|
On April 26 2011 03:31 Azzur wrote:
The "bo1" group format is used in the OSL and MSL and no one complains about it. But regardless, the group stages is effectively a bo3 but with the possibility of a player playing 3 different opponents. A bo1 implies that 1 loss would lead to elimination, which is not the case.
This. MSL and OSL use it, so they just took the same format. Sure it leads to upsets once in a while (Flash last MSL/OSL), but for the most part it works.
|
Group elimination seems more like a spectator-centric format than anything else. It gives a variety of matches between relatively few players. Running two Bo3's instead only gives you two match ups. So it's probably a viewership thing, group play makes the early stages more interesting to watch.
|
I prefer a single oponent Bo3, but i can stand this format.
You have to consider something, if they gave us a Bo3 on code S 1st round, there wouldn't be enough time to end it on 1 month or less.
|
It's far from being BO1 matches. the player has the chance to play 3 different opponents instead of the same one, wich is good IMO because you don't only play your worst or your best matchup: you have to master them all to have a good seed. BO1 would mean they are eliminated after losing only 1 match, wich is really not the case here.
|
bo1 even in groups are pretty bad, I would really like to see more bo3s :S
|
On April 26 2011 03:33 MK4512 wrote:
Group stages like the ones used in Code S are actually then a Bo3 format because it allows players to play against everyone in the group and not just the favourite, and getting crushed, where there might be two lesser players in a different Bo3. I personally think it's a great system, and allows me to see two of my favourite players vs eachother, without a 100% chance of either of them being knocked to the up and downs.
It's not a Bo1 though, theres a HUGE difference between the two.
Except this is not always the case.
NesTea lost to + Show Spoiler + for example, but gets to pass into the Ro16 because he got to play + Show Spoiler + two times instead of + Show Spoiler +, who might have beat him.
|
The system is bad because lesser players often take a game off of a more skilled player, which results in one of the higher skilled players in the group going to up and down more often than should happen.
|
On April 26 2011 03:56 Baarn wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2011 03:27 ppshchik wrote:
Do you think it's fair at all? The reason the Finals / RO4 / RO8 matchups are upgraded to Bo5 / 7 is because the qualified players are more skilled to to require more games to distinguish their skill levels.
Code S is a pretty high skill leveled tournament and I don't think it's fair to have BO1 at all given the player's skill level.
I find it ironic that there are Bo3's in Code A and Up and Down whilst Code S have to duke it out in a BO1.
What are your opinion towards it? I was kind of surprised that people are complaining over Dreamhack' Bo1 with ActionJesus 6 pooling out of his group while not complaining about a much higher calibre tournament (Code S) having BO1's I don't believe you understand how code s works based on your OP. Maybe this will help. Group X * Player A * Player B * Player C * Player D Game 1 - Player A vs. Player B Game 2 - Player C vs. Player D After this first day of play, the second day will take place in this format: Game 1 - Winner of Game 1 vs. Loser of Game 2 Game 2 - Winner of Game 2 vs. Loser of Game 1 If after those two days of gaming there are two players who have won both of their games (i.e Player A has 6 points, Player B has 6 points, Player C has 0 points, Player D has 0 points) then they automatically go through to the round of 16, but they still have to play each other to determine their rank in the top 16.
The games for any particular group all occur on a single day not two days.
|
It is essentially the same as the MSL format, and I don't see anyone crying about that. The only improvement is maybe seeding players further like OSL/MSL does?
|
If you lose 2 games in a row, you're out. If you win 2 out of 3 games, you advance.
Which system am I talking about?
+ Show Spoiler +
|
I like the Group Stage play, but I have no idea why they do this weird winner vs. loser format for it. Wish they would just use the MSL structure.
|
It's not exactly BO1 as players have to win at least 2 games in order to advance. A high caliber tournament need quality games not quantity like the NASL. The way GSL groups work helps create upsets and story and quality of game. Everyday there are upsets and some players go to the next round; some got butt kicked out of tournament. That's what make a tournament interesting. If you look at the NASL, which has a ton of games (somewhere between 18 and 27 games for a player alone, not counting the final 16). Because there's so many games that NASL is less interesting now than its hype days a week earlier. Every game is like the other. No one advances. No one got kicked out of tournament. It's like between the MLB and the football World Cup. Each MLB team plays 162 games/season, while the whole WC tournament only has 64 games for all the teams. Quality is what matters when you have money to open a tournament every month. Players have to play a ton of games over 14 weeks in the NASL and still can't earn a single dollar unless they can get to the final 16 in which they'll earn at least $500 dollars; while GSL code S players will get at least $1,300 for being in code S and only play 2 or 3 games.
I wouldn't be surprise if there's going to be a three BO7 in NASL final. I would be laughing if it happens. Tournaments in NA tend to go for quantity with a ridiculous number of games , while tournaments in EU and KR tend to go for quality.
|
Groups have been used successfully in BW for years, they work fine here too. If someone gets outplayed by at least two different people, even in a Bo1 (and sometimes they have a rematch depending on how the group works out al-la Polt and MC) then they don't deserve to move on, plain and simple.
|
You can only give players so many chances before it starts to negatively affect tournament play and results. The system is tried and true and has been successfully used for years.
The OP also has too much bias in how it's written. Without outside knowledge, he makes it seem as if one loss knocks someone out of the tournament. Group play and boX are not the same thing. Please update the OP to be accurate.
|
Don't like it, too volatile.
|
On April 26 2011 03:58 dogmeatstew wrote:
I don't think its that terrible of a format...
My main complain is that because of this format we see very little of players who don't make it out of the group stages. If a player goes 0-2 in their group and then when the up/down matches come they easily stay in code S with a 2-0 against their first opponent then I only get to watch them play 4 games every two months.
While this is more an issue of there not being enough korean tournaments that I can watch in english it's still lame for the players who do go through this kind of thing and never get to show their stuff. (One person that comes to mind is Inca I guess...). This is getting better with more korean players in foreign tournaments but it seems like some teams don't participate in those and that makes me sad.
the only remedy to this is full team leagues like Proleague, which will come soon.
|
On April 26 2011 04:09 Newguy wrote:
The system is bad because lesser players often take a game off of a more skilled player, which results in one of the higher skilled players in the group going to up and down more often than should happen.
It keeps everyone watching Code A, up and down and Code S to see their favorite players. If all the top players were in Code S than why see Code A or up and down? It's good when players slump for Gomtv. This is setup this way on purpose.
|
The best player usually comes out. Thing is the games still new so we dont have any consistent dominating players so usually its the best player playing that day. Overall it raises the players skill as a whole instead of a players matchup
|
I like the group stage in the Ro32 but I would prefer a Bo3 group stage or straight Bo3/5 starting with the Ro16 rather than the current system.
Although I don't prefer it I still think the system is adequate, unlike a straight Bo1 single elim bracket.
|
I think it's really, really bad. It's too easy to get knocked out.... I would rather they just played a 32 person tournament every time than have this group stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
