EPTPoll: Single or double elimination in tournaments?
Double Elimination (268)
84%
Single Elimination (50)
16%
318 total votes
Single Elimination (50)
318 total votes
Your vote: Single or double elimination in tournaments?
Single elimination or double elimination?
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
MechKing
United States3004 Posts
| ||
|
denzelz
United States604 Posts
| ||
|
Legend`
Canada381 Posts
Longer tournaments (NASL) or tournaments with a larger prize pool (GSL) should be double elimination. | ||
|
Lobo2me
Norway1213 Posts
| ||
|
Dr. ROCKZO
New Zealand396 Posts
Sure it adds more pressure and creates a lot more tension when every game is a "it all comes down to this" but really, I think 3 games is severe overkill. | ||
|
MrMotionPicture
United States4327 Posts
Longer tournaments should have double, because there is more money on the line. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
| ||
|
nodule
Canada931 Posts
| ||
|
lunchforthesky
United Kingdom967 Posts
I think using single elimination but not having any best of 3's (always 5 or more) would avoid the rng factor of single elim with bo3 but not lead to extended series or the Homestory scenario where Naniwa actually beat Huk, only to then lose. | ||
|
IceSlipper
Australia1028 Posts
The issue here is obviously going to be time/scheduling, as double elimination requires twice the amount of games to be played in the same amount of time.. Another thing i always have a problem with in double elimination is making the final fair.. The rules seem to change from tournament to tournament as to what advantage the winner bracket finalist receives (sometimes the loser bracket has to win the series twice, sometimes its a 1set advantage like in HSC3, sometimes its just an extended series..).. The method i like best is making the loser bracket player win the series twice.. Seems fair to me that everyone else gets a second chance, why shouldnt the winner bracket finalist? Never the less, double elimination, either way.. | ||
|
blabber
United States4448 Posts
| ||
|
DusTerr
2520 Posts
On July 09 2011 16:36 blabber wrote: It's weird to have the winner of a tournament lose a series earlier in the tournament. I'm also more familiar with seeing the winning player/team advance and the losers go home. From small tournaments or playoffs (NFL) to large ones (NCAA march madness). If we need more games, lets go BO5 or 7 instead of BO3. Double elim can also get confusing with different rules (face an opponent you already beat 2-0 and you get an advantage etc). just my .02 | ||
|
StutteR
United States1903 Posts
| ||
|
RPR_Tempest
Australia7798 Posts
| ||
|
zylog
Canada943 Posts
That being said, the matches at the NASL finals feel too short. There were several months of lead-up to this, and for someones season to end with a quick best of 3 seems too brief. With the amount of downtime shown in the first day of the finals, it feels like a best of 5 could have been fit into the schedule. While I understand they were probably allotting extra time to avoid running late, I doubt having such extended periods of non-action between matches was good either. | ||
|
EnSky
Philippines1003 Posts
 | ||
|
IceSlipper
Australia1028 Posts
On July 09 2011 16:57 StutteR wrote: We've known about the format for months and now we're bitching about it?! Whos bitching? Its a discussion, wake up. That post (and this one for that matter) are less valuable than any of the so called 'bitching' as you claim.. | ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
Extended series are a terrible terrible thing.And I don't really want more games for the sake of more games | ||
|
StutteR
United States1903 Posts
On July 09 2011 17:22 IceSlipper wrote: Whos bitching? Its a discussion, wake up. That post (and this one for that matter) are less valuable than any of the so called 'bitching' as you claim.. Try reading the LR thread -_- | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On July 09 2011 17:25 windsupernova wrote: Single elimination with BO5 or BO7. Extended series are a terrible terrible thing.And I don't really want more games for the sake of more games i agree. i dont mind the single elimination but atleast make them bo5 and bo7 for semi and on. | ||
|
IceSlipper
Australia1028 Posts
Didn't realise this was the LR thread. Maybe you should post about the bitching there. | ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
| ||
|
sgt_cr
Costa Rica95 Posts
Im not sure it looks like a no brainer 16players in 3 days, cant play a double elimination? thats just freaking weird. IF you are not going to make a double elimination bc its harder to make schedules due to the 2 brackets and lack of computers for streaming at least do it bo5, make the players actually worth coming and have a shot to play more than just 2-3 games :S | ||
|
zhurai
United States5660 Posts
| ||
|
Iamyournoob
Germany595 Posts
With that being said, I vote for single elim. However I feel that this format should be designed in a better way than it is at the NASL: Bo5 instead of Bo3 and loser's map choice. | ||
|
MonkSEA
Australia1227 Posts
At the end of the day, it was announced that it was going to be played like this, it was put into the rules. Every player signed the contract saying it was single elimination and every player had to show their top notch play from here on out otherwise they'll go home packing. These were the format, rules and guidelines pre-set and no debates were on about them when they were set. You really need to stop complaining about every single thing that doesn't go right for your favourite player. | ||
|
Garnet
Vietnam9015 Posts
| ||
|
Earll
Norway847 Posts
As a small sidenote , I might be remembering incorrectly, but did not MLG at first get tons of flak because of having a losers bracket format ? (or was that maybe only because of the extended series?) | ||
|
eXNewB
Canada291 Posts
| ||
|
tdt
United States3179 Posts
| ||
|
Bengui
Canada775 Posts
On July 09 2011 17:51 Earll wrote:To me it does not really matter that much, assuming same amount of games are played. (so Single Elimination would obviously have to have a larger set of Best of X's, since obviously in the time they are using casting /playing losers brackets can also be used just casting more of the singel elimination.) As a small sidenote , I might be remembering incorrectly, but did not MLG at first get tons of flak because of having a losers bracket format ? (or was that maybe only because of the extended series?) It was, and still is, because of the extended series. IMO single elimination is good enough when the players are already seeded based on the results of prior play, but tournaments that have no form of group stages and go directly in brackets format should be double elimination. | ||
|
GreyKnight
United States4720 Posts
it just seems a waste for everybody to setup and fly over just so you can lose in two minutes. if you're gonna argue drama did you really get hyped when ret lose to puma? it was more like wtf just happened and i felt sorta cheated. also why have tastosis, day9 if you're gonna cast so few games(much less ones THEY'RE casting). | ||
|
Dulkan
Germany24 Posts
On July 09 2011 17:25 windsupernova wrote: Single elimination with BO5 or BO7. Extended series are a terrible terrible thing.And I don't really want more games for the sake of more games double elimination doesn't mean you have to use the horrible extended series rule, don't worry, that's unique to MLG | ||
|
RealRook
Czech Republic54 Posts
| ||
|
Lobo2me
Norway1213 Posts
On July 09 2011 16:20 IceSlipper wrote: The method i like best is making the loser bracket player win the series twice.. Seems fair to me that everyone else gets a second chance, why shouldnt the winner bracket finalist? Never the less, double elimination, either way.. Those are the normal rules for double elim. A problem comes when the winner finalist wins in 2 matches, it's a huge anticlimax to the entire tournament. An alternative is to make the finals BO5, but to make it fair you still need the double elim, and then risk having 10 games. I kinda liked the Homestory cup format. It was a compromise between WB finalist having the advantage and not having to play two separate series. | ||
|
Morbidius
Brazil3449 Posts
| ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
 I really dislike any form of double elimination in Starcraft. Single elimination tournaments are pretty much a tradition, and all Korean competitions are single elimination. If you lose a BO5, there's no reason at all for you to stay in the tournament in any way. The real awful thing about double elimination are all these additional rules and structure - whether it's extended series, guys in LB having to win 2 series, a fixed game advantage, or this some other complex structure that needs a flowchart diagram to be explained. All of that is just horrible in my opinion. Every "grand" finals I've seen in double elimination tournaments was an underwhelming, pointless series in which the WB finalist has absurd advantage and shouldn't lose unless he's drunk or something. Then again, I guess there's a chance for that to happen because you may as well celebrate (thus get drunk) after winning the WB finals.  | ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
| ||
|
lorkac
United States2297 Posts
TL likes double elimination now? | ||
|
Azzur
Australia6259 Posts
1) Single elimination bo5. In my opinion, if you lose a bo5 to a "weaker" player, you don't deserve to be in the tournament. 2) Double elimination bo3 with upper bracker winner 1-0 up in bo7 finals. | ||
|
AndAgain
United States2621 Posts
On July 09 2011 18:10 Talin wrote: Ugh, the results of the poll are so discouraging. I really dislike any form of double elimination in Starcraft. Single elimination tournaments are pretty much a tradition, and all Korean competitions are single elimination. If you lose a BO5, there's no reason at all for you to stay in the tournament in any way. The thing that makes double elimination superior is that it reduces the luck of the draw factor. In single elim, the 2nd best player can lose to the best player in the first round. With double elim, there's still a chance for that to be the final (as it should properly be.) | ||
|
RaiKageRyu
Canada4773 Posts
With a single elimination, I can easily piece together who plays who by just seeing the bracket once. I can't do that with dbl elim without a bracket check online. It also allows a spectator to imagine how a tournament plays out. Remember bracket contests? You never see those with double elim. Korean ESPORTS has used single-elim for a decade. Almost every major sport uses single-elim and it's not just cause of time restraints and for the casual audience that it's used. I'll tell you why: LESS is MORE People figured out years ago single-elim games create better games. Yes, that's right better games. There's a reason why season games and group stages don't get as many views as when playoffs start: Player's aren't really in danger yet. That's the beauty of single-elim: You either Win or you're finished. Single-elim also has greater drama, as the reason why they allow games to start off with smaller sets start of the tournament is not just cause of time restraints but to allow for upsets. That's right UPSETS. Whether most people realize this or not, it is upsets that help tournaments become memorable. (e.g. MC vs ThorZain - TSL3, Huk vs July, DHS2011) This is incentive for viewers to tune in to early stages of a tournament. It balances the top end of a tournament that has greater prizes on the line with the harder fight for survival at the bottom end of a tournament. Keeps you watching start to finish. Double-elims do rank players better in order from 1st to X, but single-elims are just that much more exciting. Every stage of the tournament is that much more important. Does it suck Ret loss 2-0 right off the bat against Puma? Yea it does. But, it's also part of the many story-lines that will make up this tournament due to this format. It turned the start of the tournament into something must see and gives a weight of importance to every match. This is why I am pro for single-elimination. It gives great benefits to organizers and unbeknownst to most viewers, it them gives the most epic showing. | ||
|
St3MoR
Spain3256 Posts
- tradition - potential royal roaders and lucky runs - every game is epic, you lose, you go home - it won't always be won by the best player, but the player who wins always deserves it, variety. so yes, less games but probably the same amount of dramah | ||
|
Torumfroll
290 Posts
| ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
On July 09 2011 18:16 AndAgain wrote: The thing that makes double elimination superior is that it reduces the luck of the draw factor. In single elim, the 2nd best player can lose to the best player in the first round. With double elim, there's still a chance for that to be the final (as it should properly be.) I do see your point, and I can't really argue that it's wrong (because it isn't). Honestly I can't really articulate why I don't have a problem with that, hopefully someone else will do it better, but I'm going to try anyway. I think it's conceptually wrong to get into the moot area of considering that there are players who are among the best, but they got unlucky with draw, they got a hard opponent or a hard matchup or hard maps, so they need a second chance or a third chance or a fourth chance to get less unlucky, but even then he might get unlucky again or he might get extremely lucky, and might win having to only play "easy" opponents... you can get stuck forever in that line of thought. Elimination tournaments are essentially about players eliminating one another until there is only one player remaining, which means that one player can always eliminate another who is better than some player from the other side of the bracket. You can't really change that, so why even try? The thing is that elimination tournaments are not designed to give a clear and accurate ranking of best players. The tournament isn't meant to determine the "best player", or second best, or third best. The tournament determines the tournament winner, and how successful the player was in the tournament. There's always a big difference between a good player and a successful player. Bisu is pretty fucking good at BW, but his individual league performance is now a running joke in the community. MC is extremely successful at SC2 - but is he actually that good skillwise? We can have opinions one way or the other. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
Antipathy
United States222 Posts
As a spectator, single elimination brackets are much easier and more fun to follow. Upsets and drama are fun to see. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
| ||
|
Sandermatt
Switzerland1365 Posts
| ||
|
ThaSlayer
707 Posts
| ||
|
Woony
Germany6657 Posts
| ||
|
n0ise
3452 Posts
Only issue being time-constraints. | ||
|
arterian
Canada1157 Posts
On July 09 2011 20:21 Woony wrote: IMO single elimination for leagues like GSL and double elimination for international events like NASL. Flying people across the planet to have them loose in 15 minutes is kinda stupid. I agree with this. | ||
|
hmc
495 Posts
| ||
|
lololol
5198 Posts
| ||
|
PeZuY
935 Posts
| ||
|
oursblanc
Canada1450 Posts
| ||
|
Crovea
Denmark100 Posts
On July 09 2011 18:19 RaiKageRyu wrote: I'm really surprised people actually like double elimination. It's kinda good for players but messy for spectators. I actually find shorter tournaments better for double elimination. With a larger player pool, you will have so many games in the losers, it's not practical to see them all and it's harder to schedule it. Winner and losers still need to played in parallel too. Right now your getting every game shown on the main stage one by one. This cannot happen with double elim system. Single-elim gives the clearest concise picture of how a tournament can go down. With a single elimination, I can easily piece together who plays who by just seeing the bracket once. I can't do that with dbl elim without a bracket check online. It also allows a spectator to imagine how a tournament plays out. Remember bracket contests? You never see those with double elim. Korean ESPORTS has used single-elim for a decade. Almost every major sport uses single-elim and it's not just cause of time restraints and for the casual audience that it's used. I'll tell you why: LESS is MORE People figured out years ago single-elim games create better games. Yes, that's right better games. There's a reason why season games and group stages don't get as many views as when playoffs start: Player's aren't really in danger yet. That's the beauty of single-elim: You either Win or you're finished. Single-elim also has greater drama, as the reason why they allow games to start off with smaller sets start of the tournament is not just cause of time restraints but to allow for upsets. That's right UPSETS. Whether most people realize this or not, it is upsets that help tournaments become memorable. (e.g. MC vs ThorZain - TSL3, Huk vs July, DHS2011) This is incentive for viewers to tune in to early stages of a tournament. It balances the top end of a tournament that has greater prizes on the line with the harder fight for survival at the bottom end of a tournament. Keeps you watching start to finish. Double-elims do rank players better in order from 1st to X, but single-elims are just that much more exciting. Every stage of the tournament is that much more important. Does it suck Ret loss 2-0 right off the bat against Puma? Yea it does. But, it's also part of the many story-lines that will make up this tournament due to this format. It turned the start of the tournament into something must see and gives a weight of importance to every match. This is why I am pro for single-elimination. It gives great benefits to organizers and unbeknownst to most viewers, it them gives the most epic showing. As a spectator, i'd rather see a longer tournament, than seeing my favorite players lose a bo3 and see him go home without a second chance. | ||
|
Chrs
United Kingdom4 Posts
However, pure "fairness" is not the only thing one would take into account when choosing a format. Double elimination takes more time and requires more games to be played which makes it unsuitable for a short event - although more games is arguably a good thing for a few reasons (More games to watch! More ad revenue, etc.) it doesn't always suit a tournament. More games means that casters/referees must do more work (and maybe be paid more) and it takes more time. As also mentioned, the idea that "Loser goes out" does add more tension to each game and makes every game count, so for spectator's it has some good points. Overall, I'm in favour of double elimination when appropriate (and that tends to be when there's a lot of money or a big title on the line) but there are times when single should probably be used (Smaller tournaments in a restricted amount of time). A tournament is - afterall - supposed to hand out the first place prize to the best player and any method that makes this more likely is good in my eyes (Assuming there aren't practical issues stopping its implementation). I'm not a fan of extended series; they seem to give a further advantage to someone who's probably (In that they won the first round) better anyway. | ||
|
bokchoi
Korea (South)9498 Posts
| ||
|
lunchforthesky
United Kingdom967 Posts
[QUOTE]On July 09 2011 18:16 AndAgain wrote: [QUOTE]On July 09 2011 18:10 Talin wrote: Ugh, the results of the poll are so discouraging. I really dislike any form of double elimination in Starcraft. Single elimination tournaments are pretty much a tradition, and all Korean competitions are single elimination. If you lose a BO5, there's no reason at all for you to stay in the tournament in any way. [/QUOTE] MC is extremely successful at SC2 - but is he actually that good skillwise? We can have opinions one way or the other. [/QUOTE] Yes. Best Toss micro in the world by far, great strats and macro. | ||
|
Bobster
Germany3075 Posts
On July 09 2011 17:25 windsupernova wrote: Extended series is indeed absolutely terrible and has no place in a modern competitive format.Single elimination with BO5 or BO7. Extended series are a terrible terrible thing.And I don't really want more games for the sake of more games But that doesn't have anything to do with double elimination per se, so your reasoning is flawed. It's like saying I don't like single elimination because Bo1. | ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
On July 09 2011 18:19 RaiKageRyu wrote: I'm really surprised people actually like double elimination. It's kinda good for players but messy for spectators. I actually find shorter tournaments better for double elimination. With a larger player pool, you will have so many games in the losers, it's not practical to see them all and it's harder to schedule it. Winner and losers still need to played in parallel too. Right now your getting every game shown on the main stage one by one. This cannot happen with double elim system. Single-elim gives the clearest concise picture of how a tournament can go down. With a single elimination, I can easily piece together who plays who by just seeing the bracket once. I can't do that with dbl elim without a bracket check online. It also allows a spectator to imagine how a tournament plays out. Remember bracket contests? You never see those with double elim. Korean ESPORTS has used single-elim for a decade. Almost every major sport uses single-elim and it's not just cause of time restraints and for the casual audience that it's used. I'll tell you why: LESS is MORE People figured out years ago single-elim games create better games. Yes, that's right better games. There's a reason why season games and group stages don't get as many views as when playoffs start: Player's aren't really in danger yet. That's the beauty of single-elim: You either Win or you're finished. Single-elim also has greater drama, as the reason why they allow games to start off with smaller sets start of the tournament is not just cause of time restraints but to allow for upsets. That's right UPSETS. Whether most people realize this or not, it is upsets that help tournaments become memorable. (e.g. MC vs ThorZain - TSL3, Huk vs July, DHS2011) This is incentive for viewers to tune in to early stages of a tournament. It balances the top end of a tournament that has greater prizes on the line with the harder fight for survival at the bottom end of a tournament. Keeps you watching start to finish. Double-elims do rank players better in order from 1st to X, but single-elims are just that much more exciting. Every stage of the tournament is that much more important. Does it suck Ret loss 2-0 right off the bat against Puma? Yea it does. But, it's also part of the many story-lines that will make up this tournament due to this format. It turned the start of the tournament into something must see and gives a weight of importance to every match. This is why I am pro for single-elimination. It gives great benefits to organizers and unbeknownst to most viewers, it them gives the most epic showing. Well said. I guess my only grip is that in NASL it should have been BO5. But just said what I think about Single elimination | ||
| ||
