EPTOn January 23 2012 06:00 Superiorwolf wrote:
Just wanted to say that this event was super awesome and really well run. I was extremely impressed by the production and the organization was superb. I do think we have a little bit of constructive criticism though in terms of the format of the tournament. There are a few things that could be improved for the next CSL LANs.
First of all, and this obviously applies to us and UCSB the most, but the Ro8 should not be played on Day 1. I know the goal was to end the tournament earlier for teams that came from far away to have time to drive back, but the problem with Ro8 on Day 1 means that some teams are ELIMINATED from the tournament on the first day. Whereas wild card group teams remained in the tournament, teams that did well in group play (Berkeley 3-0, UCSB 2-1) were knocked out before the teams who lost in their groups. For us at least we felt extremely terrible after being eliminated and a bit sad that other teams who did more poorly actually got the privilege to play more. I think playing the Ro8 on Day 2 would not add that much time to the schedule, probably only 1-2 hours, and keeps teams from being eliminated and wanting to leave early. As well, Day 2 probably would end earlier than 8pm anyways since with only 3 rounds being played that should only be 5-7 hours total, and if it's started at 10PM then the tourney would end at around 3PM - 5PM ish. Obviously there are logistical issues that would cause delays but in general I think the tourney would still finish at a reasonable time even with Ro8 being played. *** Especially since 2 of the Ro8 matches weren't even played yesterday, I don't think playing Ro8 yesterday for two matches even saved any time.
Secondly, it seems the format rewarded teams who did poorly in groups, which I somewhat already mentioned earlier. As far as I know the teams were seeded #1 for Group A, #2 for Group B, #3 for Group C, and so on. So it doesn't make a ton of sense for WC winners (by default lower seeds) to be playing Group C. Instead, for losing in the original groups, they should be playing the winners of the toughest group, Group A. Losing in the original groups should make advancing more difficult, not easier. With WC vs Group C, the lowest seeds are playing each other, whereas higher seeds Group A vs Group B are eliminating each other. Instead, the format should be Group A vs WC and Group B vs Group C. Perhaps even four normal groups may have been a superior format, 3-3-3-4 groups may have solved the issue with WC rewarding teams who did worse in group play.
Overall though we loved the tournament and are really excited for future ones. It was extremely well run, very professional, and really fun. Major props to Duran and Tim for running it (and everyone else behind the scenes)! I hope these tournaments run much more often, as honestly I think they should. When I played volleyball we played tournaments pretty much every other week and it developed the teams / rivalries a lot and wasn't as devastating to teams if they lost in one tournament, as another tournament would be coming up soon for them to prove themselves yet again. I know the logistics for running this kind of tournament are insane, but I would love to see the future of CSL headed in this direction
Thanks and I hope you find this feedback useful!
-------
Actually, on further thought, I don't think Group A vs WC and Group B vs Group C makes much sense either. Teams like San Jose State which likely may have won in another, easier group, would simply play Group A once again in bracket play, which would be a bit unfair. So maybe scrapping the entire wild card group idea would be better. This would mean that teams could be eliminated on the first day though without a second chance. However, I think it's fairer.
Just wanted to say that this event was super awesome and really well run. I was extremely impressed by the production and the organization was superb. I do think we have a little bit of constructive criticism though in terms of the format of the tournament. There are a few things that could be improved for the next CSL LANs.
First of all, and this obviously applies to us and UCSB the most, but the Ro8 should not be played on Day 1. I know the goal was to end the tournament earlier for teams that came from far away to have time to drive back, but the problem with Ro8 on Day 1 means that some teams are ELIMINATED from the tournament on the first day. Whereas wild card group teams remained in the tournament, teams that did well in group play (Berkeley 3-0, UCSB 2-1) were knocked out before the teams who lost in their groups. For us at least we felt extremely terrible after being eliminated and a bit sad that other teams who did more poorly actually got the privilege to play more. I think playing the Ro8 on Day 2 would not add that much time to the schedule, probably only 1-2 hours, and keeps teams from being eliminated and wanting to leave early. As well, Day 2 probably would end earlier than 8pm anyways since with only 3 rounds being played that should only be 5-7 hours total, and if it's started at 10PM then the tourney would end at around 3PM - 5PM ish. Obviously there are logistical issues that would cause delays but in general I think the tourney would still finish at a reasonable time even with Ro8 being played. *** Especially since 2 of the Ro8 matches weren't even played yesterday, I don't think playing Ro8 yesterday for two matches even saved any time.
Secondly, it seems the format rewarded teams who did poorly in groups, which I somewhat already mentioned earlier. As far as I know the teams were seeded #1 for Group A, #2 for Group B, #3 for Group C, and so on. So it doesn't make a ton of sense for WC winners (by default lower seeds) to be playing Group C. Instead, for losing in the original groups, they should be playing the winners of the toughest group, Group A. Losing in the original groups should make advancing more difficult, not easier. With WC vs Group C, the lowest seeds are playing each other, whereas higher seeds Group A vs Group B are eliminating each other. Instead, the format should be Group A vs WC and Group B vs Group C. Perhaps even four normal groups may have been a superior format, 3-3-3-4 groups may have solved the issue with WC rewarding teams who did worse in group play.
Overall though we loved the tournament and are really excited for future ones. It was extremely well run, very professional, and really fun. Major props to Duran and Tim for running it (and everyone else behind the scenes)! I hope these tournaments run much more often, as honestly I think they should. When I played volleyball we played tournaments pretty much every other week and it developed the teams / rivalries a lot and wasn't as devastating to teams if they lost in one tournament, as another tournament would be coming up soon for them to prove themselves yet again. I know the logistics for running this kind of tournament are insane, but I would love to see the future of CSL headed in this direction
Thanks and I hope you find this feedback useful!-------
Actually, on further thought, I don't think Group A vs WC and Group B vs Group C makes much sense either. Teams like San Jose State which likely may have won in another, easier group, would simply play Group A once again in bracket play, which would be a bit unfair. So maybe scrapping the entire wild card group idea would be better. This would mean that teams could be eliminated on the first day though without a second chance. However, I think it's fairer.
Heya Suppy,
Thannks for the feedback. There are a lot of things we could have done with the format, and we'll keep working on it to improve it in the future. About the time -- unlike other big companies, I pretty much funded this entire LAN out of my own pocket. Most venues have set times where you need to be out of the building, and if you go over it you have to pay, a lot. For example, for the NASL finals, we had to pay some exorbitant amount of money for every hour past midnight we stayed. A big company like NASL can pay that... I can't.
This is why we wanted to get through the Ro8 finished on Saturday, so we could just do the semis and finals Sunday so we can have enough time to tear-down and be out by midnight. Obviously this is not ideal, and hopefully as we acquire more sponsorhship we can afford to be a lot more flexible.
So while I 100% agree with most of what you said (and about the format we definitely can make changes), a lot of things we have been really constricted financially with what we can do. I tried to get the most out of what we had!
