| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
Elentos
55459 Posts
On January 12 2017 00:37 swissman777 wrote: Tbf gsl format is much more predictable in terms of production. What SSL tried to do was cool and all but could have been a very short day or a long one. I think SSL kinda scheduled it so it wouldn't take less than 8 hours and I think the casters were all ready for the days to take 12 hours. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18341 Posts
On January 11 2017 23:49 Elentos wrote: I'm pretty scared for Stats atm. Stuck in a group with 2 Terrans (one of which is ByuN) with a ladder PvT win rate less than 50% and a huge mental block in the match-up. but its a televised game, so no worries for stats | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12045 Posts
On January 12 2017 00:38 The_Red_Viper wrote: Well by definition "winning games" means you are the better player. Ofc it is important who your opponents are and with that in mind bracket luck comes into play. I don't see how round robin and double elim are equivalent tbh, the only problem with round robin is the situation when somebody cannot advance anymore and therefore might not play his best in the deciding match for another player. Which tbf is a big problem. You can advance while losing the majority of your matches and you can be eliminated while winning the majority of your matches, depending on how your opponents in the group are doing. It's equivalent to double elim in that it's something that really really doesn't matter and yet is presented as a huge hindrance, much like losing to someone you beat before gets the same treatment in double elim. | ||
|
MyTHicaL
France1070 Posts
On January 12 2017 00:35 Elentos wrote: soO was 1 properly placed forcefield away from losing 0-2 to Billowy Not at all.. He had full saturation 5 bases. He would've eventually cleaned up or pushed billowy back; and then simply would've won at a later stage. I also don't know if it was just one forcefield.. The line of them was bad but there wasn't only one hole! | ||
|
Elentos
55459 Posts
On January 12 2017 00:52 MyTHicaL wrote: Not at all.. He had full saturation 5 bases. He would've eventually cleaned up or pushed billowy back; and then simply would've won at a later stage. I also don't know if it was just one forcefield.. The line of them was bad but there wasn't only one hole! It was one. He misplaced the forcefield on the ramp which allowed banelings to destroy the core of his army from behind. If Billowy correctly places that forcefield, he takes out most of soO's army, which soO (with no bank to speak off) can't replenish fast enough to save himself from losing most of his infrastructure and some of the units he would be remaking. | ||
|
Makro
France16890 Posts
| ||
|
NinjaToss
Austria1383 Posts
| ||
|
Elentos
55459 Posts
On January 12 2017 00:46 Nebuchad wrote: You can advance while losing the majority of your matches and you can be eliminated while winning the majority of your matches, depending on how your opponents in the group are doing. Is that even mathematically possible for most round robin groups? I think you could end up in a tie being forced to play a tie breaker but I'm not sure how the group would have to look so you're just flat out eliminated despite having won most of your matches. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On January 12 2017 00:46 Nebuchad wrote: You can advance while losing the majority of your matches and you can be eliminated while winning the majority of your matches, depending on how your opponents in the group are doing. It's equivalent to double elim in that it's something that really really doesn't matter and yet is presented as a huge hindrance, much like losing to someone you beat before gets the same treatment in double elim. What format are we talking about right now? Bo3 round robin? I mean you already implied it never matters because you won't find the best player or something. I am not quite sure on what lvl we are arguing here though. Would we find the best player if we had a big round robin including all players? Or do you imply that competition in itself isn't able to find "the best" ? On January 12 2017 01:01 Elentos wrote: Is that even mathematically possible for most round robin groups? I think you could end up in a tie being forced to play a tie breaker but I'm not sure how the group would have to look so you're just flat out eliminated despite having won most of your matches. I guess he means map wins? But even there you need like bo5 or something | ||
|
OsaX Nymloth
Poland3244 Posts
On January 12 2017 01:00 NinjaToss wrote: any recommended games today? second series between sOs and Billowy was fun. sOs second game vs Curious wasn't anything special, but was kinda wonky considering the opening and how far Curious was. Maybe Billowy vs soO, can't remember much other than that one missed forcefield. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12045 Posts
On January 12 2017 01:02 The_Red_Viper wrote: What format are we talking about right now? Bo3 round robin? I mean you already implied it never matters because you won't find the best player or something. I am not quite sure on what lvl we are arguing here though. Would we find the best player if we had a big round robin including all players? Or do you imply that competition in itself isn't able to find "the best" ? "The best player" is basically people who are salty that their guy didn't win and are trying to diminish the accomplishment of people who beat him. It's an idea with no merit. We are having this conversation because I misread Elentos' post as saying that we might as well have single elim then, which I disagree with cause single elim is a much weaker format. Round robin and double elim have the same strengths and weaknesses. And no I didn't mean map wins, I meant 2-1 2-1 2-1 0-3, thought that was obvious | ||
|
Elentos
55459 Posts
On January 12 2017 01:31 Nebuchad wrote: "The best player" is basically people who are salty that their guy didn't win and are trying to diminish the accomplishments of people who beat him. It's an idea with no merit. We are having this conversation because I misread Elentos' post as saying that we might as well have single elim then, which I disagree with cause single elim is a much weaker format. Round robin and double elim have the same strengths and weaknesses. And no I didn't mean map wins, I meant 2-1 2-1 2-1 0-3, thought that was obvious 2-1, 2-1, 2-1, 0-3 forces tie breaker matches though, in that situation you won't simply get eliminated despite winning more than half your matches. I can see ties and potential tie breakers being problematic for organizers, but I thought you were saying it's possible to flatout be eliminated despite winning the majority of your matches. So I guess it was a misunderstanding. | ||
|
Ej_
47656 Posts
| ||
|
Elentos
55459 Posts
On January 12 2017 01:46 Ej_ wrote: who cares about what is fair and what is not, what matters is that our liquibets were saved I'm surprised after 2 groups (with decently obvious outcomes) we have people with 2 or less points. Is that just a case of "This will make me look really smart when it happens or really stupid when it doesn't?"-predictions to get a possible lead? | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12045 Posts
On January 12 2017 01:43 Elentos wrote: 2-1, 2-1, 2-1, 0-3 forces tie breaker matches though, in that situation you won't simply get eliminated despite winning more than half your matches. I can see ties and potential tie breakers being problematic for organizers, but I thought you were saying it's possible to flatout be eliminated despite winning the majority of your matches. So I guess it was a misunderstanding. You said it would lead to the same amount of matches as this format so I assumed Bo3 | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On January 12 2017 01:31 Nebuchad wrote: "The best player" is basically people who are salty that their guy didn't win and are trying to diminish the accomplishment of people who beat him. It's an idea with no merit. We are having this conversation because I misread Elentos' post as saying that we might as well have single elim then, which I disagree with cause single elim is a much weaker format. Round robin and double elim have the same strengths and weaknesses. And no I didn't mean map wins, I meant 2-1 2-1 2-1 0-3, thought that was obvious "The best player" is the player who would win most games if he played against every other player in the competition i guess. As Elentos already said, if we are simply talking matches your comment seems to be wrong | ||
|
swissman777
1106 Posts
On January 12 2017 02:03 The_Red_Viper wrote: "The best player" is the player who would win most games if he played against every other player in the competition i guess. As Elentos already said, if we are simply talking matches your comment seems to be wrong Over a long period or a short one? Cuz sOs won't be high on the list if it's over a short period of time | ||
|
juicyjames
United States3815 Posts
| ||
|
v1p3r52
New Zealand182 Posts
| ||
|
c0sm0naut
United States1229 Posts
billowy literally lost two games because he didnt use photon cannons vs DT's he knows better he just tried to get an edge by not building them, saving the minerals thinking "ok, hes gonna stop making these" if he wins that game because he starts an extra nexus with those minerals or gets an extra prism, then he looks smart. he worked so hard to get to that point, and then he just risk it all like that, assuming sOs is done with DT's? i dont want that guy in ro16. well i mean, i do. but id rather have the guy who keeps making DT's because you are not making cannons | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
GSL Code S
Classic vs Reynor
GuMiho vs Maru
The PondCast
RSL Revival
GSL Code S
herO vs TBD
TBD vs Cure
OSC
Korean StarCraft League
RSL Revival
SOOP
HeRoMaRinE vs Astrea
Online Event
Clem vs ShoWTimE
herO vs MaxPax
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
