EPTOn August 16 2013 22:56 andrewlt wrote:
Something tells me that some people do not watch real sports. Head to head is the most common way to break ties in pretty much every sport.
Something tells me that some people do not watch real sports. Head to head is the most common way to break ties in pretty much every sport.
Except in real sports it's over the course of a season with many games played, like the NBA where the sheer number of games makes any H2H tiebreaker a lot less harsh. Both teams tying on 50-32 gives is freaking close and both had plenty of chances over the season to get their 51st win, not to mention playing a minimum of 2 games vs each other. Having the same system for a 2-2 (played each other once) record is dumb and I challenge you to find a H2H tiebreak existing in any 'real sport' as a first option off such limited data.
This is coupled with the difficulty of running tiebreakers between teams from different areas in longer, harder to organise sports. In the case of U&D it's a 2-2 score, the games are online, 1vs1 and take 15-20 minutes plus they're already in the studio. Even limiting it to one round of tiebreakers then going to H2H due to time restrictions, if it remains tied, would be better.
On August 16 2013 22:56 andrewlt wrote:
Everything is arbitrary. Not just the tiebreakers, but every tournament structure in every tournament. People need to stop crying about perceived unfairness every time the results aren't what they want. And stop with the BS that you don't care about the results you are whining about. That's the least believable argument you can possibly make.
Everything is arbitrary. Not just the tiebreakers, but every tournament structure in every tournament. People need to stop crying about perceived unfairness every time the results aren't what they want. And stop with the BS that you don't care about the results you are whining about. That's the least believable argument you can possibly make.
I don't give a shit about who got out of this group. However, I do get irritated when people defend a format with bullshit semantics like 'everything is arbitrary.' So regardless of how bad a format is we're never allowed to criticise or suggest improvements because we must just be a sore loser? I'm sure the players must get frustrated at how their livelihood is impacted by GOM making a single Bo1 more important than the others and turning advancement into a coin toss.
