|
On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend?  If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win?
Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games.
|
I really enjoyed the last 2 panels. Very interesting. Media panel was very well spoken. last panel was.. interesting
|
Really enjoyed this. Hope we get to see more of this in the future can only help the scene
|
United States15275 Posts
On September 22 2012 03:33 chisuri wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win? Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games.
No. You are sadly mistaken.
|
On September 22 2012 03:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? Yeah exactly. There's actually not a single good reason why every series in a weekend-long tournament isn't a "best of positive infinity" match. I'm going to just assume you're attempting to be funny and that your comment was rhetorical. Please don't reply to me unless you have something intelligent to say on the topic.
How can I pass your standard of "intelligent posts"? Oh I forget I don't need to!
Don't want to be off-topic but next time don't bring the "intelligence" argument out please.
|
On September 22 2012 03:35 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:33 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win? Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games. No. You are sadly mistaken.
Olympics, World Cup, Euros, Tennis tournaments... are using Bo1, aren't they?
|
On September 22 2012 03:35 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:33 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win? Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games. No. You are sadly mistaken.
Agreed. Hockey has BoX games, Baseball has BoX games, Tennis has BoX sets for every single match, Basketball has BoX games...
(American) Football has just one game with the Super Bowl though. lol.
|
On September 22 2012 03:35 chisuri wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? Yeah exactly. There's actually not a single good reason why every series in a weekend-long tournament isn't a "best of positive infinity" match. I'm going to just assume you're attempting to be funny and that your comment was rhetorical. Please don't reply to me unless you have something intelligent to say on the topic. How can I pass your standard of "intelligent posts"? Oh I forget I don't need to! Don't want to be off-topic but next time don't bring the "intelligence" argument out please.
We all know you are not serious about prefering bo1 over bo3, no one with a sense of anything would - You are taking the discussion way out on a tangent. Please just stop.
|
On September 22 2012 03:36 chisuri wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:35 CosmicSpiral wrote:On September 22 2012 03:33 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win? Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games. No. You are sadly mistaken. Olympics, World Cup, Euros, Tennis tournaments... are using Bo1, aren't they?
No. Every single tennis match in tournaments is at least a Bo3 (increases to Bo5 for men) sets. Never ever a Bo1.
|
Thank you Asha for the transcripts, couldn't watch the event but glad I could read the replies
|
On September 22 2012 03:37 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:36 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:35 CosmicSpiral wrote:On September 22 2012 03:33 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win? Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games. No. You are sadly mistaken. Olympics, World Cup, Euros, Tennis tournaments... are using Bo1, aren't they? No. Every single tennis match in tournaments is at least a Bo3 (increases to Bo5 for men) sets. Never ever a Bo1.
What are you even talking about? I don't even...There is only 1 game for every tennis match last time I checked.
|
On September 22 2012 03:37 ELA wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:35 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? Yeah exactly. There's actually not a single good reason why every series in a weekend-long tournament isn't a "best of positive infinity" match. I'm going to just assume you're attempting to be funny and that your comment was rhetorical. Please don't reply to me unless you have something intelligent to say on the topic. How can I pass your standard of "intelligent posts"? Oh I forget I don't need to! Don't want to be off-topic but next time don't bring the "intelligence" argument out please. We all know you are not serious about prefering bo1 over bo3, no one with a sense of anything would - You are taking the discussion way out on a tangent. Please just stop.
Very subtle way of saying either you are trolling or you are senseless. How can I win this argument? Oh I forget you aren't the one who decides what is right, what is wrong and especially what i really think.
|
On September 22 2012 03:36 chisuri wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:35 CosmicSpiral wrote:On September 22 2012 03:33 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win? Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games. No. You are sadly mistaken. Olympics, World Cup, Euros, Tennis tournaments... are using Bo1, aren't they?
Most events in the Olympics arent bo1. The only one that comes to mind are the martial arts (even then you have Repechage) and I guess track events. World cup and Euros both have group stages (plus qualifiers), in tennis you have more than 1 set in a match.
|
United States15275 Posts
On September 22 2012 03:36 chisuri wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:35 CosmicSpiral wrote:On September 22 2012 03:33 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win? Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games. No. You are sadly mistaken. Olympics, World Cup, Euros, Tennis tournaments... are using Bo1, aren't they?
Tennis tournaments don't use Bo1s. They play a single series with a Bo3 set or a Bo5 set. Every 'game" is only a single win; you need four wins to win a point and 6 points to win a set.
For the Olympics it depends on the sport.
World Cup has robin robin group stages.
Euro what?
|
On September 22 2012 03:39 chisuri wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:37 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:36 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:35 CosmicSpiral wrote:On September 22 2012 03:33 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win? Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games. No. You are sadly mistaken. Olympics, World Cup, Euros, Tennis tournaments... are using Bo1, aren't they? No. Every single tennis match in tournaments is at least a Bo3 (increases to Bo5 for men) sets. Never ever a Bo1. What are you even talking about? I don't even...There is only 1 game for every tennis match last time I checked.
Every match consists of at least 2 sets which is basically bo3.
You can't really regard a 5 set match as one game... it'd be as regarding a bo3 sc2 match als one game.
|
This was great I really enjoyed tuning in. Thanks dream hack
|
United States15275 Posts
On September 22 2012 03:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:35 CosmicSpiral wrote:On September 22 2012 03:33 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win? Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games. No. You are sadly mistaken. Agreed. Hockey has BoX games, Baseball has BoX games, Tennis has BoX sets for every single match, Basketball has BoX games... (American) Football has just one game with the Super Bowl though. lol.
BoX with football would be a nightmare. Imagine all the injured players...
|
On September 22 2012 03:43 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:35 CosmicSpiral wrote:On September 22 2012 03:33 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win? Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games. No. You are sadly mistaken. Agreed. Hockey has BoX games, Baseball has BoX games, Tennis has BoX sets for every single match, Basketball has BoX games... (American) Football has just one game with the Super Bowl though. lol. BoX with football would be a nightmare. Imagine all the injured players...
Jesus... rosters would have to be DEEP, especially for QBs
|
On September 22 2012 03:41 Pri1230 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 03:36 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:35 CosmicSpiral wrote:On September 22 2012 03:33 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:29 Dosey wrote:On September 22 2012 03:26 chisuri wrote:On September 22 2012 03:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 22 2012 03:09 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2012 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Bo1 is never a good idea if we want the better players to win, as statistically the better players will win the longer BoX series. I don't like such volatility from Bo1 either, where one cheese could knock half the great players out of the tournament. Who would want to watch the rest of the weekend? If he was the better player he would have stopped the cheese of the other player. Why do people always act like cheese is a lower lvl of play, its a strategy like an other and if it works said player deserves to win and is the better player then. I'm not saying that a better player will always lose to a worse player who cheeses, and I think you're missing the statistical fact of longer series reducing the volatility of results between players who are measuredly better and worse. So why don't we play Bo101, Bo10001? The only way to figure out the absolute best player is to play Best of positive Infinity right? If you're watching a poker tournament and it gets down to three way or heads up, would you prefer for them to just go all in for a coin flip, or play it out to see who is the better player? The coin flip can be tense and exciting at times, but that's only because we don't constantly see it. If we're seeing nothing but coin flips, doesn't that kind of stagnate the game a bit and cheapen the win? Who told you that Bo1 equals coin flip? As far as I know, most of sport tournaments are using Bo1 format, or at least a part of them. Only losers whine about coin flips or luck factor after the games. No. You are sadly mistaken. Olympics, World Cup, Euros, Tennis tournaments... are using Bo1, aren't they? Most events in the Olympics arent bo1. The only one that comes to mind are the martial arts (even then you have Repechage) and I guess track events. World cup and Euros both have group stages (plus qualifiers), in tennis you have more than 1 game in a match.
How can qualifiers and group stages be considered a part of Best of X series???? OK so you are admitting from the playoff stage they will be doing Bo1 format, right?
And Tennis is just how you score it. There is no objective in the match. You score until you have enough to win the match, according to the rules. In E-Sport there are definite ways of winning the game and force losers to leave. How can you compare a set of tennis with a full match in e-sport?
|
Man i wish there was still WCG in a truly awesome way! The olympic spirit combined with esports would be really cool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
