EPTAnd there's always this weird thing with Rain where when he's on a rise, and everyone expects him to win, he disappoints and falls slightly short; then when he's not 'hot' at the moment and people are starting to forget him as a favorite, he does better again and reclaims the 'favorite to win x tournament' spot. So for Rain fans (I'm one myself), it's probably a good thing that there aren't many people predicting a Rain win, if history repeats its usual Rain results trend in Katowice next weekend.
IEM Katowice - Bracket revealed - Page 15
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
The StarLeague will be rescheduled if necessary to accomodate the players attending both Katowice and NSSL. | ||
|
SackOfWetMice
United States288 Posts
And there's always this weird thing with Rain where when he's on a rise, and everyone expects him to win, he disappoints and falls slightly short; then when he's not 'hot' at the moment and people are starting to forget him as a favorite, he does better again and reclaims the 'favorite to win x tournament' spot. So for Rain fans (I'm one myself), it's probably a good thing that there aren't many people predicting a Rain win, if history repeats its usual Rain results trend in Katowice next weekend. | ||
|
Elentos
55561 Posts
| ||
|
feebleFanfare
76 Posts
On March 06 2015 07:56 Elentos wrote: It kinda ruins the point of seeding anyone if the 4 lowest seeded players are Cure, Dark, INnoVation and Trap, who are objectively better than several of the players seeded higher (at least right now). They might aswell completely randomise everything at that point and remove the "no previous finalists on the same side of the bracket" constrait IMO. Cure's seeded last because he got 3rd place in a qualifier. Would you seed him above Hydra or Patience, who beat him in the qualifiers? Or Bbyong, who beat Terminator after Terminator beat Cure? That would seem pretty unfair to me. Regardless of how good they are, those players earned a higher seed than Cure. Even if you make the ro16 a bit more even, there's no reasonable system by which you can stop INnoVation from potentially facing the top seed in the ro8 unless you seed him higher than the actual finalists. As much as I agree that it's a shame to have Life vs Inno in the first round, I can't fault the system they've used too much. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On March 06 2015 07:52 Elentos wrote: Actually this bracket kinda looks like they just went to aligulac and gave everyone a match-up they'd be comfortable with <_< Hah cause you mention aligulac, i will use it as basis for a theoretical seeding now. Let's see what happens..^^ + Show Spoiler + Which would result in:  Life vs  PatienceSolar vs  TaeJaherO[jOin] vs FlashCure vs TrapINnoVation vs FanTaSyBbyong vs HydraMaru vs ZestDark vs RainIs it perfect? No cause there are some questionable ratings due to the tournament landscape we have right now, but imo it's more reasonable. | ||
|
Elentos
55561 Posts
On March 06 2015 08:40 feebleFanfare wrote: Cure's seeded last because he got 3rd place in a qualifier. Would you seed him above Hydra or Patience, who beat him in the qualifiers? Or Bbyong, who beat Terminator after Terminator beat Cure? That would seem pretty unfair to me. Regardless of how good they are, those players earned a higher seed than Cure. Even if you make the ro16 a bit more even, there's no reasonable system by which you can stop INnoVation from potentially facing the top seed in the ro8 unless you seed him higher than the actual finalists. As much as I agree that it's a shame to have Life vs Inno in the first round, I can't fault the system they've used too much. I didn't say Cure or Dark should be seeded above them, I said that with the level of players they have, using seeding to create the matches is not a good idea. Not to mention their seeding seems to be a mix of systematical seeding and utter randomness. This is the seeding I proposed should have been used if seeding was really necessary, devoid of any randomness: 1. herO 2. TaeJa 3. Life 4. Flash 5. Maru 6. Rain 7. Zest 8. Solar 9. INnoVation 10. Patience 11. NA/EU player with least map losses (Trap or Hydra) 12. NA/EU player with 2nd least map losses (Hydra or Trap) 13. NA/EU player with 3rd least map losses (Bbyong) 14. NA/EU player with 4th least map losses (Fantasy) 15. KR 3rd place qualifier (Dark) 16. EU 3rd place qualifier (Cure) This would lead to: herO vs Cure TaeJa vs Dark Life vs Fantasy Flash vs Bbyong Maru vs Hydra Rain vs Trap Zest vs Patience Solar vs INnoVation IMO, this is much better matched in terms of skill and seeding and potential for later rounds, without being guaranteed to immediately remove a fan favourite from the tournament. This is better for the fans, the organisers, the tournament itself and the players. TL;DR: If you seed, do it with a better system. | ||
|
KingofdaHipHop
United States25602 Posts
| ||
|
Elentos
55561 Posts
On March 06 2015 13:23 KingofdaHipHop wrote: okay but for instance what makes maru ranked above Rain? again that seems somewhat arbitrary For 5-8 I used the recency of their 2nd place finish because I didn't have the time to look up who had the most IEM successes in the past  | ||
|
messioso
Denmark635 Posts
This is the IEM world championship, all 4 tournament winners from the season are considered equal. So they get randomly drawn. Same with the runners-up, minus the fact they cannot meet their finalist opponent until the final. I think it shows enough when you're all trying to come up with your own seeding and still none of them match. That is why we do it the way we do. The seeding is the exact opposite of arbitrary. You might not like it, but it has logic to it, and it's fair. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On March 06 2015 22:23 messioso wrote: Nobody was given their exact seed. They were randomly drawn between the seeding pools by rolling dice, no joke. This is the IEM world championship, all 4 tournament winners from the season are considered equal. So they get randomly drawn. Same with the runners-up, minus the fact they cannot meet their finalist opponent until the final. I think it shows enough when you're all trying to come up with your own seeding and still none of them match. That is why we do it the way we do. The seeding is the exact opposite of arbitrary. You might not like it, but it has logic to it, and it's fair. I think the way IEM does it is very good. In particular basing it off performance directly related to the tourney at hand and nothing else is a very good approach, otherwise you could come up with basically any order you wish by cherrypicking what "matters" and what doesn't. Fabricating brackets because of some subjective biases or "fan favourites" is a really bad idea. | ||
|
Darkdwarf
Sweden960 Posts
On March 06 2015 22:23 messioso wrote: Nobody was given their exact seed. They were randomly drawn between the seeding pools by rolling dice, no joke. This is the IEM world championship, all 4 tournament winners from the season are considered equal. So they get randomly drawn. Same with the runners-up, minus the fact they cannot meet their finalist opponent until the final. I think it shows enough when you're all trying to come up with your own seeding and still none of them match. That is why we do it the way we do. The seeding is the exact opposite of arbitrary. You might not like it, but it has logic to it, and it's fair. Seems like a fair method. Thanks for seeding and putting thought into it!  | ||
|
Elentos
55561 Posts
On March 06 2015 22:23 messioso wrote: They were randomly drawn between the seeding pools by rolling dice, no joke. I'd be interested to see how that works tbh. No seriously, you should consider streaming this next year, would be a good hype video.You say none of them match by the way, but everyone can figure out that herO and TaeJa got the highest seeds, that Cure and Dark are the lowest seeds and that the matches were nearly randomised (except for the no previous finalists in same half of the bracket condition). Of course there won't be an exact match because the community wouldn't randomly draw but purposely assign ratings to players based on whatever concept. I'm not saying that the seeding is arbitrary or unfair, just that with the way it turned out this year, it is unfortunate for certain players. | ||
|
toe
United States6 Posts
| ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
Would be interesting for sure  | ||
|
Dav1oN
Ukraine3164 Posts
| ||
|
Zerg.Zilla
Hungary5029 Posts
| ||
|
Darkdwarf
Sweden960 Posts
On March 09 2015 22:16 The_Red_Viper wrote: So.. Will there be a IEM power rank? Would be interesting for sure This man knows what's up! | ||
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
On March 09 2015 22:16 The_Red_Viper wrote: So.. Will there be a IEM power rank? Would be interesting for sure 1. Life 16. Everyone else written by Zealously | ||
|
The_Templar
your Country52797 Posts
On March 09 2015 23:42 Shellshock wrote: 1. Life 16. Everyone else written by Zealously You forgot TL bias, TaeJa is #2. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
If Taeja is in the top 5 there will be war :D | ||
|
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
On March 09 2015 23:50 The_Red_Viper wrote: If Taeja is in the top 5 there will be war :D He should be top 4. He's one of the IEM winners | ||
| ||
