EPT[GSL] Blizzard Cup Group A - Page 256
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
Contrary to popular belief Stephano is not from the States, any mindless spam asserting otherwise after this time (19:48 KST/ 5:48 AM EST/ 10:48 GMT) will meet a moderator response. We have enough confusing spam posting in LR threads these days. Lets try to keep the love for everyone's favourite French zerg reasonable. And as always: - No player bashing. - No caster bashing. - No balance whining. Enjoy the games. | ||
|
mr_tolkien
France8631 Posts
| ||
|
Bromazepam
820 Posts
On December 12 2011 21:58 darkest44 wrote: This is 5 players, it's completely different than 4 and what you said is impossible with 5. Do some math. Then find another way. Skip pool play and go directly to brackets, anything else. If they paid so much attention to design a system that wouldn't allow this kind of situations in the GSL, why couldn't they do the same for this tournament? | ||
|
quancer
Canada161 Posts
On December 12 2011 21:51 Reasonable wrote: I'm not trolling at all. That fact that you think I'm trolling is because there are two mathematically equal solutions to this result, and the one that is given the preference is more intuitive. I'm not a big fan of Stephano, but I respect him as a player and to invite someone to such tournament and fly him all the way to Korea and to rate by a controversial scale is rather disrespectful at least. Here is something who hasn't slept through inequalities on algebra: let M=MC, S=Stephano, D=DRG M>S S>D } -> (S>D>M or M>S) = (S>M or M>S) D>M I really don't see how advancement in such tournament should be based on an implication that one match result is preferred to the other. It is the first time I encounter this in sports, maybe this is a common practice somewhere. I'm sorry if I offended any MC fans with this, but I think it is just to complain about this tournament system considering the scale of the Blizzard cup Consideration of head-to-head makes zero sense, which is why it's been a contentious issue for so long. You're correct that the results do not imply MC > Stephano or vice versa and therefore the decision seems largely arbitrary. Tournaments really need to start doing tiebreakers for these situations regardless of how inconvenient they might be. Yes, it's extra work, but the fans will *always* appreciate additional high-stakes games. I think the reason you got so many negative responses was because your first post seemed to say that the results clearly implied Stephano > MC, which is obviously false. | ||
|
bbm
United Kingdom1320 Posts
On December 12 2011 21:58 darkest44 wrote: This is 5 players, it's completely different than 4 and what you said is impossible with 5. Do some math. I'm aware of that, maybe they should have 2 groups of 4 and kick out two of the players? Or invite 2 more players and have 3 groups? If you can't balance for 5 players then don't do five players. It's like trying to introduce a 4th element into RPS, it doesn't work so you just shouldn't try it. On December 12 2011 21:55 MayorITC wrote: Read the thread. People are acting like this is some foreign tournament format, citing how other sports don't use this head-to-head. They're obviously ignorant of the fact that MLG and DH used the same format. Also, cite some proof of where people called out match-fixing in MLG/DH involving pool play matches. And there is no "right" or "wrong" format. Blizzard Cup chose to go with an already-established format. I didn't see people voicing their complaints about the format before today's matches began. And if you're going to argue against that one, once again, cite your evidence. Stephano vs Bratok (can't remember what tourney, assembly maybe?) both in top 2 of group, winner played sen in ro16, loser played someone else who they viewed as inferior to sen, so they both played to lose. | ||
|
Garnet
Vietnam9054 Posts
| ||
|
quancer
Canada161 Posts
On December 12 2011 22:01 Bromazepam wrote: Then find another way. Skip pool play and go directly to brackets, anything else. If they paid so much attention to design a system that wouldn't allow this kind of situations in the GSL, why couldn't they do the same for this tournament? Pool play allows viewers to see lots of match-ups. It exists for a reason ... | ||
|
Tommylew
Wales2717 Posts
Well Done Stephano!!! Would of been nice if you had got trhough but oh well... we have Nani to look forward to next!!! | ||
|
Bromazepam
820 Posts
On December 12 2011 22:02 quancer wrote: Pool play allows viewers to see lots of match-ups. It exists for a reason ... Proper tiebreakers would allow viewers to see even more match-ups. They don't exist for what reason? Edit: also, I said "anything else". bbm two posts above had some good suggestions. | ||
|
SilverLeagueElite
United States626 Posts
| ||
|
Slike
Greece127 Posts
On December 12 2011 21:57 killerdog wrote: This would be true, if you only advanced or didn't advance. But with the way it worked where number 1 got seeded into the semi finals, there was always something to fight for. DRG now has a guaranteed $4.2k and only needs to one one boX to get into the finals, whereas if mvp has won one more game he would be in that position, which is immensely better then being in the second/third place spot and getting into what is effectively a ro8. So every game did matter, alot. MC didnt have any chance of being 1st , as even if he went to 3-1 his head-to-head record with MvP would place him 2nd. So all he fought for was playing the 2nd of the other group if he lost or playing the 3rd of the other group if he won. We can argue if this is important enough or not , but that isnt the point. The point is a format shouldnt even have the smallest window for game throwing , cause when the money is so high , it COULD happen and it would also be very hard to notice. | ||
|
Zzoram
Canada7115 Posts
On December 12 2011 22:02 Garnet wrote: This situation happens all the time in Premier League and other soccer leagues, but there's always a lot on the line for each match even if both teams' fate have been determined. In this case MC actually didn't have much to try for. But I still think he did try to win that game vs. DRG. People are so wrong about this. MC had plenty of incentive to win. DRG is a stronger player than Stephano. Knocking out DRG in a Bo1 helps MC's odds of winning the tournament later on because he wouldn't have to face DRG in a Bo3. Also, MC winning would've meant he played the weaker Group B opponent, improving his odds of advancing further. | ||
|
Crushinator
Netherlands2138 Posts
On December 12 2011 21:55 MayorITC wrote: Read the thread. People are acting like this is some foreign tournament format, citing how other sports don't use this head-to-head. They're obviously ignorant of the fact that MLG and DH used the same format. Also, cite some proof of where people called out match-fixing in MLG/DH involving pool play matches. And there is no "right" or "wrong" format. Blizzard Cup chose to go with an already-established format. I don't see people voicing their complaints about the format before today's matches began. And if you're going to argue against that one, once again, cite your evidence. I do not particularly feel like digging through weeks abn moths old 500 page threads, but if you want to go through the Dreamhack Winter or Summer threads you can find complaints about Grubby being eliminated despite going 2-1 in both of these tournaments. I'm sure there are more and better examples though. This also doesn't matter because the discussion is not less relevant just because it hasn't occured before. Also with the BO1 format the headsup situation is going to occur much more frequently, due to the inexistence of map score differences, so that actually makes this format somewhat unique. Also, like mentioned before the GSL has always taken care that these situations do not occur in their prveious tournaments, with their winner vs winner and loser vs loser format. | ||
|
quancer
Canada161 Posts
On December 12 2011 22:04 Bromazepam wrote: Proper tiebreakers would allow viewers to see even more match-ups. They don't exist for what reason? I agree, tiebreakers are a must with pool play. Tournaments need to start implementing them if they choose to go with pool play. I was responding because you seemed to suggest organizers should never go for pool play--as if it was always inferior--which is silly. | ||
|
Vorenius
Denmark1979 Posts
On December 12 2011 21:55 bbm wrote: The GSL's regular group stages dual tournament format avoids this by not having matches that are irrelevant. Every match will make a difference for someone between being in the grey "might get through" middle, or the assured 2-0 or 0-2 win/loss. The GSL "group stages" aren't group stages. They are small double elimination brackets. That's in no way relevant to this, since there aren't 4/8/16 players in each group. | ||
|
dde
Canada796 Posts
| ||
|
shadymmj
1906 Posts
On December 12 2011 22:01 quancer wrote: Consideration of head-to-head makes zero sense, which is why it's been a contentious issue for so long. You're correct that the results do not imply MC > Stephano or vice versa and therefore the decision seems largely arbitrary. Tournaments really need to start doing tiebreakers for these situations regardless of how inconvenient they might be. Yes, it's extra work, but the fans will *always* appreciate additional high-stakes games. I think the reason you got so many negative responses was because your first post seemed to say that the results clearly implied Stephano > MC, which is obviously false. agreed. format is very poor...head to head is a terrible determiner when deciding who should advance. | ||
|
darkest44
United States1009 Posts
On December 12 2011 22:02 bbm wrote: I'm aware of that, maybe they should have 2 groups of 4 and kick out two of the players? Or invite 2 more players and have 3 groups? If you can't balance for 5 players then don't do five players. It's like trying to introduce a 4th element into RPS, it doesn't work so you just shouldn't try it. Lol yes, kick 2 players out of the tournament just to appease the Stephano fanboys with delusions that MC threw a hard fought game vs DRG. Such a joke. It was plenty balanced, the players who preformed the best advanced. Group play is a standard model used in many tournaments and only now whined about cause some Stephano fanboys are butt hurt he didn't get through. If MC won none of these kids would be whining. If Stephano had won vs MC and they forced a rematch playoff then the same kids would be whining that that's unfair and "stephano already beat him". These kids will whine about whatever prevents their favorite player from advancing in any particular tournament, it happens all the time no matter the format, fanboys are gonna fanboy. Non retarded Stephano fans are happy Stephano preformed very well at 2-2 and there is nothing to be ashamed about. I'm sure he gained many Korean fans from his performance which was probably better than they expected. | ||
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
| ||
|
OopsOopsBaby
Singapore3425 Posts
On December 12 2011 21:51 Reasonable wrote: I'm not trolling at all. That fact that you think I'm trolling is because there are two mathematically equal solutions to this result, and the one that is given the preference is more intuitive. I'm not a big fan of Stephano, but I respect him as a player and to invite someone to such tournament and fly him all the way to Korea and to rate by a controversial scale is rather disrespectful at least. Here is something who hasn't slept through inequalities on algebra: let M=MC, S=Stephano, D=DRG M>S S>D } -> (S>D>M or M>S) = (S>M or M>S) D>M I really don't see how advancement in such tournament should be based on an implication that one match result is preferred to the other. It is the first time I encounter this in sports, maybe this is a common practice somewhere. I'm sorry if I offended any MC fans with this, but I think it is just to complain about this tournament system considering the scale of the Blizzard cup solved for you. D 3-2 M 2-2 S 2-2 M > S | ||
|
KiNGxXx
7928 Posts
| ||
| ||
