EPTIEM Katowice 2020 Playoffs bracket set - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
col_jung
139 Posts
| ||
|
CraigWT
97 Posts
The only difference between group c & d is the top zerg is Serral instead of solar. So unlike Maru and Inno, TY cannot get 2 wins from zerg. the others are the same (lose to top p, win against other players) | ||
|
kochanfe
Micronesia1338 Posts
I know Aligulac is not perfect, but I'm happy to use it in lieu of a better barometer. The average rating of the players populating the top half of the bracket is 2742, compared to 2851 for the bottom half. If TY had advanced with his 6-5 score instead of Hurricane with his 7-6 score (I'm still wrapping my head around the sheer idiocy of the rule that dictated that Hurricane advance), the average rating of the top half of the bracket would have been 2834, much closer to the bottom half's average of 2851. We would also have had 3 terrans, 4 zergs, and 5 protosses rather than 2, 4, and 6 respectively. Additionally, there would only be 3 guaranteed mirror matchups in the Ro12 and Ro8 as opposed to 5 guaranteed mirror matchups. For all of the above reasons, I'm sad Hurricane advanced over TY. All the same, we should be in store for some great games, so I'm excited for the next two days! | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
| ||
|
ImmortalGhost
United States57 Posts
| ||
|
JJH777
United States4420 Posts
On February 29 2020 14:32 MockHamill wrote: Only 2 Terrans in the top 12. When was the last time terran took a large portion of the top spots in a tournament? The Homestory Cup that happened immediately after Blizzcon 2018 on a brand new patch had Terran over represented. I feel the Z/P lineup there was weak though and they were still adapting to the patch while the T players didn't have to adapt as much. Serral still ended up winning there regardless. Besides that not since 2017. | ||
|
Wildmoon
Thailand4189 Posts
| ||
|
Crocolisk Dundee
870 Posts
| ||
|
omop
46 Posts
On February 29 2020 15:33 Crocolisk Dundee wrote: Hurricane won more maps than TY. Hurricane won 7 maps, whereas TY won 6. A 1:2 match loss is better than a 0:2 match loss in the ESL system. A 1:2 loss should be better than 0:2 loss. Problem with Esl system is that 2-0 win and 0-2 loss is worse than 2-1 win and 1-2 loss, which doesn't make any sense. Ties are broken in the following order: 1.Overall map difference 2.Overall number of map wins 3.Match wins amassed between the tied participants ('Mini-League') They should change order of 2. and 3. rule, to fix it. | ||
|
DarkGamer
Germany332 Posts
On February 29 2020 16:45 omop wrote: A 1:2 loss should be better than 0:2 loss. Problem with Esl system is that 2-0 win and 0-2 loss is worse than 2-1 win and 1-2 loss, which doesn't make any sense. Ties are broken in the following order: 1.Overall map difference 2.Overall number of map wins 3.Match wins amassed between the tied participants ('Mini-League') They should change order of 2. and 3. rule, to fix it. I dont understand this. Can someone help me? If a player wins 2-0 its the best, 2-1 is worse, 1-2 is more worse and 0-2 is the worst for the statistics in the groups, right? Why are ppl saying (like the quoted statement), that winning 2-0 is worse then winning 2-1? Am i missing something or is that just wrong? | ||
|
Melliflue
United Kingdom1389 Posts
On February 29 2020 16:53 DarkGamer wrote: I dont understand this. Can someone help me? If a player wins 2-0 its the best, 2-1 is worse, 1-2 is more worse and 0-2 is the worst for the statistics in the groups, right? Why are ppl saying (like the quoted statement), that winning 2-0 is worse then winning 2-1? Am i missing something or is that just wrong? It's not that 2-0 is worse than 2-1, but over two matches winning 2-0 then losing 0-2 is worse than winning 2-1 then losing 1-2 because in the first case you have a 2-2 overall map score and the second you are 3-3, and under ESL tie-break rules 3-3 is better than 2-2. People are complaining about ESL using map wins as a decider if map difference is the same. | ||
|
Argonauta
Spain4967 Posts
Lets face it, ppl complains about the ruling because of the names involved and it is sad. | ||
|
HeroSandro
542 Posts
On February 29 2020 17:17 Argonauta wrote: It would be hilarious if they change the ruling and next katowice the fan favorite also suffers from the new "fair" system that the comunity advocates for now. Lets face it, ppl complains about the ruling because of the names involved and it is sad. The rules are rules. If Harry Kane had not advanced, nobody would complaint. I would have liked to see TY or Cure go trough, but they did not. | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16103 Posts
| ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
On February 29 2020 10:43 Shellshock wrote: TY is the most overrated SC2 player since MKP At least TY is abble to see creep on the minimap... On a serious note. Where can i see Has's games ? | ||
|
spenzer
27 Posts
User was warned for this post. | ||
|
Geo.Rion
7377 Posts
| ||
|
sneakyfox
8218 Posts
On February 29 2020 16:45 omop wrote: A 1:2 loss should be better than 0:2 loss. Problem with Esl system is that 2-0 win and 0-2 loss is worse than 2-1 win and 1-2 loss, which doesn't make any sense. Ties are broken in the following order: 1.Overall map difference 2.Overall number of map wins 3.Match wins amassed between the tied participants ('Mini-League') They should change order of 2. and 3. rule, to fix it. Or even simpler, just have 1. Map win percentage 2. Match wins amassed between the tied participants ('Mini-League') | ||
|
Elentos
55594 Posts
On February 29 2020 17:47 Geo.Rion wrote: Funny how there are still people who believe we will ever get a Maru vs Serral. Havent u learnt ur lessons by now? Yeah this bracket is tailor made to be an excuse for Maru not to make the finals. | ||
|
sneakyfox
8218 Posts
On February 29 2020 18:03 Elentos wrote: If it were up to me players tied in map score would always play a tie breaker. I'm neither okay with arbitrarily deciding that 7-6 is superior to 6-5 (also not with 6-5 superior to 7-6 should they change this ruling at some point to accomodate the fact that 6-5 is in fact a superior winrate), nor with nodding someone through because they maybe barely beat somebody 2-1 once at the start of the group where neither of them was warmed up. That would theoretically be most fair, but it would be really difficult for production. If there is another group afterwards, the whole scheduled gets pushed back by the additional nail-biter match that people would surely want to watch. Or if it's the later group, the schedule might go too far into the night. Plus those players would have a disadvantage the next day by having played a possibly exhausting match at a point when they where already tired. I think in that case it would be better to just go with head-to-head. | ||
| ||
