EPTIssue with NASL First Seed vs Open Winner - Page 12
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
DarkJackalX
United States165 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
im not gonna bother reading the next 11 pages so hopefully some people actually agreed with him because he's right, odds are the open winner will be a good player.. | ||
|
ELA
Denmark4608 Posts
| ||
|
SpiritAshura
United States1271 Posts
The open bracket should not be scaled in the championship stage as the weakest seed in the league. We all know the players for this league were selectively chosen and NASL didn't invite more Koreans and other higher skilled players for group play in the league, instead opting for Artosis and a few other North American players who quite frankly aren't as good (no offense). It is an accepted fact this tournament chose localizing players to down play issues such as latency and time zone conflicts week to week. If you're going to make the open tournament global that should be accounted for. | ||
|
wxlancer
United States14 Posts
I think NASL should have followed in the footsteps of the exchange program; the Koreans who were brought to MLG were not assumed to be the highest or lowest seeds, but somewhere in the middle. The arguments on this thread which included the worst performing players in NASL doesn't really apply to finals seeding; those players wouldn't have made it through the open tournament, either. | ||
|
godemperor
Belgium2043 Posts
| ||
|
iyoume
2501 Posts
| ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
On June 25 2011 08:02 godemperor wrote: Poor ret... Poor Ret indeed. He's beasted through the Divisional play and now might have to fend off really, really good player. | ||
|
PtM
89 Posts
| ||
|
ClysmiC
United States2192 Posts
| ||
|
Xeris
Iran17695 Posts
On June 23 2011 14:30 travis wrote: wow, h3ng makes a completely legitimate post, a point which I agree with, and the entire first page shot him down lol. amazing. im not gonna bother reading the next 11 pages so hopefully some people actually agreed with him because he's right, odds are the open winner will be a good player.. So you'd rather be the #2 seed and play against MC than play against aLive/PuMa/Clide ? That logic makes 0 sense. If you look at the players in the finals, almost every matchup has a player of equal or greater skill than the top 4 players of the Open. Arguably, the only matchup that's clearly ideal for any player is getting the #3 seed (vs DarkForcE). | ||
|
stokes17
United States1411 Posts
On June 27 2011 03:09 Xeris wrote: So you'd rather be the #2 seed and play against MC than play against aLive/PuMa/Clide ? That logic makes 0 sense. If you look at the players in the finals, almost every matchup has a player of equal or greater skill than the top 4 players of the Open. Arguably, the only matchup that's clearly ideal for any player is getting the #3 seed (vs DarkForcE). I think the point is that the "reward" of being #1 seed is heavily mitigated because the quality of the player emerging from the open bracket is almost positively going to be better than some of the other playoff seeds. (clide, puma, revival are all VERY solid players ) Some one suggested the open bracket player take seed 11 which i think is a genius solution personally | ||
|
rsvp
United States2266 Posts
On June 27 2011 03:09 Xeris wrote: So you'd rather be the #2 seed and play against MC than play against aLive/PuMa/Clide ? That logic makes 0 sense. If you look at the players in the finals, almost every matchup has a player of equal or greater skill than the top 4 players of the Open. Arguably, the only matchup that's clearly ideal for any player is getting the #3 seed (vs DarkForcE). No one would have guessed MC to be the 15th before the tournament started. But everyone knew that the winner of the open tournament would definitely be stronger than some of the people in the top 16, and definitely not the worst. | ||
|
Xeris
Iran17695 Posts
On June 27 2011 03:18 stokes17 wrote: I think the point is that the "reward" of being #1 seed is heavily mitigated because the quality of the player emerging from the open bracket is almost positively going to be better than some of the other playoff seeds. (clide, puma, revival are all VERY solid players ) Some one suggested the open bracket player take seed 11 which i think is a genius solution personally Why is the 11th seed better than the 16th seed? One of these open players is significantly better than Zenio? Or July, or Moon, or SeleCT, or White-Ra? At the Top 16, every single player is insanely good. It's not like there's gonna be a weak guy. Again, the weakest player probably in most people's opinion would be DarkForcE, but even then he played through the season, and won a tough playoff bracket to get to the final. He's really good. Also, you can never predict how the league will end up, or what the standings will be. | ||
|
vnlegend
United States1389 Posts
| ||
|
insaneMicro
Germany761 Posts
| ||
|
Budmandude
United States123 Posts
On June 27 2011 03:29 Xeris wrote: Why is the 11th seed better than the 16th seed? One of these open players is significantly better than Zenio? Or July, or Moon, or SeleCT, or White-Ra? At the Top 16, every single player is insanely good. It's not like there's gonna be a weak guy. Again, the weakest player probably in most people's opinion would be DarkForcE, but even then he played through the season, and won a tough playoff bracket to get to the final. He's really good. Also, you can never predict how the league will end up, or what the standings will be. You can't just say "Well, we don't know how the league will turn out, so it's not a problem." Using the results of a 10 week league, and subsequently partial results of the open tournament, to justify a rule that was made in advance of said events (e.g. pointing to MC being the 15th seed) is fallacious. We can only look at this rule upfront; seeing that in general you would expect the 16th seed to be of higher strength than the 15th seed due to the number of top players which would have to compete in the open bracket due to exclusion from the regular season. Putting something like that into the hands of random chance is a tenuous choice at best. | ||
|
SKC
Brazil18828 Posts
On June 27 2011 03:29 Xeris wrote: Why is the 11th seed better than the 16th seed? One of these open players is significantly better than Zenio? Or July, or Moon, or SeleCT, or White-Ra? At the Top 16, every single player is insanely good. It's not like there's gonna be a weak guy. Again, the weakest player probably in most people's opinion would be DarkForcE, but even then he played through the season, and won a tough playoff bracket to get to the final. He's really good. Also, you can never predict how the league will end up, or what the standings will be. Seeding in SC2 is funny like that. It means almost nothing, most of the time. The whole point of the system, and the only reason it is considered fair, is because the #2 seed should technically be better than the #15 seed, it should be a reward for the players/teams that played better in the tournament. And ussually it works fine, in most sport it's easy to see a diference between the top 16. Since that doesn't happen in SC2, it's basically as fair as a random draw. That's also one of the reasons a lot of people don't like tournaments that give a HUGE advantage based on seedings, like MLG. That doesn't mean you can't expect people to see it as the #1 being better than the #15. That's the premisse of the system, and the only way it makes any sense. Why are you calling him the number 1 if he is not playing better? By your argument, what's the point of the system? Why is it any better than a randon draw? You are basically saying seeding is meaningless, which I can understand, but I don't think it's ever a great point to defend your tournament format. I'm not sure if there is a better format, the way 1 player is introduced from the open tournament makes it really strange, so I can really see what you are saying, but I suppose you also understand what everyone is saying. | ||
|
TeePee
United States132 Posts
| ||
|
Lunares
United States909 Posts
On June 27 2011 03:32 vnlegend wrote: Xeris's point is valid. In the long run more and more Koreans are going to participate and be seeded into NASL's. Which means guys like MC, July, Bomber, etc are 1-16 seeds while the Open winner will be some other Korean dudes. So basically it'll all even out and NASL will start calling itself KSL. You are assuming that foreigners will just roll over and die instead of learning how to train better. We are just starting to see things like team houses form outside korea, there is a definite possibility of foreigners still being able to be good enough to beat koreans regularly. | ||
| ||
