|
To the people that say he got screwed, he didnt. He knew full well from the beggining of the group that if he won tester would get a free win and he'd get an almost guaranteed loss, and if he lost it would be reversed. All he had to do was win the last game of the group, same as tester, he had the choice of either beating tester g1 or getting a free win g2, either way his g3 was always going to happen and it was always the one that mattered. If tester had won the first game and lost the second, im 100% sure no one would be saying he got screwed.
|
On June 29 2011 04:50 fraktoasters wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 04:45 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:30 fraktoasters wrote:On June 29 2011 02:54 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 02:40 FairForever wrote:On June 29 2011 02:37 Malpractice.248 wrote:
Wowwww july got screwed. How did July get screwed? If Tester had won the first match and then lost to Nestea they'd be in the exact same position. The only person that really benefited from this was Nestea: he would qualify unless he lost two games in a row. July and Tester fought for a chance to be in the same situation as Nestea. July won so he got two shots at making the elim phase (one for Tester), he wasn't able to capitalize on either. july got screwed because he was the only player not to get a free win vs rain. if july got the free win ibstead of tester, he would have advanced. also tester didnt have to face nestea while july did. this group play with a player gone is certainly not the most fair situation On June 29 2011 04:26 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:19 sefio wrote:On June 29 2011 04:16 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:07 Adebisi wrote:On June 29 2011 04:01 Chicane wrote:
Wtf? The group stages have always been screwed up. I really don't think I have a strong bias towards either player (possibly July) but he seriously got screwed. He beats Tester once, and then loses to Tester once, and Tester advances. And Tester only plays those 2 games...
Why do they not each just play each other... doesn't that make more sense?!?!?
In that case, July would lose to Nestea, and lets assume Tester would also lose to Nestea, then July would have a win over Tester, and July would advance. Even if Tester beat Nestea, then they would have a 3 way tie and would have to play it out. Terrible format... my god. Sigh, do you not understand that the group was played out as though Rain was giving forfeit wins? Nestea was 2-0, Tester 2-1, July 1-2, and Rain 0-2. Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick, but this is how the seeding benefits Nestea. You can say he got screwed, but he is guaranteed safe from the up and down match which is also somewhat of an "unfair benefit". Regardless, July played god awful in his 2nd game and deserves to lose for it -.- Ya I agree with the underlined part, and that is the point I was making. Tester got through the group by going 1-1 against July. I think neither of them would beat Nestea. Was Tester going to "play" Rain no matter what? It sounded like that from his interview. If so then that is even worse because all he has to do when walking into the group is win the last game, and lose everything else. July would have to at least beat 1 of his opponents just to get to the last game with a chance to stay in. So let me quote you "Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick" Yup. He got screwed. I'm just glad I wasn't really cheering for one to get through over the other, otherwise I would be quite pissed.  Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D So if Rain was there and Tester beat Rain and then beat July he would advance and July would not even if they went 1-1. That's just how these group plays go in GSL. Live with it. Alright first of all good job trying to be rude by saying "Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D" If someone actually is in a bad mood over something like this, then saying that only looks to start an argument, and is therefore really stupid to say. (Edit: And let me clarify, when I said argument I meant like two people getting pissed at each other, not just debating a point... because I'm sure someone is going to say "lolololololol looks like you are arguing now!!") "That's just how these group plays go in GSL" Yes... I'm aware, and I said it is a bad format. I don't know why people can't just acknowledge that this is actually a bad format especially for this circumstance rather than trying to defend it. How is this hard for anyone to understand. Nothing special happened. Just imagine they played all the Rain vs X matches and rain lost but they just didn't show it on stream. Because that's like exactly what happened. Edit: You wouldn't be saying this was unfair to July if Rain was instead replaced by some bronze noobie. But either way it would be the same. Wrong. I called the format bad in the past, and I think this situation just magnifies it. How exactly is that wrong? Rain went 0-2. If he played and lost all his games the situation is EXACTLY the same as it is now.
Well duh, that's kind of how a walkover works. The only difference (and a big one at that) is that Nestea and Tester got free wins, instead of actually having to play a game and beat the opponent. They had a guaranteed win.
|
On June 29 2011 04:55 Rayansaki wrote:
To the people that say he got screwed, he didnt. He knew full well from the beggining of the group that if he won tester would get a free win and he'd get an almost guaranteed loss, and if he lost it would be reversed. All he had to do was win the last game of the group, same as tester, he had the choice of either beating tester g1 or getting a free win g2, either way his g3 was always going to happen and it was always the one that mattered. If tester had won the first game and lost the second, im 100% sure no one would be saying he got screwed.
I would be saying that. Wtf? The big point, at least for me, is that the first game basically doesn't count for shit assuming both players will lose to Nestea, which is a reasonable assumption. So whoever wins the first game (assuming the other player doesn't throw the game) gets screwed over since his win doesn't matter.
|
On June 29 2011 04:30 fraktoasters wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 02:54 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 02:40 FairForever wrote:On June 29 2011 02:37 Malpractice.248 wrote:
Wowwww july got screwed. How did July get screwed? If Tester had won the first match and then lost to Nestea they'd be in the exact same position. The only person that really benefited from this was Nestea: he would qualify unless he lost two games in a row. July and Tester fought for a chance to be in the same situation as Nestea. July won so he got two shots at making the elim phase (one for Tester), he wasn't able to capitalize on either. july got screwed because he was the only player not to get a free win vs rain. if july got the free win ibstead of tester, he would have advanced. also tester didnt have to face nestea while july did. this group play with a player gone is certainly not the most fair situation Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 04:26 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:19 sefio wrote:On June 29 2011 04:16 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:07 Adebisi wrote:On June 29 2011 04:01 Chicane wrote:
Wtf? The group stages have always been screwed up. I really don't think I have a strong bias towards either player (possibly July) but he seriously got screwed. He beats Tester once, and then loses to Tester once, and Tester advances. And Tester only plays those 2 games...
Why do they not each just play each other... doesn't that make more sense?!?!?
In that case, July would lose to Nestea, and lets assume Tester would also lose to Nestea, then July would have a win over Tester, and July would advance. Even if Tester beat Nestea, then they would have a 3 way tie and would have to play it out. Terrible format... my god. Sigh, do you not understand that the group was played out as though Rain was giving forfeit wins? Nestea was 2-0, Tester 2-1, July 1-2, and Rain 0-2. Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick, but this is how the seeding benefits Nestea. You can say he got screwed, but he is guaranteed safe from the up and down match which is also somewhat of an "unfair benefit". Regardless, July played god awful in his 2nd game and deserves to lose for it -.- Ya I agree with the underlined part, and that is the point I was making. Tester got through the group by going 1-1 against July. I think neither of them would beat Nestea. Was Tester going to "play" Rain no matter what? It sounded like that from his interview. If so then that is even worse because all he has to do when walking into the group is win the last game, and lose everything else. July would have to at least beat 1 of his opponents just to get to the last game with a chance to stay in. So let me quote you "Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick" Yup. He got screwed. I'm just glad I wasn't really cheering for one to get through over the other, otherwise I would be quite pissed. Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D So if Rain was there and Tester beat Rain and then beat July he would advance and July would not even if they went 1-1. That's just how these group plays go in GSL. Live with it. Alright first of all good job trying to be rude by saying "Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D" If someone actually is in a bad mood over something like this, then saying that only looks to start an argument, and is therefore really stupid to say. (Edit: And let me clarify, when I said argument I meant like two people getting pissed at each other, not just debating a point... because I'm sure someone is going to say "lolololololol looks like you are arguing now!!") "That's just how these group plays go in GSL" Yes... I'm aware, and I said it is a bad format. I don't know why people can't just acknowledge that this is actually a bad format especially for this circumstance rather than trying to defend it. How is this hard for anyone to understand. Nothing special happened. Just imagine they played all the Rain vs X matches and rain lost but they just didn't show it on stream. Because that's like exactly what happened. Edit: You wouldn't be saying this was unfair to July if Rain was instead replaced by some bronze noobie. But either way it would be the same.
im not a july fanboy at all. i would be saying the same thing if tester got screwed. i want to see a fair tournament and this was certainly not fair. nestea and tester benefitted from rain leaving gsl and july didnt.
im not going to just imagine rain played and lost both games, no matter how likely that was, because thats not what happened. if he did, it would have been more fair because nestea and tester would have earned those wins. but they didnt. they each won the same amount of games as july. and thats why this is unfair.
gom screwed up. they should have ran this group differently, just as a three man group. it would have been more fair. how anyone can argue the way they did it was fair is ridiculous. saying "imagine rain played" doesnt justify anything. july was the only player to not benefit from rain leaving. so tell me, how is that fair?
|
On June 29 2011 04:55 Rayansaki wrote:
To the people that say he got screwed, he didnt. He knew full well from the beggining of the group that if he won tester would get a free win and he'd get an almost guaranteed loss, and if he lost it would be reversed. All he had to do was win the last game of the group, same as tester, he had the choice of either beating tester g1 or getting a free win g2, either way his g3 was always going to happen and it was always the one that mattered. If tester had won the first game and lost the second, im 100% sure no one would be saying he got screwed.
First of all, you are completely wrong saying "If tester had won the first game and lost the second, im 100% sure no one would be saying he got screwed." because I would still argue that the group stages have a poor format that ultimately focuses on one match in this situation.
I just can't even comprehend how you can say "i'm 100% sure" when first of all you are completely wrong, but also where is the logic in even saying that? I assume your argument is just because July has so many fans, but then what about the Tester fans? Either way, I am honestly fine with Tester advancing... I'm just still not satisfied by the format. I don't think July deserved to get through personally, I just think that a 3rd game would have made the most sense.
+ Show Spoiler +Let me just put it this way since people are using the "replace Rain with a bronze player" example.
Let's say that there is a grandmasters player (Player 1) two platinum players (Players 2 and 3) and a terrible Bronze player in a group (Player 4).
So clearly Player 1 and either 2 or 3 will make it through.
Now if they go with a round robin format, 2 and 3 will lose to 1 and beat 4... and then to decide who will advance between them two, they will play a match.
Instead what we see is one of the two players between 2 and 3 has to play player 1 and lose, while the other gets an easy win over player 4. So lets say player 2 has to play player 1 and gets a loss.... and player 3 plays player 4 and gets a win. That's pretty standard.
But then Player 2 and 3 play, and player 2 wins, despite being down a game because he lost to Player 1. So in a round robin situation, Player 2 beat player 3, and can easily beat player 4, while player 3 will lose to player 1. It makes sense that Player 2 would advance.
Instead what we get is that since player 2 lost (even though it was to the player who was going to easily advance) and player 3 won (against the player who had no chance of advancing) that player 2 has to win 2 games over player 3, while player 3 has to just win 1 game.
You can't possibly say that is fair. You just can't, because it is not.
Let me clarify two things. I am saying all this because I don't want to be the person who says "wait that is unfair" once it happens to a player I like, and not sooner (and BTW I have commented on the forum earlier, but once again this situation magnifies the problem of the bracket).
Also, I don't think July should have advanced... I think the group was simply inconclusive and incomplete. Tester playing against Nestea to not be 0-2 against the other 2 players in the group, or even Tester having to win 2 games over July would be more fair. Maybe I am missing something, but please explain your logic if I am, and more importantly point out where my logic (arguing that the format is unfair especially in this situation is unfair) is wrong. I am not arguing that July, in the current format, deserved to get through more than Tester.
|
Canada13389 Posts
why is violet v anypro recommended? It was a terrible game, was it just Zerg players upvoting anypro losing? It was 2 base turtle vs 2 base turtle with one big attack from Zerg along with baneling drops over the army at the same time :/
|
On June 29 2011 05:00 Clog wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 04:55 Rayansaki wrote:
To the people that say he got screwed, he didnt. He knew full well from the beggining of the group that if he won tester would get a free win and he'd get an almost guaranteed loss, and if he lost it would be reversed. All he had to do was win the last game of the group, same as tester, he had the choice of either beating tester g1 or getting a free win g2, either way his g3 was always going to happen and it was always the one that mattered. If tester had won the first game and lost the second, im 100% sure no one would be saying he got screwed.
I would be saying that. Wtf? The big point, at least for me, is that the first game basically doesn't count for shit assuming both players will lose to Nestea, which is a reasonable assumption. So whoever wins the first game (assuming the other player doesn't throw the game) gets screwed over since his win doesn't matter.
But they know before the group starts that the first game doesn't matter, so you don't use any prepared strategy and just focus on winning the second game, Both players can go to the group with that mentality so it doesn't matter. How do you know tester didn't do that in g1?
|
NOOOOOOO , FUUUUUUUUU , I MISSED the fight between Nesta and July , FUUUUUUU
|
On June 29 2011 05:08 Rayansaki wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 05:00 Clog wrote:On June 29 2011 04:55 Rayansaki wrote:
To the people that say he got screwed, he didnt. He knew full well from the beggining of the group that if he won tester would get a free win and he'd get an almost guaranteed loss, and if he lost it would be reversed. All he had to do was win the last game of the group, same as tester, he had the choice of either beating tester g1 or getting a free win g2, either way his g3 was always going to happen and it was always the one that mattered. If tester had won the first game and lost the second, im 100% sure no one would be saying he got screwed.
I would be saying that. Wtf? The big point, at least for me, is that the first game basically doesn't count for shit assuming both players will lose to Nestea, which is a reasonable assumption. So whoever wins the first game (assuming the other player doesn't throw the game) gets screwed over since his win doesn't matter. But they know before the group starts that the first game doesn't matter, so you don't use any prepared strategy and just focus on winning the second game, Both players can go to the group with that mentality so it doesn't matter. How do you know tester didn't do that in g1?
and meaningless games is a good thing? july, nestea and tester all won a grand total of one game each. tester and july each lost one game. july doesnt advance and tester does. how the hell is this fair?
|
On June 29 2011 05:13 jmbthirteen wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 05:08 Rayansaki wrote:On June 29 2011 05:00 Clog wrote:On June 29 2011 04:55 Rayansaki wrote:
To the people that say he got screwed, he didnt. He knew full well from the beggining of the group that if he won tester would get a free win and he'd get an almost guaranteed loss, and if he lost it would be reversed. All he had to do was win the last game of the group, same as tester, he had the choice of either beating tester g1 or getting a free win g2, either way his g3 was always going to happen and it was always the one that mattered. If tester had won the first game and lost the second, im 100% sure no one would be saying he got screwed.
I would be saying that. Wtf? The big point, at least for me, is that the first game basically doesn't count for shit assuming both players will lose to Nestea, which is a reasonable assumption. So whoever wins the first game (assuming the other player doesn't throw the game) gets screwed over since his win doesn't matter. But they know before the group starts that the first game doesn't matter, so you don't use any prepared strategy and just focus on winning the second game, Both players can go to the group with that mentality so it doesn't matter. How do you know tester didn't do that in g1? and meaningless games is a good thing? july, nestea and tester all won a grand total of one game each. tester and july each lost one game. july doesnt advance and tester does. how the hell is this fair?
July lost twice, Once to Tester and once to Nestea... Two losses = elimination in the group, It's completely fair.
|
On June 29 2011 05:24 Hrrrrm wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 05:13 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 05:08 Rayansaki wrote:On June 29 2011 05:00 Clog wrote:On June 29 2011 04:55 Rayansaki wrote:
To the people that say he got screwed, he didnt. He knew full well from the beggining of the group that if he won tester would get a free win and he'd get an almost guaranteed loss, and if he lost it would be reversed. All he had to do was win the last game of the group, same as tester, he had the choice of either beating tester g1 or getting a free win g2, either way his g3 was always going to happen and it was always the one that mattered. If tester had won the first game and lost the second, im 100% sure no one would be saying he got screwed.
I would be saying that. Wtf? The big point, at least for me, is that the first game basically doesn't count for shit assuming both players will lose to Nestea, which is a reasonable assumption. So whoever wins the first game (assuming the other player doesn't throw the game) gets screwed over since his win doesn't matter. But they know before the group starts that the first game doesn't matter, so you don't use any prepared strategy and just focus on winning the second game, Both players can go to the group with that mentality so it doesn't matter. How do you know tester didn't do that in g1? and meaningless games is a good thing? july, nestea and tester all won a grand total of one game each. tester and july each lost one game. july doesnt advance and tester does. how the hell is this fair? July lost twice, Once to Tester and once to Nestea... Two losses = elimination in the group, It's completely fair.
You're confusing "fair" with "that's how the format is." If they picked who the opponents were by random because that's just how they wanted it, and July beat Tester and got a free win from Rain, and Tester lost to July, he would then have to play Nestea. If he beat Nestea (who would by then already have a free win from Rain) then things would get more interesting as him and Nestea would each have a loss, but if he lost to Nestea which he likely would, then he would be out.
|
Abit annoyed about the Group A situation.. however July really played quite bad in his 2nd game vs Tester, muta/ling when he saw blink stalker and high temps? :\
|
On June 29 2011 05:01 jmbthirteen wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 04:30 fraktoasters wrote:On June 29 2011 02:54 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 02:40 FairForever wrote:On June 29 2011 02:37 Malpractice.248 wrote:
Wowwww july got screwed. How did July get screwed? If Tester had won the first match and then lost to Nestea they'd be in the exact same position. The only person that really benefited from this was Nestea: he would qualify unless he lost two games in a row. July and Tester fought for a chance to be in the same situation as Nestea. July won so he got two shots at making the elim phase (one for Tester), he wasn't able to capitalize on either. july got screwed because he was the only player not to get a free win vs rain. if july got the free win ibstead of tester, he would have advanced. also tester didnt have to face nestea while july did. this group play with a player gone is certainly not the most fair situation On June 29 2011 04:26 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:19 sefio wrote:On June 29 2011 04:16 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:07 Adebisi wrote:On June 29 2011 04:01 Chicane wrote:
Wtf? The group stages have always been screwed up. I really don't think I have a strong bias towards either player (possibly July) but he seriously got screwed. He beats Tester once, and then loses to Tester once, and Tester advances. And Tester only plays those 2 games...
Why do they not each just play each other... doesn't that make more sense?!?!?
In that case, July would lose to Nestea, and lets assume Tester would also lose to Nestea, then July would have a win over Tester, and July would advance. Even if Tester beat Nestea, then they would have a 3 way tie and would have to play it out. Terrible format... my god. Sigh, do you not understand that the group was played out as though Rain was giving forfeit wins? Nestea was 2-0, Tester 2-1, July 1-2, and Rain 0-2. Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick, but this is how the seeding benefits Nestea. You can say he got screwed, but he is guaranteed safe from the up and down match which is also somewhat of an "unfair benefit". Regardless, July played god awful in his 2nd game and deserves to lose for it -.- Ya I agree with the underlined part, and that is the point I was making. Tester got through the group by going 1-1 against July. I think neither of them would beat Nestea. Was Tester going to "play" Rain no matter what? It sounded like that from his interview. If so then that is even worse because all he has to do when walking into the group is win the last game, and lose everything else. July would have to at least beat 1 of his opponents just to get to the last game with a chance to stay in. So let me quote you "Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick" Yup. He got screwed. I'm just glad I wasn't really cheering for one to get through over the other, otherwise I would be quite pissed. Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D So if Rain was there and Tester beat Rain and then beat July he would advance and July would not even if they went 1-1. That's just how these group plays go in GSL. Live with it. Alright first of all good job trying to be rude by saying "Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D" If someone actually is in a bad mood over something like this, then saying that only looks to start an argument, and is therefore really stupid to say. (Edit: And let me clarify, when I said argument I meant like two people getting pissed at each other, not just debating a point... because I'm sure someone is going to say "lolololololol looks like you are arguing now!!") "That's just how these group plays go in GSL" Yes... I'm aware, and I said it is a bad format. I don't know why people can't just acknowledge that this is actually a bad format especially for this circumstance rather than trying to defend it. How is this hard for anyone to understand. Nothing special happened. Just imagine they played all the Rain vs X matches and rain lost but they just didn't show it on stream. Because that's like exactly what happened. Edit: You wouldn't be saying this was unfair to July if Rain was instead replaced by some bronze noobie. But either way it would be the same. im not a july fanboy at all. i would be saying the same thing if tester got screwed. i want to see a fair tournament and this was certainly not fair. nestea and tester benefitted from rain leaving gsl and july didnt. im not going to just imagine rain played and lost both games, no matter how likely that was, because thats not what happened. if he did, it would have been more fair because nestea and tester would have earned those wins. but they didnt. they each won the same amount of games as july. and thats why this is unfair. gom screwed up. they should have ran this group differently, just as a three man group. it would have been more fair. how anyone can argue the way they did it was fair is ridiculous. saying "imagine rain played" doesnt justify anything. july was the only player to not benefit from rain leaving. so tell me, how is that fair?
I understand that logic is hard and this "feels" unfair but what I explained is exactly how the situation is.
|
ohhhhhhh shiiiiii
tsl_clide vs tricker
ex teamates ..gonna be sick!
|
On June 29 2011 05:33 fraktoasters wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 05:01 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 04:30 fraktoasters wrote:On June 29 2011 02:54 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 02:40 FairForever wrote:On June 29 2011 02:37 Malpractice.248 wrote:
Wowwww july got screwed. How did July get screwed? If Tester had won the first match and then lost to Nestea they'd be in the exact same position. The only person that really benefited from this was Nestea: he would qualify unless he lost two games in a row. July and Tester fought for a chance to be in the same situation as Nestea. July won so he got two shots at making the elim phase (one for Tester), he wasn't able to capitalize on either. july got screwed because he was the only player not to get a free win vs rain. if july got the free win ibstead of tester, he would have advanced. also tester didnt have to face nestea while july did. this group play with a player gone is certainly not the most fair situation On June 29 2011 04:26 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:19 sefio wrote:On June 29 2011 04:16 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:07 Adebisi wrote:On June 29 2011 04:01 Chicane wrote:
Wtf? The group stages have always been screwed up. I really don't think I have a strong bias towards either player (possibly July) but he seriously got screwed. He beats Tester once, and then loses to Tester once, and Tester advances. And Tester only plays those 2 games...
Why do they not each just play each other... doesn't that make more sense?!?!?
In that case, July would lose to Nestea, and lets assume Tester would also lose to Nestea, then July would have a win over Tester, and July would advance. Even if Tester beat Nestea, then they would have a 3 way tie and would have to play it out. Terrible format... my god. Sigh, do you not understand that the group was played out as though Rain was giving forfeit wins? Nestea was 2-0, Tester 2-1, July 1-2, and Rain 0-2. Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick, but this is how the seeding benefits Nestea. You can say he got screwed, but he is guaranteed safe from the up and down match which is also somewhat of an "unfair benefit". Regardless, July played god awful in his 2nd game and deserves to lose for it -.- Ya I agree with the underlined part, and that is the point I was making. Tester got through the group by going 1-1 against July. I think neither of them would beat Nestea. Was Tester going to "play" Rain no matter what? It sounded like that from his interview. If so then that is even worse because all he has to do when walking into the group is win the last game, and lose everything else. July would have to at least beat 1 of his opponents just to get to the last game with a chance to stay in. So let me quote you "Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick" Yup. He got screwed. I'm just glad I wasn't really cheering for one to get through over the other, otherwise I would be quite pissed. Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D So if Rain was there and Tester beat Rain and then beat July he would advance and July would not even if they went 1-1. That's just how these group plays go in GSL. Live with it. Alright first of all good job trying to be rude by saying "Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D" If someone actually is in a bad mood over something like this, then saying that only looks to start an argument, and is therefore really stupid to say. (Edit: And let me clarify, when I said argument I meant like two people getting pissed at each other, not just debating a point... because I'm sure someone is going to say "lolololololol looks like you are arguing now!!") "That's just how these group plays go in GSL" Yes... I'm aware, and I said it is a bad format. I don't know why people can't just acknowledge that this is actually a bad format especially for this circumstance rather than trying to defend it. How is this hard for anyone to understand. Nothing special happened. Just imagine they played all the Rain vs X matches and rain lost but they just didn't show it on stream. Because that's like exactly what happened. Edit: You wouldn't be saying this was unfair to July if Rain was instead replaced by some bronze noobie. But either way it would be the same. im not a july fanboy at all. i would be saying the same thing if tester got screwed. i want to see a fair tournament and this was certainly not fair. nestea and tester benefitted from rain leaving gsl and july didnt. im not going to just imagine rain played and lost both games, no matter how likely that was, because thats not what happened. if he did, it would have been more fair because nestea and tester would have earned those wins. but they didnt. they each won the same amount of games as july. and thats why this is unfair. gom screwed up. they should have ran this group differently, just as a three man group. it would have been more fair. how anyone can argue the way they did it was fair is ridiculous. saying "imagine rain played" doesnt justify anything. july was the only player to not benefit from rain leaving. so tell me, how is that fair? I understand that logic is hard and this "feels" unfair but what I explained is exactly how the situation is.
the thing is that there is no good logic behind this. and it doesnt feel unfair, it is unfair. nestea advanced with one win. tester advanced with one win. july didnt.
what should have happened is tester and nestea should have played before july and tester played against each other. they should have made it a 3 man group. july got screwed
|
On June 29 2011 05:39 jmbthirteen wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 05:33 fraktoasters wrote:On June 29 2011 05:01 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 04:30 fraktoasters wrote:On June 29 2011 02:54 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 02:40 FairForever wrote:On June 29 2011 02:37 Malpractice.248 wrote:
Wowwww july got screwed. How did July get screwed? If Tester had won the first match and then lost to Nestea they'd be in the exact same position. The only person that really benefited from this was Nestea: he would qualify unless he lost two games in a row. July and Tester fought for a chance to be in the same situation as Nestea. July won so he got two shots at making the elim phase (one for Tester), he wasn't able to capitalize on either. july got screwed because he was the only player not to get a free win vs rain. if july got the free win ibstead of tester, he would have advanced. also tester didnt have to face nestea while july did. this group play with a player gone is certainly not the most fair situation On June 29 2011 04:26 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:19 sefio wrote:On June 29 2011 04:16 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:07 Adebisi wrote:On June 29 2011 04:01 Chicane wrote:
Wtf? The group stages have always been screwed up. I really don't think I have a strong bias towards either player (possibly July) but he seriously got screwed. He beats Tester once, and then loses to Tester once, and Tester advances. And Tester only plays those 2 games...
Why do they not each just play each other... doesn't that make more sense?!?!?
In that case, July would lose to Nestea, and lets assume Tester would also lose to Nestea, then July would have a win over Tester, and July would advance. Even if Tester beat Nestea, then they would have a 3 way tie and would have to play it out. Terrible format... my god. Sigh, do you not understand that the group was played out as though Rain was giving forfeit wins? Nestea was 2-0, Tester 2-1, July 1-2, and Rain 0-2. Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick, but this is how the seeding benefits Nestea. You can say he got screwed, but he is guaranteed safe from the up and down match which is also somewhat of an "unfair benefit". Regardless, July played god awful in his 2nd game and deserves to lose for it -.- Ya I agree with the underlined part, and that is the point I was making. Tester got through the group by going 1-1 against July. I think neither of them would beat Nestea. Was Tester going to "play" Rain no matter what? It sounded like that from his interview. If so then that is even worse because all he has to do when walking into the group is win the last game, and lose everything else. July would have to at least beat 1 of his opponents just to get to the last game with a chance to stay in. So let me quote you "Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick" Yup. He got screwed. I'm just glad I wasn't really cheering for one to get through over the other, otherwise I would be quite pissed. Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D So if Rain was there and Tester beat Rain and then beat July he would advance and July would not even if they went 1-1. That's just how these group plays go in GSL. Live with it. Alright first of all good job trying to be rude by saying "Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D" If someone actually is in a bad mood over something like this, then saying that only looks to start an argument, and is therefore really stupid to say. (Edit: And let me clarify, when I said argument I meant like two people getting pissed at each other, not just debating a point... because I'm sure someone is going to say "lolololololol looks like you are arguing now!!") "That's just how these group plays go in GSL" Yes... I'm aware, and I said it is a bad format. I don't know why people can't just acknowledge that this is actually a bad format especially for this circumstance rather than trying to defend it. How is this hard for anyone to understand. Nothing special happened. Just imagine they played all the Rain vs X matches and rain lost but they just didn't show it on stream. Because that's like exactly what happened. Edit: You wouldn't be saying this was unfair to July if Rain was instead replaced by some bronze noobie. But either way it would be the same. im not a july fanboy at all. i would be saying the same thing if tester got screwed. i want to see a fair tournament and this was certainly not fair. nestea and tester benefitted from rain leaving gsl and july didnt. im not going to just imagine rain played and lost both games, no matter how likely that was, because thats not what happened. if he did, it would have been more fair because nestea and tester would have earned those wins. but they didnt. they each won the same amount of games as july. and thats why this is unfair. gom screwed up. they should have ran this group differently, just as a three man group. it would have been more fair. how anyone can argue the way they did it was fair is ridiculous. saying "imagine rain played" doesnt justify anything. july was the only player to not benefit from rain leaving. so tell me, how is that fair? I understand that logic is hard and this "feels" unfair but what I explained is exactly how the situation is. the thing is that there is no good logic behind this. and it doesnt feel unfair, it is unfair. nestea advanced with one win. tester advanced with one win. july didnt. what should have happened is tester and nestea should have played before july and tester played against each other. they should have made it a 3 man group. july got screwed
It is not a 3 man group. It's a 4 man group where 1 person forfeited, meaning he auto-loses his matches.
In group stage, not every win matters. This is going to occur no matter the format.
|
On June 29 2011 05:48 fraktoasters wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 05:39 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 05:33 fraktoasters wrote:On June 29 2011 05:01 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 04:30 fraktoasters wrote:On June 29 2011 02:54 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 02:40 FairForever wrote:On June 29 2011 02:37 Malpractice.248 wrote:
Wowwww july got screwed. How did July get screwed? If Tester had won the first match and then lost to Nestea they'd be in the exact same position. The only person that really benefited from this was Nestea: he would qualify unless he lost two games in a row. July and Tester fought for a chance to be in the same situation as Nestea. July won so he got two shots at making the elim phase (one for Tester), he wasn't able to capitalize on either. july got screwed because he was the only player not to get a free win vs rain. if july got the free win ibstead of tester, he would have advanced. also tester didnt have to face nestea while july did. this group play with a player gone is certainly not the most fair situation On June 29 2011 04:26 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:19 sefio wrote:On June 29 2011 04:16 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:07 Adebisi wrote:On June 29 2011 04:01 Chicane wrote:
Wtf? The group stages have always been screwed up. I really don't think I have a strong bias towards either player (possibly July) but he seriously got screwed. He beats Tester once, and then loses to Tester once, and Tester advances. And Tester only plays those 2 games...
Why do they not each just play each other... doesn't that make more sense?!?!?
In that case, July would lose to Nestea, and lets assume Tester would also lose to Nestea, then July would have a win over Tester, and July would advance. Even if Tester beat Nestea, then they would have a 3 way tie and would have to play it out. Terrible format... my god. Sigh, do you not understand that the group was played out as though Rain was giving forfeit wins? Nestea was 2-0, Tester 2-1, July 1-2, and Rain 0-2. Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick, but this is how the seeding benefits Nestea. You can say he got screwed, but he is guaranteed safe from the up and down match which is also somewhat of an "unfair benefit". Regardless, July played god awful in his 2nd game and deserves to lose for it -.- Ya I agree with the underlined part, and that is the point I was making. Tester got through the group by going 1-1 against July. I think neither of them would beat Nestea. Was Tester going to "play" Rain no matter what? It sounded like that from his interview. If so then that is even worse because all he has to do when walking into the group is win the last game, and lose everything else. July would have to at least beat 1 of his opponents just to get to the last game with a chance to stay in. So let me quote you "Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick" Yup. He got screwed. I'm just glad I wasn't really cheering for one to get through over the other, otherwise I would be quite pissed. Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D So if Rain was there and Tester beat Rain and then beat July he would advance and July would not even if they went 1-1. That's just how these group plays go in GSL. Live with it. Alright first of all good job trying to be rude by saying "Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D" If someone actually is in a bad mood over something like this, then saying that only looks to start an argument, and is therefore really stupid to say. (Edit: And let me clarify, when I said argument I meant like two people getting pissed at each other, not just debating a point... because I'm sure someone is going to say "lolololololol looks like you are arguing now!!") "That's just how these group plays go in GSL" Yes... I'm aware, and I said it is a bad format. I don't know why people can't just acknowledge that this is actually a bad format especially for this circumstance rather than trying to defend it. How is this hard for anyone to understand. Nothing special happened. Just imagine they played all the Rain vs X matches and rain lost but they just didn't show it on stream. Because that's like exactly what happened. Edit: You wouldn't be saying this was unfair to July if Rain was instead replaced by some bronze noobie. But either way it would be the same. im not a july fanboy at all. i would be saying the same thing if tester got screwed. i want to see a fair tournament and this was certainly not fair. nestea and tester benefitted from rain leaving gsl and july didnt. im not going to just imagine rain played and lost both games, no matter how likely that was, because thats not what happened. if he did, it would have been more fair because nestea and tester would have earned those wins. but they didnt. they each won the same amount of games as july. and thats why this is unfair. gom screwed up. they should have ran this group differently, just as a three man group. it would have been more fair. how anyone can argue the way they did it was fair is ridiculous. saying "imagine rain played" doesnt justify anything. july was the only player to not benefit from rain leaving. so tell me, how is that fair? I understand that logic is hard and this "feels" unfair but what I explained is exactly how the situation is. the thing is that there is no good logic behind this. and it doesnt feel unfair, it is unfair. nestea advanced with one win. tester advanced with one win. july didnt. what should have happened is tester and nestea should have played before july and tester played against each other. they should have made it a 3 man group. july got screwed It is not a 3 man group. It's a 4 man group where 1 person forfeited, meaning he auto-loses his matches. In group stage, not every win matters. This is going to occur no matter the format.
yet the forefit doesnt hurt the man who left, it hurts a current player. his matches should have been disregarded. i understand why and how this happened. you dont need to explain it. its unfair and bull shit that gom allowed this to happen. this was a 3 man group. forefit games proved to be unfair.
|
On June 29 2011 05:48 fraktoasters wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 05:39 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 05:33 fraktoasters wrote:On June 29 2011 05:01 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 04:30 fraktoasters wrote:On June 29 2011 02:54 jmbthirteen wrote:On June 29 2011 02:40 FairForever wrote:On June 29 2011 02:37 Malpractice.248 wrote:
Wowwww july got screwed. How did July get screwed? If Tester had won the first match and then lost to Nestea they'd be in the exact same position. The only person that really benefited from this was Nestea: he would qualify unless he lost two games in a row. July and Tester fought for a chance to be in the same situation as Nestea. July won so he got two shots at making the elim phase (one for Tester), he wasn't able to capitalize on either. july got screwed because he was the only player not to get a free win vs rain. if july got the free win ibstead of tester, he would have advanced. also tester didnt have to face nestea while july did. this group play with a player gone is certainly not the most fair situation On June 29 2011 04:26 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:19 sefio wrote:On June 29 2011 04:16 Chicane wrote:On June 29 2011 04:07 Adebisi wrote:On June 29 2011 04:01 Chicane wrote:
Wtf? The group stages have always been screwed up. I really don't think I have a strong bias towards either player (possibly July) but he seriously got screwed. He beats Tester once, and then loses to Tester once, and Tester advances. And Tester only plays those 2 games...
Why do they not each just play each other... doesn't that make more sense?!?!?
In that case, July would lose to Nestea, and lets assume Tester would also lose to Nestea, then July would have a win over Tester, and July would advance. Even if Tester beat Nestea, then they would have a 3 way tie and would have to play it out. Terrible format... my god. Sigh, do you not understand that the group was played out as though Rain was giving forfeit wins? Nestea was 2-0, Tester 2-1, July 1-2, and Rain 0-2. Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick, but this is how the seeding benefits Nestea. You can say he got screwed, but he is guaranteed safe from the up and down match which is also somewhat of an "unfair benefit". Regardless, July played god awful in his 2nd game and deserves to lose for it -.- Ya I agree with the underlined part, and that is the point I was making. Tester got through the group by going 1-1 against July. I think neither of them would beat Nestea. Was Tester going to "play" Rain no matter what? It sounded like that from his interview. If so then that is even worse because all he has to do when walking into the group is win the last game, and lose everything else. July would have to at least beat 1 of his opponents just to get to the last game with a chance to stay in. So let me quote you "Obviously in this case July did get the short end of the stick" Yup. He got screwed. I'm just glad I wasn't really cheering for one to get through over the other, otherwise I would be quite pissed. Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D So if Rain was there and Tester beat Rain and then beat July he would advance and July would not even if they went 1-1. That's just how these group plays go in GSL. Live with it. Alright first of all good job trying to be rude by saying "Are you sure? You sound pretty pissed to me. :D" If someone actually is in a bad mood over something like this, then saying that only looks to start an argument, and is therefore really stupid to say. (Edit: And let me clarify, when I said argument I meant like two people getting pissed at each other, not just debating a point... because I'm sure someone is going to say "lolololololol looks like you are arguing now!!") "That's just how these group plays go in GSL" Yes... I'm aware, and I said it is a bad format. I don't know why people can't just acknowledge that this is actually a bad format especially for this circumstance rather than trying to defend it. How is this hard for anyone to understand. Nothing special happened. Just imagine they played all the Rain vs X matches and rain lost but they just didn't show it on stream. Because that's like exactly what happened. Edit: You wouldn't be saying this was unfair to July if Rain was instead replaced by some bronze noobie. But either way it would be the same. im not a july fanboy at all. i would be saying the same thing if tester got screwed. i want to see a fair tournament and this was certainly not fair. nestea and tester benefitted from rain leaving gsl and july didnt. im not going to just imagine rain played and lost both games, no matter how likely that was, because thats not what happened. if he did, it would have been more fair because nestea and tester would have earned those wins. but they didnt. they each won the same amount of games as july. and thats why this is unfair. gom screwed up. they should have ran this group differently, just as a three man group. it would have been more fair. how anyone can argue the way they did it was fair is ridiculous. saying "imagine rain played" doesnt justify anything. july was the only player to not benefit from rain leaving. so tell me, how is that fair? I understand that logic is hard and this "feels" unfair but what I explained is exactly how the situation is. the thing is that there is no good logic behind this. and it doesnt feel unfair, it is unfair. nestea advanced with one win. tester advanced with one win. july didnt. what should have happened is tester and nestea should have played before july and tester played against each other. they should have made it a 3 man group. july got screwed It is not a 3 man group. It's a 4 man group where 1 person forfeited, meaning he auto-loses his matches. In group stage, not every win matters. This is going to occur no matter the format.
You are really missing the point, or just willfully ignoring it, man.
|
well at least july is still in code s. right?
|
Opening thread in order to read people cry about the group A situation - I got what I expected! :D
However, look at it this way, the loser of game 2 (the first July-Tester game) HAD to win game 5 to advance, whereas the winner of g2 had a chance (albeit very small, since it's Nestea we're talking about) to seize advancement already in g3.
July got that extra chance, vs Nestea, and blew it. Then ends up fightning Tester for the #2 spot, without Tester getting this additonal opportunity to advance.
In what possible way was July disadvantaged? If anything, Tester was at a disadvantage after losing g2, since he then only had ONE chance remaining - winning g5. July had two chances, winning g3, or winning g5.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
