On June 23 2014 11:03 Josh_Video wrote: Using a dual bracket is hard because you have to reward the player coming from the winner bracket in some way, but not make it too much harder for the player coming from losers, personally i dislike both extended series and the two bo3 thing, but i cant think of a fair way of doing it, maybe start Polt with a 1 game advantage?
How about just have a regular BO7 finals? Is it really that hard to comprehend that the WB final player already has the upper hand due to having rested + having had the advantage of being able to study his opponent?
Such an advantage is not quantifiable and as such is pretty unfair towards the person that hasn't lost a series yet. A better alternative in my opinion, and one that MLG had used before is to split the brackets, and loser brackets into two halves, and have two people of equal standing in the tournament face each other on equal ground.
The Smash Bros community complained about that idea and it was changed for all the games for some reason. What you're describing was the original format they were going to use.
Why did they complain?
I honestly don't remember, but I do know that the standard double elimination format is used at most Smash tourneys, they probably just thought it was a change for no reason.
Also I've never heard "double elimination is unfair because the loser's bracket player has to play more games" outside the Starcraft community. Most people would look at you funny.
On June 23 2014 11:03 Josh_Video wrote: Using a dual bracket is hard because you have to reward the player coming from the winner bracket in some way, but not make it too much harder for the player coming from losers, personally i dislike both extended series and the two bo3 thing, but i cant think of a fair way of doing it, maybe start Polt with a 1 game advantage?
How about just have a regular BO7 finals? Is it really that hard to comprehend that the WB final player already has the upper hand due to having rested + having had the advantage of being able to study his opponent?
Not enough of an advantage. The winner is entitled to lose one bo3 like everyone else, otherwise he's the only one that got screwed. In theory the lower bracket player is playing lesser people who have all lost before, so it doesn't matter if they have to play more games. The winner bracket player needs an advantage that is more than just rest.
I call bullshit on that, the rest + studying is enough of an advantage.
Alternatively you can see rest = "lack of warmup"
Hey you have a whole day's worth of time, its up to you what you do with it, if you didn't practice ladder or some custom games and then QQ that the other guy was warmed up then you really deserve to lose.
Well it's like the lower bracket player QQ that he has to play more games because he lost earlier. Polt is entitled to losing one bo3 like everyone else, otherwise it's totally unfair. It's not his fault he never lost, so he shouldn't be penalized for it.
On June 23 2014 11:03 Josh_Video wrote: Using a dual bracket is hard because you have to reward the player coming from the winner bracket in some way, but not make it too much harder for the player coming from losers, personally i dislike both extended series and the two bo3 thing, but i cant think of a fair way of doing it, maybe start Polt with a 1 game advantage?
How about just have a regular BO7 finals? Is it really that hard to comprehend that the WB final player already has the upper hand due to having rested + having had the advantage of being able to study his opponent?
Such an advantage is not quantifiable and as such is pretty unfair towards the person that hasn't lost a series yet. A better alternative in my opinion, and one that MLG had used before is to split the brackets, and loser brackets into two halves, and have two people of equal standing in the tournament face each other on equal ground.
The Smash Bros community complained about that idea and it was changed for all the games for some reason. What you're describing was the original format they were going to use.
Why did they complain?
I honestly don't remember, but I do know that the standard double elimination format is used at most Smash tourneys, they probably just thought it was a change for no reason.
What was the MLG Anaheim finals last year? Best of 7?
On June 23 2014 11:06 Larkin wrote: It wouldn't be MLG without a faceless Korean winning it!
MMA, MVP, DRG, MKP, Taeja so faceless wow
A lot of those guys were considered faceless Koreans until they were consistently winning foreign events. For Mvp especially that status stuck around for a very long time.
The term is complete bullshit and borderline racism anyway, as is calling them robots etc.
but nobody who won a mlg was their first tournament success.
bomber. code A doesn't count.
actually MMA too
If you win code A, you no longer classify as a "Faceless korean"
Nobody qualifies as a faceless Korean. It's a derogatory term that makes fun of the fact that it's tough to express your personality after being flown halfway around the world to a foreign country where you don't speak a lick of English
I don't think anyone should be considered a faceless korean, Im just trying to see this guys point of view when he says MLG has faceless koreans for champions.
On June 23 2014 11:03 Josh_Video wrote: Using a dual bracket is hard because you have to reward the player coming from the winner bracket in some way, but not make it too much harder for the player coming from losers, personally i dislike both extended series and the two bo3 thing, but i cant think of a fair way of doing it, maybe start Polt with a 1 game advantage?
How about just have a regular BO7 finals? Is it really that hard to comprehend that the WB final player already has the upper hand due to having rested + having had the advantage of being able to study his opponent?
Such an advantage is not quantifiable and as such is pretty unfair towards the person that hasn't lost a series yet. A better alternative in my opinion, and one that MLG had used before is to split the brackets, and loser brackets into two halves, and have two people of equal standing in the tournament face each other on equal ground.
The Smash Bros community complained about that idea and it was changed for all the games for some reason. What you're describing was the original format they were going to use.
Why did they complain?
I honestly don't remember, but I do know that the standard double elimination format is used at most Smash tourneys, they probably just thought it was a change for no reason.
What was the MLG Anaheim finals last year? Best of 7?
On June 23 2014 11:03 Josh_Video wrote: Using a dual bracket is hard because you have to reward the player coming from the winner bracket in some way, but not make it too much harder for the player coming from losers, personally i dislike both extended series and the two bo3 thing, but i cant think of a fair way of doing it, maybe start Polt with a 1 game advantage?
How about just have a regular BO7 finals? Is it really that hard to comprehend that the WB final player already has the upper hand due to having rested + having had the advantage of being able to study his opponent?
Such an advantage is not quantifiable and as such is pretty unfair towards the person that hasn't lost a series yet. A better alternative in my opinion, and one that MLG had used before is to split the brackets, and loser brackets into two halves, and have two people of equal standing in the tournament face each other on equal ground.
The Smash Bros community complained about that idea and it was changed for all the games for some reason. What you're describing was the original format they were going to use.
Why did they complain?
I honestly don't remember, but I do know that the standard double elimination format is used at most Smash tourneys, they probably just thought it was a change for no reason.
What was the MLG Anaheim finals last year? Best of 7?
On June 23 2014 11:06 Larkin wrote: It wouldn't be MLG without a faceless Korean winning it!
MMA, MVP, DRG, MKP, Taeja so faceless wow
A lot of those guys were considered faceless Koreans until they were consistently winning foreign events. For Mvp especially that status stuck around for a very long time.
The term is complete bullshit and borderline racism anyway, as is calling them robots etc.
but nobody who won a mlg was their first tournament success.
bomber. code A doesn't count.
actually MMA too
If you win code A, you no longer classify as a "Faceless korean"
Nobody qualifies as a faceless Korean. It's a derogatory term that makes fun of the fact that it's tough to express your personality after being flown halfway around the world to a foreign country where you don't speak a lick of English
I don't think anyone should be considered a faceless korean, Im just trying to see this guys point of view when he says MLG has faceless koreans for champions.
I gotcha I didn't think you did I was just spouting my opinion haha
9670
5875
548
248
122
EPT
