|
On February 26 2011 13:11 Blueblister wrote:
Could someone please check if I've understood the simulated bracket correctly?
There's 254 "Open"-participants and 16 "Ranking"-seeds.
The ranking seeds are competing for:
- 16 spots in the final 24 (seeded 1-20 into the bracket depending on pool play results).
The open participants is competing for:
- 4 spots in the final 24 (seeded 1-20 depending on pool play results).
- 4 spots in the final 24 (seeded 21-24)
- Players seeded 21-24 are 10 match wins away from becoming the overall winner.
The ranking seeds are competing for:
- 16 spots in the final 32 (seeded 1-20 into the bracket depending on pool play results).
The open participants are competing for:
- 4 spots in the final 32 (seeded 1-20 depending on pool play results).
- 12 spots in the final 32 (seeded 21-32)
- Players seeded 25-32 are 11 match wins away from becoming the overall champion
- Players seeded 21-24 are 10 match wins away from becoming the overall champion
I am quite sure that this is accurate; I apologise if it isn't.
EDIT: I didn't realize this was my first post. I normally just lurk the forums O.O
|
On February 26 2011 13:09 Response wrote:
apparently I'm in FXO and I didnt even know it T_T
Great team choice. Kudos for stealth-joining.
|
I've been following mlg for a few years now, and the one point they really fail on is their tournament bracket setup. They seem to never have a solid system and continually try to switch things up. For a while in halo they had random drawn seeds (like #3-6 could play anyone from 11-14). Just stuff that doesn't make sense.
Groups really don't work in a three day tournament. It will probably be more interesting to watch, but the competitive level suffers.
Honestly I think the best format would be a single-elim, bo5 bracket. That's really the only thing you can really fit into a weekend.
|
On February 26 2011 13:51 Hrrrrm wrote:
You have to wonder if MLG was trying to outgun the GSL on convoluted tournament format. I gave them some slack last year since they implemented SC2 midway through their season and just adapted rules from their other games. To see them not only complicate things further, what should be a simple double-elimination tournament but, also keep the rules that people rallied against is mind blowing.
Like others have mentioned now those that start out as top 16 are basically cemented up there since they can't get any lower than 20th place. They are being artificially inflated since there isn't even a CHANCE of them being eliminated earlier. Great for them horrible for everybody else. I noticed Tyler mention that no one likes to see the pros stomp nubs in the first couple of rounds. While I agree with him, some of the best moments come from upsets in those early rounds.
I'm just at a loss for words though, I want MLG to succeed because I love watching SC. Seeing MLG trying to reinvent the wheel in tournament formatting is just retarded, especially if this is going to be the format of EVERY tournament.
They're only seeded in 1-20 for the 32 man Championship Bracket. If someone loses two series there, he ends up in 25th to 32nd place, which won't give him any ranking points for the next tournament (only Top 16 players get points).
That said, it is much easier for the Top 16, since they have to play less games, less stressful games (because pool placement "only" affects your seed compared to the live-or-die knockout brackets everyone else has to go through) and there's not a full 64/128 final bracket to emerge from like we had in the three previous MLG events.
|
The top 16 must be ecstatic about this format...
|
On February 26 2011 13:56 Weseen wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2011 13:11 Blueblister wrote:
Could someone (OP?) please check if I've understood the simulated bracket correctly?
There's 254 open participants and 16 ranking seeds.
The ranking seeds are competing for:
- 16 spots in the final 24 (seeded 1-20 through pool play).
The open participants is competing for:
- 4 spots in the final 24 given to undefeated open players (seeded 1-20 through pool play).
- 4 spots in the final 24 given to open players with 1 loss (seeded 21-24)
- Seeds 21-24 needs 10 straight match wins to become the overall winner.
Last edit: 2011-02-26 13:54:11
- 10 straight match wins equals winning a 1024-player knock-out tournament. The ranking seeds are competing for: - 16 spots in the final 32 (seeded 1-20 into the bracket depending on pool play results). The open participants are competing for: - 4 spots in the final 32 (seeded 1-20 depending on pool play results). - 12 spots in the final 32 (seeded 21-32) - Players seeded 25-32 are 11 match wins away from becoming the overall champion - Players seeded 21-24 are 10 match wins away from becoming the overall champion I am quite sure that this is accurate; I apologise if it isn't. EDIT: I didn't realize this was my first post. I normally just lurk the forums O.O
Welcome Weseen!
My post was regarding those with chances of winning the event. Seems like there's a second lower bracket without the possibility of making it back to the championship match?
So the 16 seeds are guaranteed 1-20 seeds into the final 24, but for final standings they can place as low as 32nd?
|
Hmm. I actually like the hybrid group-bracket play, and it's fairly straightforward but I have two problems with this:
1. Top 16 are incredibly hard to dislodge. The worst you can get is 24th - only 8 open bracket players can get past you. I understand favoring seeds, both in terms of match quality and making the non-Championship weekends important, but this seems a bit much (4th and 5th in the pool could be pushed down further in the loser's bracket)
2. The schedule is too tight. There are 10 consecutive rounds on both Saturday (LBR1-CLBR2) and 9-10 consecutive on Sunday (CLBR3-Final, 1-2 rounds in Final). It doesn't matter if it's not one player making a run, if a Bo3 runs 2 hours (or even 2 in a row running over 1 hour) it'll delay every round that follows it as they'll need to wait for opponents. Especially if the winner has to go eat or something. But the matches don't start until after 5:30 on Fri, there isn't much to do about this.
On February 26 2011 14:09 Blueblister wrote:
My post was regarding those with chances of winning the event. Seems like there's a second lower bracket without the possibility of making it back to the championship match? .
Are you looking at the "Consolation Bracket" on the right of the simulated bracket link? That's just to determine final placement (such as playing off to determine who gets 5th and 6th between two players eliminated at the same time).
|
I actually really dig this format. Kudos MLG. Also for those saying this is rough for those outside the top 16, there is the advantage of not running into any of those top 16 until the championship bracket. Not saying it sets off the disadvantage but it's something to consider. From a spectator perspective it's going to be fantastic for sure.
|
barring format aside. its all about the maps silly. get the maps right, everything falls into place. i'm rooting for you mlg.
|
I feel like MLG tries way too hard to fix perceived unfairness problems via their format. They probably don't like a top player/team losing early, so they give them byes and make the format double elimination. Then somebody lost to a team they beat earlier in a tournament, people whined, so they came up with extended series. Now there's pool play for...some reason, and I don't really understand what problem that's supposed to fix.
Seriously, if you have pool play + double elim + byes + extended series for a weekend tournament, your format is way overthought and confusing. It's OK sometimes for somebody other than the best players to win a tournament.
|
Ranking Points Distribution - MLG Regular Season Competitions
1st = 1200
2nd = 1000 (-200pts decrease compared to 1st place)
3rd = 900 (-100pts)
4th = 800 (-100pts)
5th = 700 (-100pts)
6th = 650 (-50pts)
7th = 600 (-50pts)
8th = 550 (-50pts)
9th = 490 (-60pts)
10th = 460 (-30pts)
11th = 430 (-30pts)
12th = 400 (-30pts)
13th = 340 (-60pts)
14th = 310 (-30pts)
15th = 280 (-30pts)
16th = 250 (-30pts)
17th = 210 (-40pts)
18th = 200 (-20pts)
19th = 190 (-20pts)
20th = 180 (-20pts)
21st = 140 (-40pts)
22nd = 130 (-10pts)
23rd = 120 (-10pts)
24th = 110 (-10pts)
25th = 90 (-20pts)
26th = 80 (-10pts)
27th = 70 (-10pts)
28th = 60 (-10pts)
29th = 40 (-10pts)
30th = 30 (-10pts)
31st = 20 (-10pts)
32nd = 10 (-10pts)
|
wow, IdrA has a fairly easy group (minus TLO if he goes Terran)
should be interesting
|
On February 26 2011 13:11 zaii wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2011 13:09 Response wrote:
apparently I'm in FXO and I didnt even know it T_T Congrats on joining FXO
I was gonna ask about that lolol
Well I actually kinda like the format.. I'd rather play a ton of games than be waiting around all day. As for koreans/euros, there are many bigger global tournaments, why do the need to be part of the staple american circuit? I kinda prefer for some mid sized events to be mostly NA to give those players a chance to shine. This is of course for partly selfish reasons, but if tournaments like these don't attract foreign players, then I say it just means the scene has grown enough that there are enough tournaments for them to participate in. MLG isn't NASL/GSL/IEM, its a staple american championship.
|
watching all that halo pays off. i actually get it lol.
The bo3 finals probably banks on the fact that the two players will have played before at one point, so most likely it'll be a bo7 (considering the winner of winners bracket plays the winner of losers bracket, one of whom the winner of winners bracket will have knocked down in winner bracket finals) oo
still MIGHT be at dallas TT
|
|
|
I'm all for ensuring that meaningful matches between established, skilled players occur on day 1. But in a game where the distinction between #16 and #17 is razor thin, this system is a bit too favorable to those players who did well early. I'd like to see them double the number of "seeded" spots to 32. It wouldn't be perfect, but I think it's a better balance of "we get to see good matches from the start" with "players not in the seeded section still have a legit chance".
Other than that, the format looks excellent to me. (And perfectly intelligible with a little bit of thought; seriously, folks, it's not that tough.)
|
honestly no reason to show up to MLG and play flight tickets with this format unless you are seeded or the best player in the world.
|
Wow they probably have turned off so many international players who considered going because of this:/
|
Yeah, they had the same problem with Halo. Basically the only way to get onto a good team was to join (since there's a team of 4) an open spot by making your name by either being really good at FFA or begging pros to play with you. Now that there's only 1 player, basically no one will break top 16 that was already there. Just too many games, nothing to do with skill.
|
On February 26 2011 16:24 DystopiaX wrote:
Yeah, they had the same problem with Halo. Basically the only way to get onto a good team was to join (since there's a team of 4) an open spot by making your name by either being really good at FFA or begging pros to play with you. Now that there's only 1 player, basically no one will break top 16 that was already there. Just too many games, nothing to do with skill.
Yep,
play an entire 256 man, best of three, double elim tournament friday until early morning
Play 4 best of 5s just to seed into a championship bracket
play the championship bracket
I would be surprised if any pro could really play top shape through that and beat completely rested "seeded" players. It's not that they seed players, it's the humongous advantage they get.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
