EPT[D] Why the future of Pro-SC2 should be Tennis - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
FXOBoSs
337 Posts
| ||
|
cerebralz
United States443 Posts
Getting a 2-0 victory might be considered a superior victory for extra team points, putting emphasis on players to get those points for their team or deny them from another team. This system also indroduces a type of bracketology for the fans. The only drawback is that while wrestling has many different weight classes and thus more competitors, in SC you only have one "group" of players so each tournament would be in fact one weight class. Another form could be the NASCAR race for the cup format where all the player's placements earn them overall points for an end of the season award. The drawback to that would probably be that you would still have to separate the GSL from the rest-of-us due to the more difficult nature of the GSL. | ||
ImbaTosS
United Kingdom1685 Posts
| ||
|
Arceus
Vietnam8333 Posts
1. SC2 will definitely develop into that stage when teams are so iconic. Especially when KeSPA teams are coming 2. Leagues do matter. The Slams with hundreds years of prestige and million dollars of prize attract players & fans. I will still watch Wimbledon if Fed/Nad dont participate, I still watch OSL if TBLS fail in prelim. These tournaments are simplly historic and prestigious. I bet the serious and competent pros in Korea would commit to the GSL, the lesser ones who choose easy money oversea will disappear into oblivion sooner or later. 3. Only the Slams use bo5 (for men), all other ATP tourneys use bo3, all single elimination. At the same time there're shit tons of format in Sc2. You just dont compare a physical sport with electronic sport in that aspect 4. Sure Fed, Nad are better than those 40,41,42th players but Squirtle, sC can just annihilate like 25 players above them. The worldwide ranking you suggest just wont work cuz theres world of difference between Korea and the rest. No one takes International TLPD seriously 5. Tennis players can practice on their own with private coach. While Sc2 players can only become better in teamhouse environment. And thus the team needs to be recognized. Ever wonder why OSL has been struggling finding sponsors while Proleague never skips a beat? Those teamless or one-man-team players would go nowhere. In overall your compare works better with street fighter imo. Making a thread on shoryuken or eventhubs may be more appreciated | ||
|
chocopaw
2072 Posts
On April 10 2012 09:07 YMCApylons wrote: 4. Teams should be sports agencies, not teams. To some extent they already are. They handle money, media, sponsorships, branding, PR. Starcraft 2 players need practice partners, sure, but again, it's not a team sport. Did anyone really care when Huk went from Liquid to EG? Or MC from oGs to SK? Not so sure about the latter, but Huk to EG? Erm, I remember people talking about the saddest day in years or that they haven't been so angry and disappointed in a long time.^^ God that was a good day... | ||
|
ki11z0ne
United States427 Posts
| ||
|
virpi
Germany3598 Posts
| ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
| ||
|
Jakkerr
Netherlands2549 Posts
On April 10 2012 20:03 FXOBoSs wrote: Team leagues are proven to be more interesting in Sc2 via viewership. But you can still run Tennis team leagues IMO. Good example I like it, very interesting read. The Davis Cup is one of the coolest tennis events every year  .There's a ton of similarities between Tennis and Starcraft indeed, except on 1 point. In tennis teamhouses and teamcoaches don't exist, every player has a personal coach and that coach also doesn't teach multiple tennis players. Korea has proven what teamhouses can do for a player. I agree with every other point tho. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10696 Posts
People seem to think that Proleague is important/interesting because it's team vs team. It isn't, it's because it is VERY REGULAR, near daily... The performance of an entitiy, be it player or team, is measured over the whole year and people can follow their favorite player nearly non stop whiteout having to wait for this next big tournament. Btw: 5. Tennis players can practice on their own with private coach. While Sc2 players can only become better in teamhouse environment. And thus the team needs to be recognized. Ever wonder why OSL has been struggling finding sponsors while Proleague never skips a beat? Those teamless or one-man-team players would go nowhere. Wait what? Tennis.. The Sport that is way more developed than SC2 will ever be can go with players practising kinda "alone" (which just means they search practise partners/trainers/place to train themselves) has a training model that is worse than SC2's? Please tell me your not serious... Korean style Teamhouses exist for only 1 true reason: It's cheap. It's cheap for the teams, it's cheap for the players... | ||
|
THM
Bulgaria1131 Posts
I'd have to disagree with the team part too, they are essential, but other than that - you're on to something | ||
|
Insurrectionist
Norway141 Posts
On April 10 2012 19:51 Xiron wrote: Internet. and, oh btw, by every top player you mean like the top 30 of the world? yeah, you're right. Or do you mean everyone in the top 50 or top 100? Nope. But the list from the OP with top 50 earners has number 50 earning more than 3$mil total from prize money alone. Looking at the wiki he's been playing internationally since ~2004 which means ~400k per year average, surely even disregarding sponsorship money he can afford to go to pretty much any tournament he wants. Anyway, as has been mentioned teams are very important in SC since there isn't as much to be gained by playing by yourself than in tennis, and there is far less risk in practicing with your competitors in tennis since there's less actual information to be gained on competitors (mainly just gauging their form and what kind of balls they hit/whether they're playing defensively or offensively) compared to SC which is a game of imperfect information, and every practice match you risk giving something away which can help your practice partner if you meet in competition. Certainly there's an element of that in tennis as well, but it's small enough that it doesn't outweigh the drawbacks of forming teams, which I'd argue isn't the case in SC/2. | ||
|
timwac
Scotland93 Posts
5. SC2 Tournaments should be run like tennis tournaments. Revenue from sponsorships, ticket sales, and broadcast rights. I don't want to go into the Arena-PPV debate, but I'll simply observe that tennis as a pro-sport grows by allowing casual viewers to watch for free. Then, as they get more into it, they pay to attend tournaments. PPV is not part of the equation. The thing is to watch Tennis you don't directly pay towards the tournament but for example when the BBC broadcasts Wimbledon you have already paid a TV license which makes up the "broadcast rights" as you stated. I know that you could argue that we also pay for the internet to watch SC2 but none of that revenue ends up in say MLG's hands(and lets be frank here the money pumped into the broadcast by the TV licence alone is a colossal amount. Note: no advertisements and a few non-intrusive sponsors). Therefore a company like MLG must find a method of plugging this huge gap in revenue. Therefore PPV if probably the best method of doing this even if it is not a popular. Disclaimer: I can only speak for the UK when I talk about TV licence. I know nothing of TV licencing in other countries | ||
|
Pantythief
Denmark657 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10696 Posts
On April 10 2012 20:36 timwac wrote: I agree 100% with everything you said apart from the point below. Tennis and Starcraft are very similar in all the ways you mention. The thing is to watch Tennis you don't directly pay towards the tournament but for example when the BBC broadcasts Wimbledon you have already paid a TV license which makes up the "broadcast rights" as you stated. I know that you could argue that we also pay for the internet to watch SC2 but none of that revenue ends up in say MLG's hands(and lets be frank here the money pumped into the broadcast by the TV licence alone is a colossal amount. Note: no advertisements and a few non-intrusive sponsors). Therefore a company like MLG must find a method of plugging this huge gap in revenue. Therefore PPV if probably the best method of doing this even if it is not a popular. Disclaimer: I can only speak for the UK when I talk about TV licence. I know nothing of TV licencing in other countries Thats simple: 1. If a national TV station buys it --> You paid for it buy Taxes/Media Fee.. Whatever your country has. 2. If a private TV station buys it --> You "pay" for it buy watchign adds. 3. If a pay-per view TV station buys it --> You paid for it with your channel access fee or whatever that is called. The question is... What is good for SC2? Number 2 or 3? | ||
|
bLah.
Croatia497 Posts
On April 10 2012 20:34 Velr wrote: Korean style Teamhouses exist for only 1 true reason: It's cheap. It's cheap for the teams, it's cheap for the players... Not really. Strategy is alot different in sc2 than in tennis. in sc2 terms tennis would be mostly mechanics, while in sc2 build orders and stuff like that are sooo important. That way in tennis you need to scout your opponent before a match even starts to see what you're dealing against and then in match you just play in a way you see fits. In sc2 things are different and that's why having alot of people around you helps, because everyone figures some tiny thing out and then everyone practices it. also, important thing to note: Pyramid money scheme - in individual sports like tennis only top3 players attract sponsors etc, they are most fun to watch like in sc2 but you still need to have newcomers and people who can make an upset. In sc2 there's alot less money than in tennis so worse players wouldn't be able to afford any costs. In team system people for example sponsor IM because of Nestea and MVP but of that sponsorships they can afford to fly 5 people somewhere. | ||
|
timwac
Scotland93 Posts
On April 10 2012 20:40 Velr wrote: Thats simple: 1. If a national TV station buys it --> You paid for it buy Taxes/Media Fee.. Whatever your country has. 2. If a private TV station buys it --> You "pay" for it buy watchign adds. 3. If a pay-per view TV station buys it --> You paid for it with your channel access fee or whatever that is called. The question is... What is good for SC2? Number 2 or 3? I'm not arguing they the gap can't be paid I'm just saying that PPV is the best option for an internet broadcast. Remember if starcraft goes to TV (most likely in amerca well before countries). Other countries will be immediately isolated if our countries are not quick on the uptake. Would the NA audience alone be able to sustain the viewer numbers? Not at starcraft 2's current popularity. Then we go back to the internet broadcast wherein PPV is the most sustainable business model. | ||
|
HaXXspetten
Sweden15718 Posts
| ||
|
Space Invader
Australia291 Posts
| ||
|
revy
United States1524 Posts
| ||
| ||
