EPTMLG extended Series Poll - Page 42
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
labbe
Sweden1456 Posts
| ||
|
Attilanator
United States154 Posts
I mean, it seems illogical that he gets the benefits of winning two games TWICE. The two wins he got in pool play should have counted for there and only there, and in the championship bracket the players should be given a clean slate. Essentially, Idra was given 4 wins for two games, which makes no sense to me. I also understand why extended series in the final is "fair", but it really kills the fun of the finals. I mean, what are the odds of the LB player winning? And has it ever happened? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think it has. It just makes the finals very anticlimactic... at the very least, the UB player should start with only 1 win instead of two, or (Even better) make the series a straight up BO7 without any starting advantages. | ||
|
Yung
United States727 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16117 Posts
On October 17 2011 06:22 Yung wrote: It's a dumb rule, it gives win that shouldnt have been won, but I do like it because of idra winning vs boxer, but i dont like it because he has to win 4 games vs mkp now MC beat MKP. Idra is facing MC next. | ||
|
Lobo2me
Norway1213 Posts
On October 17 2011 06:22 Attilanator wrote: As much as I like Idra, I think the extended series rule gave him an unfair advantage. I mean, it seems illogical that he gets the benefits of winning two games TWICE. The two wins he got in pool play should have counted for there and only there, and in the championship bracket the players should be given a clean slate. Essentially, Idra was given 4 wins for two games, which makes no sense to me. I also understand why extended series in the final is "fair", but it really kills the fun of the finals. I mean, what are the odds of the LB player winning? And has it ever happened? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think it has. It just makes the finals very anticlimactic... at the very least, the UB player should start with only 1 win instead of two, or (Even better) make the series a straight up BO7 without any starting advantages. In a normal double elim, the finals will be underwhelming anyways, because the player from the winner bracket has to lose two series to lose the finals. So in a finals is pretty much the only place extended series would work as close to how it would be normally. | ||
|
groms
Canada1017 Posts
As a fan it doesn't bother me that much except that it annoys the players. Hopefully in 2012 they take this rule away and then MLG can become the perfect tourney. | ||
|
Alvar
Sweden61 Posts
Lag issues with the horrible stream could also have been an issue for me closing the stream :p I hope when I later read the results that STC gets the code S slot, its the only thing that interests me with the tournament. | ||
|
Yung
United States727 Posts
Yeah i realized that just now, thanks tho | ||
|
Yung
United States727 Posts
| ||
|
Shaok
297 Posts
In most sc2 tournaments (really why is MLG the only double elimination tournament around) you only play against a player ONCE. MLG is the only tournament that allows you to play against the same person twice because its one of the only tournaments that allows a losers bracket. The sc2 community has an extreme bias on this point because its always been single elimination brackets. | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
| ||
|
Alvar
Sweden61 Posts
On October 17 2011 06:33 Erasme wrote: Well, as much as I love Boxer, I think that it's a fair rule. If Boxer would have 2-0 Idra in the WB, would you have necro this thread ? Probably not. Some people are more consistent in their hate towards the rule to not be swayed by who gets unfairly eliminated by it. | ||
|
Fubi
2228 Posts
On October 17 2011 06:33 Erasme wrote: Well, as much as I love Boxer, I think that it's a fair rule. If Boxer would have 2-0 Idra in the WB, would you have necro this thread ? Probably not. Just because the rule doesn't influence any series in a particular tournament, it doesn't change the fact that the rule is dumb...there is no logical or rational reasoning for it that would make any sense | ||
|
ninjamyst
United States1903 Posts
| ||
|
Redmark
Canada2129 Posts
Benefits of, and all opinions against it are debatable. Not really worth discussing, don't lose to a player if you really believe you shouldn't and it will not be a problem in the losers bracket if you meet again. Are you serious? Just because it's possible to always win, this shouldn't even be discussed. That's your argument. I at least respect people who defend the rule for defending their opinion, but people who just try to sweep it under the rug for ridiculous reasoning disgust me. This has nothing to do with single/double elimination, extended series is not standard in double elim. It is absolutely a crucial issue and it makes a difference. | ||
|
VTJRaen
United Kingdom238 Posts
| ||
|
Alvar
Sweden61 Posts
On October 17 2011 06:38 VTJRaen wrote: I actually like it as a fan, it makes the pool play a lot more engaging, because losing 2-1 instead of 2-0 can mean so much in the long run. This already means something without this rule. Sase actualy got third in his group because of maps with a 4-1 score. He could have got first if we 2-0ed bomber instead of going 2-1. There is absolutely no need to double-punish someone for loosing a game in pool-play with the extended series rule. They already get the normal punishment. | ||
|
Holgerius
Sweden16951 Posts
| ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
| ||
|
Let it Raine
Canada1245 Posts
its perfectly fine | ||
| ||
