|
On November 30 2014 05:17 kaykoose wrote:
I dont really care as a spectator, but if I were a player coming from the winners bracket, I'd want the extended series/2-0 lead/however you want to set it up
Of course you would, you'd also want a 13-0 lead if you could get it. That is not the point. Any system is bound to be "unfair" in some way. We can't make all matches carry precisely the same weight (unless we do a round robin which is not practical).
Both players knew precisely what the WB finals meant, and that the grand final match is more important. If it was extended series, then Life would have to beat Taeja as well as go 2-1 vs Forgg, but Forgg would only have to go 2-1 vs Life. How is it fair that only Life had to face elimination vs Taeja? Why should the first match of the extended series mean more than the second one?
|
On November 30 2014 05:19 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:17 kaykoose wrote:
I dont really care as a spectator, but if I were a player coming from the winners bracket, I'd want the extended series/2-0 lead/however you want to set it up 1-0 lead seems appropriate for a Bo7. Any more and the one coming up from losers would have play flawlessly.
Yeah agree, a 1-0 lead should be a standart when there is a double elim bracket like that. This is quite unfair to ForGG there as he's the only one who is not allowed to lose a series
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
player from the winner's bracket has the advantage because they play one less bo5
no other advantages necessary.
In NFL playoffs the top seed doesn't start the game 7-0, they just didn't have to play wild card week.
|
On November 30 2014 05:21 Walnuts wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:11 Dodgin wrote:On November 30 2014 05:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 30 2014 05:08 sibs wrote:
Come on.
it's
1. Life
2. NesTea
3. DRG
4. Soulkey (maybe?) Definitely Life and Nestea for top two Zergs of all SC2 history (although I'm not sure who's technically in first). Life is very clearly better unless you weigh GSL way too high I think it goes 1 Life- pretty much has everything 2 Nestea-3 GSLs, best for a shorter period of time 3 DRG, been around longer than Life, with similar success but not quite the same highs. I almost think he ties Nestea. 4 SoO- All those silvers. 5 Leenock- everybody seems to forget how good he was at foreign tournaments for a while there. For terrans, I think it goes Mvp, Taeja, Polt, Innovation.... MKP/MMA? For tosses, I guess MC, Rain/Zest, Parting, and idk who else, toss doesn't have much of a unified best players group, unless I'm forgetting someone.
liquid hero was pretty good for a while, but not nearly as consistent as some T/Z top players
|
On November 30 2014 05:21 Walnuts wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:11 Dodgin wrote:On November 30 2014 05:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 30 2014 05:08 sibs wrote:
Come on.
it's
1. Life
2. NesTea
3. DRG
4. Soulkey (maybe?) Definitely Life and Nestea for top two Zergs of all SC2 history (although I'm not sure who's technically in first). Life is very clearly better unless you weigh GSL way too high I think it goes 1 Life- pretty much has everything 2 Nestea-3 GSLs, best for a shorter period of time 3 DRG, been around longer than Life, with similar success but not quite the same highs. I almost think he ties Nestea. 4 SoO- All those silvers. 5 Leenock- everybody seems to forget how good he was at foreign tournaments for a while there. For terrans, I think it goes Mvp, Taeja, Polt, Innovation.... MKP/MMA? For tosses, I guess MC, Rain/Zest, Parting, and idk who else, toss doesn't have much of a unified best players group, unless I'm forgetting someone.
MMA shouldn't be a question... he's at least #3.
|
On November 30 2014 05:15 Supersamu wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:13 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:12 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:11 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:10 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:09 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:08 Diderick wrote:
No winners bracket advantage for ForGG? No and thank goodness, I hate when tournaments do that. But giving the winner's bracket advantage increases the chance that the winner of the tournament was the best player. Winners bracket advantage is that that player doesn't have to play another extremely difficult best of 5 and face elimination. But one of the two players in the loser's bracket is guaranteed to play in the finals... what's your point? My point is that the person in the winner's bracket should be rewarded for not losing a series.
I agree entirely. The person who never drops to the losers bracket never gets his second chance. Life has already lost to ForGG once, so he has one loss. If Life then wins the final final, he wins the whole thing. He will have lost 1 series and won the rest.
ForGG will also have lost 1 series and won the rest, but everyone else in the tournament will have lost TWO series to get knocked out.
It's unfair on ForGG because he never gets his second chance. If he loses in the grand final that's it for him.
That's why the double BOX is the most sensible, because the first BOX is the winner route finalist's second chance BO5, or the loser bracket finalists final BOX/second chance loss.
If they had a double BOX final where ForGG wins if he wins the first one, it's fair. Life would lose because he lost two BOX's.
If Life wins the first one, then it's fair, Life will have lost one BOX and ForGG will have lost one BOX as well, and then they go into the final BOX with one loss each, and it's a final elimination.
Having a double elimination tournament with no advantage for not being eliminated during the whole thing is DUMB. It gives ZERO advantage to the person who never lost, other than a small amount of time in terms of playing fewer games potentially, but since all the sets are variable, it's possible the losers bracket finalist could have actually played fewer games overall than the winner finalist.
Either make it double elimination ALL THE WAY, or don't have double elimination at all.
|
On November 30 2014 05:15 Zealously wrote:
I would buy Life another headset (seriously) but they wont let him use gear that isnt official
So is he stuck using the same one that made playing difficult in the first series??
|
On November 30 2014 05:21 rasnj wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:17 kaykoose wrote:
I dont really care as a spectator, but if I were a player coming from the winners bracket, I'd want the extended series/2-0 lead/however you want to set it up Of course you would, you'd also want a 13-0 lead if you could get it. That is not the point. Any system is bound to be "unfair" in some way. We can't make all matches carry precisely the same weight (unless we do a round robin which is not practical). Both players knew precisely what the WB finals meant, and that the grand final match is more important. If it was extended series, then Life would have to beat Taeja as well as go 2-1 vs Forgg, but Forgg would only have to go 2-1 vs Life. How is it fair that only Life had to face elimination vs Taeja? Why should the first match of the extended series mean more than the second one?
See Lonyo's post. He said it way better than I ever could. Would rep if I could.
|
On November 30 2014 05:23 Lonyo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:15 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:13 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:12 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:11 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:10 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:09 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:08 Diderick wrote:
No winners bracket advantage for ForGG? No and thank goodness, I hate when tournaments do that. But giving the winner's bracket advantage increases the chance that the winner of the tournament was the best player. Winners bracket advantage is that that player doesn't have to play another extremely difficult best of 5 and face elimination. But one of the two players in the loser's bracket is guaranteed to play in the finals... what's your point? My point is that the person in the winner's bracket should be rewarded for not losing a series. I agree entirely. The person who never drops to the losers bracket never gets his second chance. Life has already lost to ForGG once, so he has one loss. If Life then wins the final final, he wins the whole thing. He will have lost 1 series and won the rest. ForGG will also have lost 1 series and won the rest, but everyone else in the tournament will have lost TWO series to get knocked out. It's unfair on ForGG because he never gets his second chance. If he loses in the grand final that's it for him. That's why the double BOX is the most sensible, because the first BOX is the winner route finalist's second chance BO5, or the loser bracket finalists final BOX/second chance loss. If they had a double BOX final where ForGG wins if he wins the first one, it's fair. Life would lose because he lost two BOX's. If Life wins the first one, then it's fair, Life will have lost one BOX and ForGG will have lost one BOX as well, and then they go into the final BOX with one loss each, and it's a final elimination. Having a double elimination tournament with no advantage for not being eliminated during the whole thing is DUMB. It gives ZERO advantage to the person who never lost, other than a small amount of time in terms of playing fewer games potentially, but since all the sets are variable, it's possible the losers bracket finalist could have actually played fewer games overall than the winner finalist. Either make it double elimination ALL THE WAY, or don't have double elimination at all.
Yes indeed. There should be some kind of advantage but i guess DH thinks it'd be too "complicated" for the viewers / especially the more casuals one from swedish tv
|
On November 30 2014 05:10 kaykoose wrote:
Oh shit. ForGG beat him but gets no advantage?
His advantage was not needing to play an additional set (the Loser's Final match vs. Taeja). Winning non-stop means you play fewer matches while the losers drop down to the lower bracket and need to play more and work their way through a larger bracket. ForGG has more time to rest and can watch how Life played vs. Taeja to help him plan his series.
|
On November 30 2014 05:23 Lonyo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:15 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:13 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:12 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:11 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:10 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:09 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:08 Diderick wrote:
No winners bracket advantage for ForGG? No and thank goodness, I hate when tournaments do that. But giving the winner's bracket advantage increases the chance that the winner of the tournament was the best player. Winners bracket advantage is that that player doesn't have to play another extremely difficult best of 5 and face elimination. But one of the two players in the loser's bracket is guaranteed to play in the finals... what's your point? My point is that the person in the winner's bracket should be rewarded for not losing a series. I agree entirely. The person who never drops to the losers bracket never gets his second chance. Life has already lost to ForGG once, so he has one loss. If Life then wins the final final, he wins the whole thing. He will have lost 1 series and won the rest. ForGG will also have lost 1 series and won the rest, but everyone else in the tournament will have lost TWO series to get knocked out. It's unfair on ForGG because he never gets his second chance. If he loses in the grand final that's it for him. That's why the double BOX is the most sensible, because the first BOX is the winner route finalist's second chance BO5, or the loser bracket finalists final BOX/second chance loss. If they had a double BOX final where ForGG wins if he wins the first one, it's fair. Life would lose because he lost two BOX's. If Life wins the first one, then it's fair, Life will have lost one BOX and ForGG will have lost one BOX as well, and then they go into the final BOX with one loss each, and it's a final elimination. Having a double elimination tournament with no advantage for not being eliminated during the whole thing is DUMB. It gives ZERO advantage to the person who never lost, other than a small amount of time in terms of playing fewer games potentially, but since all the sets are variable, it's possible the losers bracket finalist could have actually played fewer games overall than the winner finalist. Either make it double elimination ALL THE WAY, or don't have double elimination at all.
look, they are already rewarded with one less bo5.
how is that not enough?
|
On November 30 2014 05:22 kaykoose wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:21 Walnuts wrote:On November 30 2014 05:11 Dodgin wrote:On November 30 2014 05:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 30 2014 05:08 sibs wrote:
Come on.
it's
1. Life
2. NesTea
3. DRG
4. Soulkey (maybe?) Definitely Life and Nestea for top two Zergs of all SC2 history (although I'm not sure who's technically in first). Life is very clearly better unless you weigh GSL way too high I think it goes 1 Life- pretty much has everything 2 Nestea-3 GSLs, best for a shorter period of time 3 DRG, been around longer than Life, with similar success but not quite the same highs. I almost think he ties Nestea. 4 SoO- All those silvers. 5 Leenock- everybody seems to forget how good he was at foreign tournaments for a while there. For terrans, I think it goes Mvp, Taeja, Polt, Innovation.... MKP/MMA? For tosses, I guess MC, Rain/Zest, Parting, and idk who else, toss doesn't have much of a unified best players group, unless I'm forgetting someone. MMA shouldn't be a question... he's at least #3.
It's tough to say, he used to be my #1 favorite player, but he really went down during 2012/2013, to the point where Polt is definitely ahead. I guess I could be convinced that MMA is #4 tho, over Innovation.
|
On November 30 2014 05:23 Lonyo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:15 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:13 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:12 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:11 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:10 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:09 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:08 Diderick wrote:
No winners bracket advantage for ForGG? No and thank goodness, I hate when tournaments do that. But giving the winner's bracket advantage increases the chance that the winner of the tournament was the best player. Winners bracket advantage is that that player doesn't have to play another extremely difficult best of 5 and face elimination. But one of the two players in the loser's bracket is guaranteed to play in the finals... what's your point? My point is that the person in the winner's bracket should be rewarded for not losing a series. I agree entirely. The person who never drops to the losers bracket never gets his second chance. Life has already lost to ForGG once, so he has one loss. If Life then wins the final final, he wins the whole thing. He will have lost 1 series and won the rest. ForGG will also have lost 1 series and won the rest, but everyone else in the tournament will have lost TWO series to get knocked out. It's unfair on ForGG because he never gets his second chance. If he loses in the grand final that's it for him. That's why the double BOX is the most sensible, because the first BOX is the winner route finalist's second chance BO5, or the loser bracket finalists final BOX/second chance loss. If they had a double BOX final where ForGG wins if he wins the first one, it's fair. Life would lose because he lost two BOX's. If Life wins the first one, then it's fair, Life will have lost one BOX and ForGG will have lost one BOX as well, and then they go into the final BOX with one loss each, and it's a final elimination. Having a double elimination tournament with no advantage for not being eliminated during the whole thing is DUMB. It gives ZERO advantage to the person who never lost, other than a small amount of time in terms of playing fewer games potentially, but since all the sets are variable, it's possible the losers bracket finalist could have actually played fewer games overall than the winner finalist. Either make it double elimination ALL THE WAY, or don't have double elimination at all.
ForGG's advantage was not needing to play an additional set (the Loser's Final match vs. Taeja). Winning non-stop means you play fewer matches while the losers drop down to the lower bracket and need to play more and work their way through a larger bracket. ForGG has more time to rest and can watch how Life played vs. Taeja to help him plan his series.
|
People saying Life needing to play more games being a good enough disadvantage? wtf. Those progamers can play 20 more games without a problem.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
the whole debate comes down to whether or not you believe not having to play a b05 vs the 3rd best player at the tournament is an advantage or not.
to me it is enough advantage so no extended series is necessary
|
On November 30 2014 05:22 kaykoose wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:21 Walnuts wrote:On November 30 2014 05:11 Dodgin wrote:On November 30 2014 05:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 30 2014 05:08 sibs wrote:
Come on.
it's
1. Life
2. NesTea
3. DRG
4. Soulkey (maybe?) Definitely Life and Nestea for top two Zergs of all SC2 history (although I'm not sure who's technically in first). Life is very clearly better unless you weigh GSL way too high I think it goes 1 Life- pretty much has everything 2 Nestea-3 GSLs, best for a shorter period of time 3 DRG, been around longer than Life, with similar success but not quite the same highs. I almost think he ties Nestea. 4 SoO- All those silvers. 5 Leenock- everybody seems to forget how good he was at foreign tournaments for a while there. For terrans, I think it goes Mvp, Taeja, Polt, Innovation.... MKP/MMA? For tosses, I guess MC, Rain/Zest, Parting, and idk who else, toss doesn't have much of a unified best players group, unless I'm forgetting someone. MMA shouldn't be a question... he's at least #3.
Yup. There's no way MMA is ranked lower than Innovation, Polt or MKP.
|
On November 30 2014 05:23 Lonyo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:15 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:13 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:12 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:11 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:10 Supersamu wrote:On November 30 2014 05:09 KingofdaHipHop wrote:On November 30 2014 05:08 Diderick wrote:
No winners bracket advantage for ForGG? No and thank goodness, I hate when tournaments do that. But giving the winner's bracket advantage increases the chance that the winner of the tournament was the best player. Winners bracket advantage is that that player doesn't have to play another extremely difficult best of 5 and face elimination. But one of the two players in the loser's bracket is guaranteed to play in the finals... what's your point? My point is that the person in the winner's bracket should be rewarded for not losing a series. I agree entirely. The person who never drops to the losers bracket never gets his second chance. Life has already lost to ForGG once, so he has one loss. If Life then wins the final final, he wins the whole thing. He will have lost 1 series and won the rest. ForGG will also have lost 1 series and won the rest, but everyone else in the tournament will have lost TWO series to get knocked out. It's unfair on ForGG because he never gets his second chance. If he loses in the grand final that's it for him. That's why the double BOX is the most sensible, because the first BOX is the winner route finalist's second chance BO5, or the loser bracket finalists final BOX/second chance loss.
ForGG get to play less series, and have less opportunities to be eliminated.
The penalty for losing the WB finals is that you have to play a bo5 vs Taeja which could eliminate you. If you win, then you suffer no more consequences (apart from the fatigue and revealing strategies). However you have to consider that if Life only had a 65% chance of beating Taeja, then losing WB finals is equivalent to being eliminated with probability 35%. That is not nothing. Unless Forgg is the only realistic threat to Life, then losing the WB finals does carry a serious penalty.
The two chances, or two life approach to double elimination is all fine. But there is no reason it should carry on like that till the end. As long as all players know exactly what winning a match means for them in the tournament nothing can really be unfair.
|
On November 30 2014 05:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 05:10 kaykoose wrote:
Oh shit. ForGG beat him but gets no advantage? His advantage was not needing to play an additional set (the Loser's Final match vs. Taeja). Winning non-stop means you play fewer matches while the losers drop down to the lower bracket and need to play more and work their way through a larger bracket. ForGG has more time to rest and can watch how Life played vs. Taeja to help him plan his series.
I guess it depends on what you deem is more important. Life played more but he got his 2nd chance. ForGG not getting that 2nd chance is more important to me
EDIT: Also, obviously the players knew this before hand. So it's a non issue for them. Just stating my opinion
|
Life won more series than forGG, just saying :/
|
i'm back someone needed to use the computer.
how was taeja vs life?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
