EPT[OSL]Bo1 vs Bo3 Odds
OSL Ro32 groups + format - Page 36
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19205 Posts
[OSL]Bo1 vs Bo3 Odds | ||
|
bittman
Australia8759 Posts
Well people should still note that some advantage is gained from a Bo3 over Bo1, but it's definitely small and it's a well demonstrated blog. Also he notes that if maps sucks, blame the people that picked em. No vetoes, random draw. So we blame OSL anyway right? I mean I'm not freaking out about it, because most likely the best players will still win like best players do. But I am yet to be convinced that Bo3 is a better format for a large number of reasons. Storylines, mindgames, build variety, map variety, endurance, stronger overall preparation, etc, etc. I don't think any of that is more prevalent in Bo1. Of course, people disagree, maybe more strongly here as Bo3 is such a sc2 staple. Proleague or all-kill format though? See I think that debate is more in the air, and more interesting. | ||
|
Penev
28452 Posts
Prayin' for good maps it is then. Edit: And for surpreme scouting by everyone and for everything else that can prevent major upsets to happen. I understand why they chose this format but I don't know if it's worth the amount of shitstorms this potentially brings. Times have changed. People want bo3's now. | ||
|
tili
United States1332 Posts
 | ||
|
NightOfTheDead
Lithuania1711 Posts
As the maps will be picked by random, odds of getting screwed in BO1 are much larger than in Bo3 (cause you don't play same map twice). So it is still the fault of Bo1, and not the random map selection. | ||
|
NicksonReyes
Philippines4431 Posts
| ||
|
MysterySC
Andorra109 Posts
 | ||
|
Arceus
Vietnam8332 Posts
On June 14 2013 23:56 NightOfTheDead wrote: As the maps will be picked by random, odds of getting screwed in BO1 are much larger than in Bo3 (cause you don't play same map twice). So it is still the fault of Bo1, and not the random map selection. for the millionth time, maps in bo1 group are all preset. You dont come to the stadium without knowing which map to play on | ||
|
Petrina
United States178 Posts
| ||
|
sushiman
Sweden2691 Posts
| ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On June 15 2013 01:54 sushiman wrote: The OSL-format was always good, no problems at all with BO1 in the early rounds. The BW OSL's should be a clear indicator that the best players almost always qualify and that the rest of the games in the tournament tend to be of good quality; I vastly prefer it to the mess of GSL constant qualifiers with bo3's and up/down round-robins with so-so players that takes forever to finish. You know that with this system those "so-so players" can actually beat the top people and get to higher rounds right? Personally i am up for a new format to see how it goes but your reasoning is actually backwards. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On June 14 2013 11:48 BLinD-RawR wrote: its a shame that you think that, I'm sure you feel the same way about players who consistently do well in proleague/GSTL but cannot make it far in individual leagues. Most non-GSL players got famous for being ladder heroes. Winning tones of Bo1 games live on stream, gaining fans that way. Happy, DeMuslim, etc... Flash and JD also got huge props for never failing to make it past the group stage in MSL and OSL. Because no amount of cheese or greedy plays could knock them out. Not only that, but all game 7's in a Bo7 is just a Bo1 between tired players. Some play standard (like MMA) others cheese (Like MVP) | ||
|
fuzzylogic44
Canada2633 Posts
Average win rates aren't really the issue though. Sometimes you'll have a BO choice where it/s 100% chance to win or lose by luck, or as has been said the map... or you make one bad mistake and have no chance to make up for it... | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On June 14 2013 22:06 bittman wrote: Well people should still note that some advantage is gained from a Bo3 over Bo1, but it's definitely small and it's a well demonstrated blog. Also he notes that if maps sucks, blame the people that picked em. No vetoes, random draw. So we blame OSL anyway right? I mean I'm not freaking out about it, because most likely the best players will still win like best players do. But I am yet to be convinced that Bo3 is a better format for a large number of reasons. Storylines, mindgames, build variety, map variety, endurance, stronger overall preparation, etc, etc. I don't think any of that is more prevalent in Bo1. Of course, people disagree, maybe more strongly here as Bo3 is such a sc2 staple. Proleague or all-kill format though? See I think that debate is more in the air, and more interesting. There are many ways of creating stories. Would I like to see more games? Surely, as demonstrated by my World Circuit where the top players would fly all over the world and compete against one another more frequently for points in a LAN setting. At the end of the season for the Grand Season Finals the top players would play in a similar round robin format like your GSLs/OSLs. You want to create stories you can do it all the time by having these players meet more frequently rather than playing a best of every time they meet. Pro League does this to a certain extent but not often enough. Think of a a few hundred little Napoleons setting forth to conquer the World. I digress, let's get back to the point. There are plenty of ways of building story and when the players meet as often as the KeSPA players. The mind games and story is already there. There will be variety no matter what with the round robin. Player selections are fun and you cannot have 5 bo3's take place with the given time slot TV wise. Heck OGN is only airing half the PL games on TV weekly because their schedule is already pretty tight. The feed is very different compared to your internet stream. It's worked for them before & they have years of experience when it comes to hosting. Also just because it's a best of one doesn't mean your preparation isn't as strong. The amount of upsets will be minor. On June 15 2013 02:36 fuzzylogic44 wrote: Average win rates aren't really the issue though. Sometimes you'll have a BO choice where it/s 100% chance to win or lose by luck, or as has been said the map... or you make one bad mistake and have no chance to make up for it... That's why it's intense and yes SC2 is very unforgiving when it comes to a mistake. That's why you prepare yourself for all possibilities and come up with a good game plan. This is what makes champions and your chance is by rectifying the issue by beating out the other players in your group. | ||
|
sushiman
Sweden2691 Posts
On June 15 2013 01:59 Assirra wrote: You know that with this system those "so-so players" can actually beat the top people and get to higher rounds right? Personally i am up for a new format to see how it goes but your reasoning is actually backwards. If you'd watched the previous OSL's, you'd see that it almost always are the best players advancing; only occasionally would so-so players slip through, and either shape up for the more preparation-heavy ro16 or just drop out. The good thing with the OSL-system is that there's less shitty games with mediocre players and more time to build hype for the more important higher rounds. | ||
|
ThinJ
United States58 Posts
Not worth it. Even a little bit. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
i know its easier to adjust the format...but...... :/ | ||
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On June 15 2013 03:03 jinorazi wrote: i blame the game, not the bo1. i know its easier to adjust the format...but...... :/ On June 13 2013 15:03 opterown wrote: they'd just blame sc2 for being a bad game rather than blame bo1 format i guess yup knew that at least some would ;p | ||
|
| ||
|
corumjhaelen
France6884 Posts
On June 15 2013 03:39 opterown wrote: yup knew that at least some would ;p You mean exactly like all those people who said "it's not because it worked for bw that it will work for sc2" ? | ||
| ||
