On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote: Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system...
It mmakes perfect sense. Both players are 4-1. Drg beat select. Drg gets first. Head to head matters more than individual games.
So its okay if you lose more than someone else so long as you've beaten him before?
Losing an individual game doesn't fucking matter. All that matters is series record.
On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote: Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system...
It mmakes perfect sense. Both players are 4-1. Drg beat select. Drg gets first. Head to head matters more than individual games.
So its okay if you lose more than someone else so long as you've beaten him before?
yes? how does that not make sense to people? head to head has always been the first tiebreaker for any game tourney
It does make sense. Except for the part where the player who does worse in the tournament is rewarded instead of the guy who did better in the tournament.
Just thought performance was rewarded is all. I guess MLG doesn't care for that too much.
No MLG cares, which is why DRG got first because they both went 4-1, but DRG won h2h. It's the right system to use and used by pretty much most of the sports in the world.
It would be like if Lakers won season series against San Antonio 3-1, but spurs blew out the clippers by more to give them a better point differential, so spurs get seeded ahead of the lakers. Wouldn't make any sense.
Wow incontrol pretty lucky with his championship bracket seeding, he might actually retain his pool play position despite not winning a map in pool play (again) just because he was placed against drewbie and now machine...
On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote: Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system...
It mmakes perfect sense. Both players are 4-1. Drg beat select. Drg gets first. Head to head matters more than individual games.
So its okay if you lose more than someone else so long as you've beaten him before?
yes? how does that not make sense to people? head to head has always been the first tiebreaker for any game tourney
It does make sense. Except for the part where the player who does worse in the tournament is rewarded instead of the guy who did better in the tournament.
Just thought performance was rewarded is all. I guess MLG doesn't care for that too much.
No MLG cares, which is why DRG got first because they both went 4-1, but DRG won h2h. It's the right system to use and used by pretty much most of the sports in the world.
It would be like if Lakers won season series against San Antonio 3-1, but spurs blew out the clippers by more to give them a better point differential, so spurs get seeded ahead of the lakers. Wouldn't make any sense.
It's technically like if the lakers beat San Antonio 2-0 best two out of three and proceeded to lose a least a game against every other team while San Antonio beats everyone else 2-0 showing they dominated the tournament much better than the lakers did, but still given the shaft anyway.
But I digress, it's okay that MLG doesn't care. I just wanted to clarify.
And beating san antonio 2-0 shows that la is better than san antonio, which is why they would be seeded higher. Mlg isn't about winning individual games, its about winning series.
On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote: Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system...
It mmakes perfect sense. Both players are 4-1. Drg beat select. Drg gets first. Head to head matters more than individual games.
So its okay if you lose more than someone else so long as you've beaten him before?
yes? how does that not make sense to people? head to head has always been the first tiebreaker for any game tourney
No not for any tourney. It is for instance not the first tiebreaker in the worlds biggest tourney, the FIFA World Cup.
It's an American thing. They think because it happens in their tournaments, it happens in EVERY tournament.
It's not the first tiebreaker in most European events.
Stupid Americans, thinking that because head to head matters in other American tournaments, it might matter in THIS AMERICAN TOURNAMENT.
Holy fuck, you can argue it either way, MLG and several other major tournaments go with head to head. Why turn it into a nationalistic argument?
On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote: Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system...
It mmakes perfect sense. Both players are 4-1. Drg beat select. Drg gets first. Head to head matters more than individual games.
So its okay if you lose more than someone else so long as you've beaten him before?
yes? how does that not make sense to people? head to head has always been the first tiebreaker for any game tourney
No not for any tourney. It is for instance not the first tiebreaker in the worlds biggest tourney, the FIFA World Cup.
It's an American thing. They think because it happens in their tournaments, it happens in EVERY tournament.
It's not the first tiebreaker in most European events.
Stupid Americans, thinking that because head to head matters in other American tournaments, it might matter in THIS AMERICAN TOURNAMENT.
Holy fuck, you can argue it either way, MLG and several other major tournaments go with head to head. Why turn it into a nationalistic argument?
No that's not stupid, if they wanna use that system fair enough. What is stupid though is saying ANY game tourny in the WORLD uses this system when it's an ignorant and incorrect statement.
On August 28 2011 14:01 Ryder. wrote: Wow incontrol pretty lucky with his championship bracket seeding, he might actually retain his pool play position despite not winning a map in pool play (again) just because he was placed against drewbie and now machine...
When it comes to the tiebreaker system, of course head to head is going to be first. Think of it this way. If someone loses all their Bo3's but takes everyone to 3 games, they still have a fairly ok looking record in individual games, but guess what they are seeded lower. This tournement is based on the Bo3's not on how many individual games a person wins
On August 28 2011 14:18 CKHound wrote: When it comes to the tiebreaker system, of course head to head is going to be first. Think of it this way. If someone loses all their Bo3's but takes everyone to 3 games, they still have a fairly ok looking record in individual games, but guess what they are seeded lower. This tournement is based on the Bo3's not on how many individual games a person wins
Except that what you wrote has nothing to do with a tiebreaker system. If they lose all their series, they're seeded last due to losing all their series, nothing else.
On August 28 2011 14:20 holynorth wrote: Cultural differences are pretty weird. To me, head to head is an obvious first pick for tiebreaker. Apparently, other countries disagree.
I just feel as if two people are tied, yet one beat the other, that person should get the lead.
But what if it's the guy's best matchup and the other's worst? Shouldn't the guy with the overall better map score be the better player?