|
|
|
For those wondering:
01:00 GMT (+00:00)
+ Show Spoiler +
EDIT: O shit, a useful 1100 post :O
EDIT2: Will this be streamed?
|
If I can secure a caster, it can be streamed, else people will just have to watch the replays of it.
|
On October 04 2011 02:10 pHaRSiDE wrote:
If I can secure a caster, it can be streamed, else people will just have to watch the replays of it.
You should try and ask It's Gosu if they'd be willing to cast it.
|
I'll cast it if there is no one really else. My casting is subpar, but it's better than nothing I guess :B
|
I don't suppose there's any sort of travel stipend or anything?
|
its $600 stipend pay for travel and hotel stay. But a plane ticket this short notice will cost you quite a bit.
|
Why is this being done instead of standard ESL policy for player replacement? I don't understand the inconsistencies. It drives me crazy. It's really hard to plan for potentially sending players as replacements when the criteria for who goes seems to change every event.
I have spoken with Carmac and Shawn about this on several occasions. Most recently, it was explained to me that there is a standard protocol for replacements, which is to go down the list of qualifier participants, sequentially offering a slot based on highest placement outside of the top 8. By this protocol, which it has been explained to me to be standard protocol, the slot would go to either the 4th place finisher from qualifier #1 (Attero), the 4th place finisher from qualifier #2 (StrifeCro), or the 3rd place finisher from qualifier #3 (winner of giX/OwMyGroin).
Since Attero has subsequently qualified, shouldn't the logical next step be to contact StrifeCro and the winner of giX/OwMyGroin, to see if both can go? If both can go, there should be a match between those two. If only one can go, that player should get the spot. Am I missing something here?
Obviously this is a self-interested post, but that doesn't make my point illegitimate or invalid. I have had arguments about this on numerous occasions with ESL officials - the last time, quite an extended discussion about Cologne - and the resolution we came to was that I was assured that ESL's policies for player replacement were uniform and standard, and would be applied the same throughout the season.
Now, just two Global Challenges later, I have to voice the exact same complaint. Am I missing something?
|
On October 04 2011 05:08 pHaRSiDE wrote:
its $600 stipend pay for travel and hotel stay. But a plane ticket this short notice will cost you quite a bit.
It says on the event page : -You must provide your own travel cost to the event. NESL or IEM will not provide stipends for travel to the New York Comi Con event! BUT each team attending the event is guaranteed $600.
So is there a $600 stipend IN ADDITION to the minimum prize? or are u referring to the minimum prize as the stipend?
|
On October 04 2011 05:17 EGalex wrote:
Why is this being done instead of standard ESL policy for player replacement? I don't understand the inconsistencies. It drives me crazy. It's really hard to plan for potentially sending players as replacements when the criteria for who goes seems to change every event.
I have spoken with Carmac and Shawn about this on several occasions. Most recently, it was explained to me that there is a standard protocol for replacements, which is to go down the list of qualifier participants, sequentially offering a slot based on highest placement outside of the top 8. By this protocol, which it has been explained to me to be standard protocol, the slot would go to either the 4th place finisher from qualifier #1 (Attero), the 4th place finisher from qualifier #2 (StrifeCro), or the 3rd place finisher from qualifier #3 (winner of giX/OwMyGroin).
Since Attero has subsequently qualified, shouldn't the logical next step be to contact StrifeCro and the winner of giX/OwMyGroin, to see if both can go? If both can go, there should be a match between those two. If only one can go, that player should get the spot. Am I missing something here?
Obviously this is a self-interested post, but that doesn't make my point illegitimate or invalid. I have had arguments about this on numerous occasions with ESL officials - the last time, quite an extended discussion about Cologne - and the resolution we came to was that I was assured that ESL's policies for player replacement were uniform and standard, and would be applied the same throughout the season.
Now, just two Global Challenges later, I have to voice the exact same complaint. Am I missing something?
Because we hosted 3 separate qualifiers thats why we can't simply go down the line of the next person. In the other format where we had a championship bracket, then yes we would go straight down the line to the next person as its 1 tournament. When you have 3 tournaments you simply can't do it in a fair way. So another mini tournament is the most fair way. Gix, owmygroin, and strifecro will participate as they all can go.
As far as your fights with carmac and shawn, it a little odd considering this was approved by Carsten.
On October 04 2011 05:52 p34nUt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2011 05:08 pHaRSiDE wrote:
its $600 stipend pay for travel and hotel stay. But a plane ticket this short notice will cost you quite a bit. It says on the event page : Show nested quote +-You must provide your own travel cost to the event. NESL or IEM will not provide stipends for travel to the New York Comi Con event! BUT each team attending the event is guaranteed $600. So is there a $600 stipend IN ADDITION to the minimum prize? or are u referring to the minimum prize as the stipend?
the $600 on the prize list is the stipend pay.
|
Invite StrifeCo. I bet he takes it anyways.
|
Well I signed up, let's see what happens.
|
How long does it take for approval?
|
I forgot to write the max participants is 8 in the main post. I'll edit it in. Its a small tournament, If anyone who signed up does not confirm I'll accept more in in order of sign up.
|
Hum, so essentially first come first serve with very few spots?
Why is this? Too much work or...?
How do you confirm? You mean check-in
|
Yea its just a small cup for people who most definitely can attend, it needs to be finished quickly because of the short notice, so more than 8 people double elimination would greatly legthen the duration of the tournament.
And yes we check who confirms by checkins. If by 8:00 pm EST we have a spots open, we will accept more to fill those slots.
|
I think it being short-notice would greatly shorten the number of participants.
If you need additional help, I can help you if it means more people get to play.
|
On October 04 2011 06:52 pHaRSiDE wrote:
Yea its just a small cup for people who most definitely can attend, it needs to be finished quickly because of the short notice, so more than 8 people double elimination would greatly legthen the duration of the tournament.
And yes we check who confirms by checkins. If by 8:00 pm EST we have a spots open, we will accept more to fill those slots.
alright i signed up as soon as i saw this, appears full.. so ill be around. waiting.
|
On October 04 2011 06:50 Torte de Lini wrote:
Hum, so essentially first come first serve with very few spots?
Why is this? Too much work or...?
How do you confirm? You mean check-in
Yeah, I would feel guilty of taking the opportunity away to someone with greater skill as he/she's going into the hardest group in the tourney lmao, seems really hasty, I would hate to see a no-name with no shot attend due to unfortunate circumstances.
|
On October 04 2011 07:06 Badfatpanda wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2011 06:50 Torte de Lini wrote:
Hum, so essentially first come first serve with very few spots?
Why is this? Too much work or...?
How do you confirm? You mean check-in Yeah, I would feel guilty of taking the opportunity away to someone with greater skill as he/she's going into the hardest group in the tourney lmao, seems really hasty, I would hate to see a no-name with no shot attend due to unfortunate circumstances.
Everyone deserves a chance regardless of their likelihood to win or "have a shot"
|
|
|
I desperately need OwMyGroin and CrotchHammer to be in the qualifiers so we finally get to see the most anticipated game of all time :D
|
So this is why axslav is playing with machine in my 2v2 tonight instead of strifecro 
GL to him though. Hope he makes it through.
|
7 zergs 1 protoss as the 8 contestants O_O
|
Killer does need some backup at IEM after all lol
|
On October 04 2011 08:33 -reveNge- wrote:
7 zergs 1 protoss as the 8 contestants O_O
According to popular belief this means Zerg is OP and we need an 80 page thread denouncing ESL for creating such a horrid spectacle for us to watch 
|
On October 04 2011 06:02 pHaRSiDE wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2011 05:17 EGalex wrote:
Why is this being done instead of standard ESL policy for player replacement? I don't understand the inconsistencies. It drives me crazy. It's really hard to plan for potentially sending players as replacements when the criteria for who goes seems to change every event.
I have spoken with Carmac and Shawn about this on several occasions. Most recently, it was explained to me that there is a standard protocol for replacements, which is to go down the list of qualifier participants, sequentially offering a slot based on highest placement outside of the top 8. By this protocol, which it has been explained to me to be standard protocol, the slot would go to either the 4th place finisher from qualifier #1 (Attero), the 4th place finisher from qualifier #2 (StrifeCro), or the 3rd place finisher from qualifier #3 (winner of giX/OwMyGroin).
Since Attero has subsequently qualified, shouldn't the logical next step be to contact StrifeCro and the winner of giX/OwMyGroin, to see if both can go? If both can go, there should be a match between those two. If only one can go, that player should get the spot. Am I missing something here?
Obviously this is a self-interested post, but that doesn't make my point illegitimate or invalid. I have had arguments about this on numerous occasions with ESL officials - the last time, quite an extended discussion about Cologne - and the resolution we came to was that I was assured that ESL's policies for player replacement were uniform and standard, and would be applied the same throughout the season.
Now, just two Global Challenges later, I have to voice the exact same complaint. Am I missing something? Because we hosted 3 separate qualifiers thats why we can't simply go down the line of the next person. In the other format where we had a championship bracket, then yes we would go straight down the line to the next person as its 1 tournament. When you have 3 tournaments you simply can't do it in a fair way. So another mini tournament is the most fair way. Gix, owmygroin, and strifecro will participate as they all can go. As far as your fights with carmac and shawn, it a little odd considering this was approved by Carsten. Show nested quote +On October 04 2011 05:52 p34nUt wrote:On October 04 2011 05:08 pHaRSiDE wrote:
its $600 stipend pay for travel and hotel stay. But a plane ticket this short notice will cost you quite a bit. It says on the event page : -You must provide your own travel cost to the event. NESL or IEM will not provide stipends for travel to the New York Comi Con event! BUT each team attending the event is guaranteed $600. So is there a $600 stipend IN ADDITION to the minimum prize? or are u referring to the minimum prize as the stipend? the $600 on the prize list is the stipend pay.
You hosted different qualifiers for the other Global Challenges, too. I was told that the policy still applies. I agree that it is "odd" that this was approved given the depth of the past discussions that I've had. "Odd" is kind of a nice way of putting it. I would describe the situation as "internal communication breakdowns and lack of consistent policy enforcement."
|
for IEM Guangzhou you had a rematch for 3rd place in the 2nd qualifier. HasuObs lost to Xlord, but Xlord withdraw...
So why not apply the same rule for the same qualifier? just take the 4th from the 1st qualifier, in which qxc succeded.
|
On October 04 2011 08:52 EGalex wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2011 06:02 pHaRSiDE wrote:On October 04 2011 05:17 EGalex wrote:
Why is this being done instead of standard ESL policy for player replacement? I don't understand the inconsistencies. It drives me crazy. It's really hard to plan for potentially sending players as replacements when the criteria for who goes seems to change every event.
I have spoken with Carmac and Shawn about this on several occasions. Most recently, it was explained to me that there is a standard protocol for replacements, which is to go down the list of qualifier participants, sequentially offering a slot based on highest placement outside of the top 8. By this protocol, which it has been explained to me to be standard protocol, the slot would go to either the 4th place finisher from qualifier #1 (Attero), the 4th place finisher from qualifier #2 (StrifeCro), or the 3rd place finisher from qualifier #3 (winner of giX/OwMyGroin).
Since Attero has subsequently qualified, shouldn't the logical next step be to contact StrifeCro and the winner of giX/OwMyGroin, to see if both can go? If both can go, there should be a match between those two. If only one can go, that player should get the spot. Am I missing something here?
Obviously this is a self-interested post, but that doesn't make my point illegitimate or invalid. I have had arguments about this on numerous occasions with ESL officials - the last time, quite an extended discussion about Cologne - and the resolution we came to was that I was assured that ESL's policies for player replacement were uniform and standard, and would be applied the same throughout the season.
Now, just two Global Challenges later, I have to voice the exact same complaint. Am I missing something? Because we hosted 3 separate qualifiers thats why we can't simply go down the line of the next person. In the other format where we had a championship bracket, then yes we would go straight down the line to the next person as its 1 tournament. When you have 3 tournaments you simply can't do it in a fair way. So another mini tournament is the most fair way. Gix, owmygroin, and strifecro will participate as they all can go. As far as your fights with carmac and shawn, it a little odd considering this was approved by Carsten. On October 04 2011 05:52 p34nUt wrote:On October 04 2011 05:08 pHaRSiDE wrote:
its $600 stipend pay for travel and hotel stay. But a plane ticket this short notice will cost you quite a bit. It says on the event page : -You must provide your own travel cost to the event. NESL or IEM will not provide stipends for travel to the New York Comi Con event! BUT each team attending the event is guaranteed $600. So is there a $600 stipend IN ADDITION to the minimum prize? or are u referring to the minimum prize as the stipend? the $600 on the prize list is the stipend pay. You hosted different qualifiers for the other Global Challenges, too. I was told that the policy still applies. I agree that it is "odd" that this was approved given the depth of the past discussions that I've had. "Odd" is kind of a nice way of putting it. I would describe the situation as "internal communication breakdowns and lack of consistent policy enforcement."
We hosted different qualifiers that qualified into 1 championship bracket tournament for the last 2 global challenges. This time around we hosted 3 qualifiers that directly qualified the players into the event and not a championship bracket. Things change when you are the host country because it jumps from 2 players being allowed to attend to 8 players being allowed to attend.
Is it a break down of communication? Maybe, but its more likely an adjustment to the situation at hand rather than a breakdown. I understand your concern for consistency, but this is not the same format as the past two global challenges.
On October 04 2011 09:07 Derity wrote:
for IEM Guangzhou you had a rematch for 3rd place in the 2nd qualifier. HasuObs lost to Xlord, but Xlord withdraw...
So why not apply the same rule for the same qualifier? just take the 4th from the 1st qualifier, in which qxc succeded.
Fourth was Attero who qualified in the next one.
|
StrifeCo and Future are the only 2 I recognize. I'm guessing one of those two take it.
|
Dhalism and GiX are equally good players.
|
On October 04 2011 09:09 pHaRSiDE wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2011 09:07 Derity wrote:
for IEM Guangzhou you had a rematch for 3rd place in the 2nd qualifier. HasuObs lost to Xlord, but Xlord withdraw...
So why not apply the same rule for the same qualifier? just take the 4th from the 1st qualifier, in which qxc succeded. Fourth was Attero who qualified in the next one.
oh, sry, i missed that...
|
Who won ?? OwMyGroin vs Strifecro in the final~~
|
On October 04 2011 09:33 Torte de Lini wrote:
Dhalism and GiX are equally good players.
Dhalism is a no skill newbie!
GiX has beaten HuK at one of the WCG qualifiers tho(to win a slot at national finals)
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Strifecro wins / qualifies and EG will send him 
we are very proud of our two EG's going axslav and strife!
|
|
|
Yep Strifecro wins the event like incontrol says, in a quite dominating fashion. Did not drop 1 series.
All replays available at the brackets! Just click the "vs"
|
|
|
Congratulations StrifeCro! It's awesome to see him perform outside of the 2v2s.
Good luck at IEM NY. That weekend will be pretty epic.
|
what happend with koreans invites?
|
On October 04 2011 23:28 HaCkTeR wrote:
what happend with koreans invites?
Korean invites to the NA/SA qualifier?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/i9TSO.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VBerV.jpg)
FXO.qxc decided to withdrawl from the tournament due to personal reasons, therefore we have to replace him at the event.
EG,StrifeCro wins the replacement spot and will be at the IEM NYC Comicon event!
