| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
425kid
416 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? If koreans show up then probably | ||
|
everyday847
United States14 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. Disagree. I don't think they could have predicted the degree to which PainUser would have started to cast more than play, I think Grubby was a calculated risk who brought in a ton of WC fans, and I think it's hard to argue that Artosis wasn't a fan favorite. The premise was never truly for the participants to be the top fifty in the world. A balance was struck between the reality of who the target audience for the tournament was, who could get into the US easily for the finals, and who would show the best games. I think NASL did a pretty good job at that balance, and while the winner of the open bracket is likely to be stronger than the fifteenth finalist, there's certainly no guarantee. Each season will inevitably produce imperfect results--any single-elimination tournament is likely to result in more variance than double elim and so forth--but that's why there are multiple seasons. | ||
|
L3gendary
Canada1470 Posts
On June 09 2011 12:06 SanguineS wrote: Standard tournament rules. 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. No it's not standard tournament rules. Where on earth do you have a regular season to seed 15 players and then an open bracket for the 16th? The problem here is that there are good players that don't play in the NASL so the 16th player isn't necessarily the worst based off past results. It could be Nestea for all we know. Anybody going up against Nestea (or say Thorzain) would not have the "easiest" game and I doubt the first seed would prefer it. It's kind of a gamble. It really depends on who is in the open bracket. | ||
|
chasmofcrisis
60 Posts
| ||
|
cyclone25
Romania3344 Posts
On June 09 2011 12:15 McKTenor13 wrote: Not the smartest OP in the world....but you are supposed to assume that everyone in the NASL is the best. They are the 50 in NA or the world or whatever. Whoever wins that open bracket isn't going to be better than the top of the NASL. So therefore it's smart to put open bracket vs. top seed. 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. So there's nothing wrong with inviting "bad" players (instead of better players) because they won't make it into the next season anyway? Your post is very smart, yes >.< | ||
|
carloselcoco
United States2302 Posts
On June 09 2011 11:28 jalstar wrote: I think it should be: 1-10: Top 2 of each division 11: Open Bracket winner 12-16: Wild Card Playoff winners That is exactly how I think it should be too! | ||
|
rsvp
United States2266 Posts
On June 09 2011 12:15 sjschmidt93 wrote: I like the idea of letting the #1 seed pick his opponent, then the next highest seed pick his, and keep going until it's all over with. That's such an awesome idea. | ||
|
WGarrison
United States96 Posts
On March 22 2011 02:12 WGarrison wrote: Bracket and setup seem really nice. Only one thing bugs me about it, the open tournament spot in the finals is seeded 16th. I think it would be better if the top 10 (red) were 1-10 as they are, then the open winner (green) was seeded 11, then the 11-30 winners (blue) were 12-16. A couple reasons for this. 1. You want to protect your top seed. The green seed could be anybody, a dark horse or anything. This seed will be much harder for the top seed to prepare for (less time as he is completely unknown until two weeks before), and could possibly be an unknown with little information about him. This is more dangerous for the top seed than lowest seed from blue would be. 2. There are to "Stories" you want to protect. You want to have the stories available for the champion top seed that crushes everything, and the story of the unlikely last minute underdog winning it all. When the top seed plays the open tournament winner first round, you kill one of your stories off the bat. 3. It is possible for top seed to hit the open tournament winner in the finals. This would be an amazing story. Remember the season that the open winner went 4-2 against the top seed in the finals. Well we wont have that opportunity with the current bracket. 4. Adds veiwer value to the 6-11 seed match. 1-16 already has veiwer value due to top seed. With the open winner in the 6-11 seed match it becomes more featured. 5. Seeding below the open tournament entry is a valid consequence for players who do not qualify for the championship through divisional seeding. Blue tournament matches are the ones competing for the final spots 11-16 and not making that means elimination. Its kinda weird to be playing for either 15+ seed or being knocked out, should be 16th and final spot or out. Blue is rightfully below green in this case. 6. It is possible for players who play well enough to garuntee that they will not have to play a random payer. One of the advantages now of placing 1st in your division is knowing the player you have to play against in match 1 in the championship. You have to be 2nd place in your division to have to play the green open winner. Please consider seeding the green open player as 11th over the blue qualifiers 12-16. I think this will improve the otherwise brilliant bracket. | ||
|
seiferoth10
3362 Posts
On June 09 2011 12:23 chasmofcrisis wrote: So you're saying that they should arbitrarily decide how good the open bracket winner is when he has zero results in the NASL? That makes absolutely no sense at all. Let's say for a second that MVP wins the open. I have seen MVP play the most inspired starcraft of anyone in the world. I have also seen him play fucking awful starcraft and lose to people worse than him. On what do I base my decision? You can either arbitrarily apply one random game and seed a player based on that or seed him based on how he performed in the league at hand. The obvious and only solution is to give the open bracket winner the 16th seed. Have to agree with this guy. They can only go by what happened in the NASL and not some arbitrary decision about how good the open winner is compared to the other seeds. We could argue all day about where the open winner "deserves" to be, and those arguments would differ based on who the open winner was. | ||
|
aristarchus
United States652 Posts
On June 09 2011 12:27 WGarrison wrote: I made a post about this point in the Q&A thread for NASL back in March. Its relevant to this discussion so I will post it here. I also posted in the NASL Q&A thread maybe a week ago or something... The problem here is that however stupid the rule is, it's really not fair to change it once you have an idea of who the #1 seed will be and who is going to be in the open tournament. The tournament is only fair if the rules are fixed and not decided after you know who they'll effect. Dumb or not, they're stuck with this rule now. | ||
|
WGarrison
United States96 Posts
On June 09 2011 12:37 aristarchus wrote: I also posted in the NASL Q&A thread maybe a week ago or something... The problem here is that however stupid the rule is, it's really not fair to change it once you have an idea of who the #1 seed will be and who is going to be in the open tournament. The tournament is only fair if the rules are fixed and not decided after you know who they'll effect. Dumb or not, they're stuck with this rule now. Yeah, I was advocating to change it before the league started, it might be harsh to change it now. As far as the players are concerned it shouldn't make a huge difference, they should be prepared to have to beat anyone at anytime. I'm only worried about the possibility of missed marketing/excitement opportunities. My storyline and viewer value points I feel are the strongest. | ||
|
phate
81 Posts
On June 09 2011 11:16 h3nG wrote: http://nasl.tv/News/Article/20110602nasl-finals-information According to the article, the the first seed in NASL will face the open bracket winner. Am I the only one who thinks this is a bad choice??? Typically, the first seed faces the weakest player. But I actually think the open bracket winner will be one of the strongest players, if not the strongest. Imagine if MMA, Bomber, Thorzain, etc... signs up for the open tournament. In my opinion it is better to NOT be first seed because of this. Anyone else agree with this and think the rules need to be re-evaluated? Or am I misunderstanding something? I agree. Not sure what the correct decision would be though. Would've liked to see a group system rather than the single elimination bracket (correct me if that's wrong). | ||
|
Lord_J
Kenya1085 Posts
| ||
|
Mephiztopheles1
1124 Posts
| ||
|
yoshi_yoshi
United States440 Posts
On June 09 2011 12:24 carloselcoco wrote: On June 09 2011 11:28 jalstar wrote: I think it should be: 1-10: Top 2 of each division 11: Open Bracket winner 12-16: Wild Card Playoff winners ------- That is exactly how I think it should be too! Yea this sounds good. | ||
|
FLuE
United States1012 Posts
byzantine systems when a straightforward league format with a plain old regular bracket for the playoffs will do. Funny thing is it just goes back to people complain no matter what. In the more straight forward systems people often feel some of the better players can get eliminated to easily, or that seeding isn't always easy and you get good players matching up to early. Then when they go to systems like the NASL or MLG are using which try to allow the cream of the crop to rise to the top over time, people complain it is confusing, to long, to many games, to easy to stay on the top, to hard to get into the top, etc. People are just never happy. The participants all know the setup going in, and this is the layout. It can always be reevaluated or changed, but seems to me this thread could simply have gone into the NASL suggestions thread. | ||
|
seiferoth10
3362 Posts
The problem I have with seeding the open winner #11 is that #11 faces #6 in the standard bracket. Why does #6 have to face the open winner? He'd argue that #15 is the one who most deserves to face the open player because #15 did the worst during pool play. So we'd seed the open winner into #1 to face the previous #15, but now #16 because it pushed everyone down. The previous #1 would argue that he deserves to play the previous #15 who did the worst in pool play. My point: there will be complaints no matter where you put the open winner. The most logical place to put the open winner is #16 because by the invite structure, they're trying to invite the top 50 players in the world to the league, so the open winner should theoretically be #51 or greater in the world. Of course, that's impossible to invite the top 50 players in the world because player rating is incredibly arbitrary, but putting the open winner as #16 makes the most sense in theory. | ||
|
Halcyondaze
United States509 Posts
| ||
|
ZapRoffo
United States5544 Posts
On June 09 2011 13:16 Halcyondaze wrote: The Koreans still have to play cross server. And seeing their results, I would rather play one of them than a very good player that is playing in NA. Because honestly, all these players are able to take games off of each other The seeds are for the grand final which is a "LAN" event in Ontario. | ||
|
RmoteCntrld
United States596 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
OSC
Shameless vs MaNa
Nicoract vs Percival
Krystianer vs TBD
Cure vs SHIN
PiGosaur Monday
The PondCast
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
Serral vs TBD
BSL 21
BSL 21
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
|
|
|
EPT
