EPTstandard tournament seed format??
#1 vs #32
#2 vs #31 ?? etc.. etc..
#1 vs #32
#2 vs #31 ?? etc.. etc..
obiviously that guy has it right....
Issue with NASL First Seed vs Open Winner - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
teaCher
Canada521 Posts
obiviously that guy has it right.... | ||
|
[Silverflame]
Germany640 Posts
| ||
|
neo_sporin
United States516 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On June 09 2011 11:34 seiferoth10 wrote: So the winner of the first seed vs open winner wins and we move on. I don't see an issue here. Surely you're not trying to argue that the open winner will be vastly superior to seeds #2-15? I will make the argument that the winner of a 1024 open tourney will likely be as good as, if not better than, then 15 seed. | ||
|
h3nG
46 Posts
My concern is guys like SeleCT, July, Morrow, etc... will end up facing guys like MMA, Losira, in the first round. If I were in the position to grab first, aka SeleCT, I would rather face someone in the lower seed as oppose to the Open bracket winner. So imo, the rule doesn't reward being first seed. As a spectator, I would not be happy to see July vs someone like MMA in the first round, and see the first seed get knocked out... | ||
|
AndAgain
United States2621 Posts
| ||
|
ronpaul012
United States769 Posts
| ||
|
Hunterai
Thailand842 Posts
| ||
|
sc2guy
291 Posts
On June 09 2011 11:28 Kraznaya wrote: This just underlines NASL's stupidity in general. They invited people like Artosis, Grubby, Painuser, etc. when they clearly weren't the top 50 players in the world, and now you have problems like these. Read NASL. | ||
|
h3nG
46 Posts
| ||
|
oniman999
United States169 Posts
| ||
|
h3nG
46 Posts
On June 09 2011 12:00 oniman999 wrote: Wont the top 16 part of the tourney be a live in person event? Read the article. If you win the open tourney, all your expenses are paid. The Koreans have done poorly (relatively) in NASL because, as Idra pointed out, the latency disadvantage. They will make a stronger showing at the live event. | ||
|
Fugue
Australia253 Posts
After all, this is the first season of NASL, and the invites were sent to top players with the caveat that they would have to be playing online through the season and be available to travel for the finals. I can imagine with all the tournaments running, there may have been players not willing to take a punt on that kind of commitment. But if competitive SC2 in the US keeps on expanding (and/or if latency between regions somehow becomes less of an issue), it may become the place to be for top tier pros, and then the ruling would make a lot more sense. Every change to the league hurts its stability, so while a lot of changes make sense for now and the future, not every change that makes sense now does. | ||
|
SanguineS
32 Posts
I don't see the big fuss. The best player gets the easiest first game. The lowest seeded player gets the hardest first game. If you didn't get an invite you are the lowest seed. It wouldn't be fair to seed a player winning out of the open bracket above the player who were actually INVITED to play in the league. | ||
|
oniman999
United States169 Posts
On June 09 2011 12:02 h3nG wrote: Read the article. If you win the open tourney, all your expenses are paid. The Koreans have done poorly (relatively) in NASL because, as Idra pointed out, the latency disadvantage. They will make a stronger showing at the live event. Ahh didn't know about the expense paid trip. Yeah that changes everything haha | ||
|
rsvp
United States2266 Posts
On June 09 2011 11:31 iNcontroL wrote: fantastic post kraznaya Would you like to comment on the OP, who brings a valid point, instead of responding to trolls? I agree 100% with the OP, the winner of the open bracket is certainly going to be a really good player, much better than the lower seeds. Right now it seems like you're punishing the #1 seeded player. | ||
|
LegendaryZ
United States1583 Posts
How does the "NA" part even apply as an argument when you already have Europeans and Asians playing in the league anyway. They were clearly poor choices (well, maybe not PainUser at the time) and chosen primarily for their star power rather than any merit of skill. There were most definitely better people that could have taken those spots from both the foreign and Korean communities. | ||
|
PtM
89 Posts
However, I also want to emphasize that I don't think this is some devastating issue for the league. It's kind of silly that this even needs to be said, but I think that this is a minor oversight for an otherwise well-designed tournament. | ||
|
McKTenor13
United States1383 Posts
And the people bitching about Artosis, Grubby, Painuser, etc. Are you serious? I mean really now. Please read how the freaking tournament works before you start bitching about it. The bottom 16? or 20? or whatever do not make it into the next season. The weaker players will drop out and the stronger ones will come in. | ||
|
sjschmidt93
United States2518 Posts
On June 09 2011 12:11 Anihc wrote: Would you like to comment on the OP, who brings a valid point, instead of responding to trolls? I agree 100% with the OP, the winner of the open bracket is certainly going to be a really good player, much better than the lower seeds. Right now it seems like you're punishing the #1 seeded player. Sometimes I don't think people read the username of the person they are replying to. :O On June 09 2011 11:21 NExt wrote: standard tournament seed format?? #1 vs #32 #2 vs #31 ?? etc.. etc.. Did you read the OP? He's not arguing that fact. He's arguing his opinion that the open bracket winner will not be the weakest player in the pool. | ||
| ||
