan tournaments only have bo3 until semi or even final. Dreamhack invitational coming up I think have bo3 semi and bo5 final which isn't ideal for a single elimination tournament imo. But with a good map pool and bo5 at least from quarter final, I agree that single elimination creates the best viewing experience.
And just for the record, I don't think either gsl or dreamhack have the best formats either. I don't like the group system gsl use for the early rounds for instance.
|
On April 04 2011 22:42 zeru wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2011 22:27 howerpower wrote:On April 04 2011 22:24 eot wrote:On April 04 2011 22:16 blackone wrote:
I think that is generally the problem with tournament formats; fairness and spectator excitement are diametrically opposed to each other. I don't think single elim is unfair. The biggest issue is one side of the bracket being much more stacked than the other, but it's usually not a huge problem if you have good seeding. MLG's format is bad for everything except making sure that the same players place in the top16 every time. For the finals specifically though I don't think it matters if you have 2 Bo3 or an extended Bo7, it's bad either way. Group play with single elim is the way to go. That way everyone gets the same number of games to the finals and you can have a Bo7 game on equal terms. no one here is going to agree that single elimination is the way to go. Eh, wrong. Single elimination the way dreamhack/gsl had it is the best format imo.
Which seeds the best player of each group so they wont play against eachother, right?
Thats probably a good idea, because straight up single elimination is bad, imagine accidently having the best 2 players face eachother in the ro1024. Double elimination would fix those issues instantly.
|
Is there anyway to watch this after the fact? Really want to see the games but they were going on until 4am for me and had work today so couldnt watch
|
On April 04 2011 22:52 hicks91 wrote:
Is there anyway to watch this after the fact? Really want to see the games but they were going on until 4am for me and had work today so couldnt watch
The MLG stream is re-broadcasting most of day 3: http://www.teamliquid.net/video/streams/MLG Stream
VODs will be out eventually, but no one knows when (could be weeks).
|
PvP final?
Not suprised =/.
How were the matches between Select and Kiwi?
|
Personally, i am also not a fan of the double elimination set up. I do think it has its merits, like giving players a second chance to perform in the tourney if they are cheesed out in early match ups or something. But it gets so messy and anti climactic to watch players go up against each other multiple times in the later stages. I especially don't like previous results carrying over into the second series' between players, not that it isn't 'fair' on the players that this happens, I just find it horrible to watch and feel it takes away alot of the prestige, drama and causes the players to play under different mentalities as they would if they were starting on equal footing in a fresh 'best of X'.
I think the Groups > Single elimination is just a much more solid and over all more enjoyable setup up to watch as a viewer. The Group stage gives players multiple chances to perform against several opponents, and then they are placed on equal footing in a nice single elimination bracket with all the other top performing players, allowing for an epic Bo5/7 to determine a champ.
Overall the Group/single elim just feel like a stronger way to go...from a spectators point of view.
|
Are there recordings of the Idra vs Huk extended series somewhere?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
