The competitive StarCraft II scene bid the 5.0.15 patch adieu last Saturday night, with the offline finale of Maestros of the Game II serving as the final matchday of pro-tier play under that iteration of the game. The 5.0.16 patch had gone live prior to the conclusion of the tournament, but the organizers decided to play the finale on a rollback mod—allowing the final four contenders of Maru, Serral, Classic, and herO to conclude on the event on the same version of the game they had begun on.
The end result was one that is all too familiar to fans of StarCraft II esports: Serral lifted the championship trophy in front of a roaring crowd. Yet, it did not carry the air of inevitability as in many of Serral's past triumphs. In fact, the stage had been set in Paris for herO to punctuate his dominance over a mini-era of StarCraft II with one final championship. The 5.0.15 version of StarCraft had been active from September 30 of 2025 to June 22 of 2026, and during that time, herO had reigned supreme by sweeping the four most richly prized competitions held prior to Maestros of the Game II.
In contrast, the Finnish Phenom had performed well below his usual GOAT-level bar during the 5.0.15 patch, perhaps having eased up on the reins after winning the 2025 Esports World Cup (possibly the final world championship in SC2). However, a near-vintage version of Serral showed up to play at the live conclusion to Maestros of the Game, as he forced herO forced to accept a small blemish on his otherwise impeccable 9-month report card.
Prior to live finals, Serral had held a narrow 3-2 match edge over herO during the 5.0.15 patch—with the major caveat of herO having taken a crushing 3-0 sweep at the biggest tournament of the year in the Netease/Thunderfire All-Star Invitational. On the other hand, Serral had defeated herO 3-1 during the online portion of the Maestros of the Game playoffs, making it anyone's guess as to who might triumph in a potential Paris punchout.
The two paragons of Protoss and Zerg rushed to book their finals clash, disposing of the other two offline finalists with ease. Serral smashed Maru 4-0 in the upper bracket, while herO took a 4-0 win over Classic and a 4-1 win over Maru in the lower bracket.
The initial best-of-seven leg of the double-elimination finals was a brutal demonstration of why herO had dominated the 5.0.15 patch up to that point. Although Serral took game one with a clever Swarm Host strategy that caught his opponent off-guard, herO reeled off four consecutive one-sided wins to earn the bracket 'reset.' Serral's ironclad defense has been the foundation of his unparalleled career success, but herO continually found ways to inflict early damage and snowball into routine victories. On the other hand, herO was actually rewarded for his devil-may-care approach to defense in game three of the series. Serral's attempt to mine through the mineral wall on Exarch to hit a fast Speedling timing proved to be too clever by half, as he wasted precious time against an opponent who hadn't even bothered to wall off in the first place!
herO looked well on his way to another championship in the 5.0.15 patch, but in a first-ever scene in competitive StarCraft II, he jumped the gun and celebrated with trophy before the full series was even over. As it turned out, herO had been unaware that he had merely reset the bracket—a somewhat understandable mistake given the differing implementations of double-elimination throughout StarCraft II history—and did not know there was one final best-of-three left to be played. Fortunately, the always affable herO laughed off the incident, and it seemed to pass as a comedic interlude before the final best-of-three to decide the championship.
herO realizes the double-elimination finals has a second half.
In spite of herO's sunny disposition, the second leg of the finals gave way to a massive momentum swing that begged the question of if outside circumstances were affecting him in-game as well. Of course, it could also have been the case that the widely proclaimed greatest of all time made some necessary adjustments.
The post-match interview revealed that Serral had made a note of herO's Chargelot-heavy play in the first half of the finals, which had been highly effective against his fast-Hydra approach. Serral's counter was to play fast +1 melee with earlier Banelings instead, and herO played right into his hands in game one of the ultimate BO3. Serral weathered herO's initial Chargelot-Archon pressure with his Ling-Bane defenses, and gratefully accepted donations of Zealots sent forth in a series of unsuccessful backdoor attacks.
herO's wasteful use of Zealots and late Psionic Storm upgrade opened him up to a Hydra-Baneling attack from Serral, and he found himself teetering for the first time since Serral's surprise Swarm Hosts in the opening bout. With the 'defend and stabilize' chapter being (in)famously torn out of his playbook, herO looked to try and make his way back into the game with more offense. However, Serral struck the perfect balance between defense and backdoor attacks, and herO was eventually forced to GG out.
As it turned out in game two, +1 Zerglings were good against more than just Chargelots. After a nervy start that saw herO lose one of his initial Oracles—another sign that the series had shifted psychologically—herO committed to inflicting damage with an early Blink-Stalker strike. However, Serral was on point about evading Stasis Traps (the loss of the early Oracle certainly didn't help), and the game quickly turned into an example of how herO's aggressive tendencies are a double edged sword. herO was put firmly behind after his failed attack, forcing him into one final gamble to try and salvage the championship: a rush to Carriers while bypassing mid-game units. However, Serral was uninterested in delaying the real trophy lift much longer, and finished herO off with a Hydra-Baneling barrage to receive the final GG.
Although herO stumbled one step short of the Maestros of the Game championship, his tremendous performances during the 5.0.15 patch furthered his legacy by making him the first dominant player of the post-EWC era. As for Serral, his 28th S-tier championship was a reminder that for him, any short title drought is illusory, and a warning shot to the rest of the StarCraft II scene about who might rule the coming 5.0.16 era.
Credits and acknowledgements
Writer: Wax Images: ComebackTV, BASILISK Records and Statistics: Aligulac.com and Liquipedia
Nice write-up! I really liked how you highlighted the psychological aspect. That probably played a significant role in the reset match, although the strategic adjustments seem like they were a major factor as well. I also can't help but think that it was a huge disadvantage for herO to prepare exclusively for a Bo7 without really considering the possibility of having to play the Bo3 beforehand. For Serral, it was probably especially satisfying to finally come out on top this time, considering he lost the previous MotG finals against Clem in the reset match.
But I also think you're being a bit too harsh on Serral. While he didn't put up the same absurd numbers as during his absolute peak years, he still won around 40% of all the tournaments he entered during that patch. That's a level of consistency that very few professional players have ever achieved. His average placement was 2,8, which is honestly an incredible statistic. He further did all of this during a patch where Zerg wasn't winning any relevant tournaments outside of him. herO was definitely the standout player of that patch, but it's not as if Serral was underperforming. He simply wasn't quite as overwhelmingly dominant as people had become accustomed to seeing (looking at his loss to HM propably being the biggest upset, as losses to herO and Maru can always happen).
On July 03 2026 10:33 ETisME wrote: damn I gotta watch the vod. hope the games were good with the new patch
But they didnt play on the new patch
They did. Idk what you're talking about. It was 8 worker start im pretty sure unless I'm confusing it with the Chinese tournament.
You are.. it was specifically mentioned throughout. They used a mod for MotG2, as the previous rounds were played on the old patch and they did not want to shake it up.
Yeah it was old patch but new-ish maps, as before some maps were added on ladder, like Blackrock, they were already played for MotG 2. New patch before hotfix I highly doubt herO would have taken a single map off Serral. As for after the hotfix we will have answer at HSC starting today
A bit bummed for herO that he couldn’t win the second bo3 but I did not expect him to after that akward trophy lift Sad for Maru, but I find TvZ and TvP not terran favored at the moment, even the contrary (even before patch), even Clem is losing in the important tournaments (at least he lost to herO in TvP, haven’t seen his 5.0.15 TvZ versus strong zergs) But some of Maru’s games were still good to watch despite losing
Poor Classic though, he flew all the way to heat wave France to get 4-0d super quickly (and the games weren’t close at all for most of them)
Great tournament by the French crew overall, good decision to end the tournament on the old patch as well for the competitive integrity
A bit bummed for herO that he couldn’t win the second bo3 but I did not expect him to after that akward trophy lift.
Serral mentioned on his stream that herO apologized like 4 times after the tournament ended on top of what we saw live on the MoG II broadcast, so it really must have gotten to him despite the usual smile. I too think he lost the Bo3 at this moment, super sad that this happened.
Yeah, in those last 2 games, herO's play was off. Was it a language barrier thing, I get the feeling the koreans didn't have any clue what was going on, did they even know the patch before stepping into the game? I'm rly sad for the koreans. And the double elim sucks so much, I was definitely not convinced by the format that serral was the strongest player that day, thankfully he 3-1 herO earlier, so we can say that he at least won on overall score.
herO is the best, and is become my favourite player, but of course the coming patch will screw up all his hard work, and will probably retire a lot of protoss players.
This was actually a really sweet run by Serral, against some of if not the three all-time best Korean representatives of their respective races. 3-1 vs. Rogue, 4-0 against Maru (a classic at this point), and 6-5, cumulatively, against herO. And this is not to mention 2-0 against Percival and 3-0 against ShowTime earlier in the group stage.
On July 03 2026 17:55 kajtarp wrote: This finals absolutely shows why i hate the double elimination format.
If that’s the case herO wouldn’t even be in the finals since Serral already eliminated him in the upper bracket
The finals would just have been Serral 4-0 Maru
Yeah, I don't get the fuzz about this, except that it is of course unfortunate that herO was not aware of the bracket system. Many others have lost finals in the same way before, including literally Serral at the first edition of this exact tournament.
#12 Of course the players knew what the patch would be, we were in talks with them all the time since the announcement of the patch (11PM/midnight in EU) discussing instantly what our plan was (modding the game to play prepatch) and just waited on confirmation that it could be done in time.
I dont think language barrier played a role in anything but some difficult and cute answers in interview. People we're aware of the format, herO too, he just forgot in the heat of the moment, and while that's a shame, it is life and Yes would i have loved an admin nearby that could tell him before he lifted the trophy but it wasn't the case.
As for the format while we're always happy to rething and reiterate, that was the format for this edition. No way around it, if it wasn't double elim herO would'n even have been in the finals :D
And as #14 rightly pointed out, both players in the finals were top 4 of this exact same tournament last year while the reset hapenned aswell <3
Will do a proper post sometimes to give my feelings about the general event as i'm casting HSC currently and already late for the mixu/skillous series
Cheers guys, hope you enjoyed the tournament all the same !
On July 05 2026 01:18 FunKa wrote: Cheers guys, hope you enjoyed the tournament all the same !
Yeah man, this was an amazing tournament. Loved the vibe of the crowd, the venue and production, and of course the level of competition. Thank you so much for hosting this!
On July 03 2026 17:55 kajtarp wrote: This finals absolutely shows why i hate the double elimination format.
If that’s the case herO wouldn’t even be in the finals since Serral already eliminated him in the upper bracket
The finals would just have been Serral 4-0 Maru
I get it, with this format you can have a player theoretically going 5-2 in the finals and still 'lose'. In this case you can still do mental gymnastics like herO lost in the upper bracket to Serral so it's fair, but the player from the lower bracket may also get knocked down to the lower bracket by a different player, making the finals the first confrontation between the opponents. I feel like we just need to get one case like that, then everyone will realize how stupid that is, and we will never see double elimination in the finals again.
On July 03 2026 17:55 kajtarp wrote: This finals absolutely shows why i hate the double elimination format.
If that’s the case herO wouldn’t even be in the finals since Serral already eliminated him in the upper bracket
The finals would just have been Serral 4-0 Maru
I get it, with this format you can have a player theoretically going 5-2 in the finals and still 'lose'. In this case you can still do mental gymnastics like herO lost in the upper bracket to Serral so it's fair, but the player from the lower bracket may also get knocked down to the lower bracket by a different player, making the finals the first confrontation between the opponents. I feel like we just need to get one case like that, then everyone will realize how stupid that is, and we will never see double elimination in the finals again.
On July 03 2026 17:55 kajtarp wrote: This finals absolutely shows why i hate the double elimination format.
If that’s the case herO wouldn’t even be in the finals since Serral already eliminated him in the upper bracket
The finals would just have been Serral 4-0 Maru
I get it, with this format you can have a player theoretically going 5-2 in the finals and still 'lose'. In this case you can still do mental gymnastics like herO lost in the upper bracket to Serral so it's fair, but the player from the lower bracket may also get knocked down to the lower bracket by a different player, making the finals the first confrontation between the opponents. I feel like we just need to get one case like that, then everyone will realize how stupid that is, and we will never see double elimination in the finals again.
The better player won, people just need to deal with it.
We don’t need a loser bracket simple.
Should just need it simple, group stage —> playoff bracket single elimination
On July 03 2026 17:55 kajtarp wrote: This finals absolutely shows why i hate the double elimination format.
If that’s the case herO wouldn’t even be in the finals since Serral already eliminated him in the upper bracket
The finals would just have been Serral 4-0 Maru
I get it, with this format you can have a player theoretically going 5-2 in the finals and still 'lose'. In this case you can still do mental gymnastics like herO lost in the upper bracket to Serral so it's fair, but the player from the lower bracket may also get knocked down to the lower bracket by a different player, making the finals the first confrontation between the opponents. I feel like we just need to get one case like that, then everyone will realize how stupid that is, and we will never see double elimination in the finals again.
For my taste, I think 'true' double elim with 2x BO7's woulda been fine for this specific tournament since it was a one day event with an otherwise low # of series compared to what the SC2 scene is used to (8x BO5's was typical for WCS/IEM events).
On July 03 2026 17:55 kajtarp wrote: This finals absolutely shows why i hate the double elimination format.
If that’s the case herO wouldn’t even be in the finals since Serral already eliminated him in the upper bracket
The finals would just have been Serral 4-0 Maru
I get it, with this format you can have a player theoretically going 5-2 in the finals and still 'lose'. In this case you can still do mental gymnastics like herO lost in the upper bracket to Serral so it's fair, but the player from the lower bracket may also get knocked down to the lower bracket by a different player, making the finals the first confrontation between the opponents. I feel like we just need to get one case like that, then everyone will realize how stupid that is, and we will never see double elimination in the finals again.
The better player won, people just need to deal with it.
We don’t need a loser bracket simple.
Should just need it simple, group stage —> playoff bracket single elimination
It's not that simple. Double-Elim was clearly intended here to provide more games. Just for clarification, in this specific tournament, without Loser Bracket you would have lost SIX Bo7s between the best players in the world. Bo7s btw that all mattered and weren't useless group stage fluff.
As I said before: Double-Elim is a great format, it is just hard to get the finals right. "Bo7 into Bo3" is definetly not it though. But I'm biased, I dislike basically all Super-Advantages, except maybe when it is double Bo3
I am torn on this one... on one hand, this follow-up Bo3 seems like a hype-killer for the grand final everyone has been waiting for the entire tournament. On the other, it would be unfair to the upper bracket winner who didn't get any kind of compensation for not losing in the knockout stage, if nothing is done.
The grand final into reset-solution imo is anti-climactic and the ridiculous possibility described by Charoisaur is real.
Perhaps the solution with 1 game awarded as a free win for the uppet bracket qualifier is a better option?
But it is good to know that herO simply forgot in the heat of the moment. This information singles out the option that he only prepared for the Bo7 or had a disadvantage based on any kind of language barrier.
Anyway: Great crowd, great tournament. You can't please everyone... that's just how it is.
On July 03 2026 17:55 kajtarp wrote: This finals absolutely shows why i hate the double elimination format.
If that’s the case herO wouldn’t even be in the finals since Serral already eliminated him in the upper bracket
The finals would just have been Serral 4-0 Maru
I get it, with this format you can have a player theoretically going 5-2 in the finals and still 'lose'. In this case you can still do mental gymnastics like herO lost in the upper bracket to Serral so it's fair, but the player from the lower bracket may also get knocked down to the lower bracket by a different player, making the finals the first confrontation between the opponents. I feel like we just need to get one case like that, then everyone will realize how stupid that is, and we will never see double elimination in the finals again.
100%! It's clearly unfair...
The rules might be confusing, but I won't call it unfair. Serral lost one series in the play-off bracket, Hero lost two.
I would just extend tie-break to Bo5 instead of Bo3.
It's weird that people say double elim groups into a single elim bracket is fine but having a double elim ro4 and a single elim finals isn't. Group Stages are literally just a double elim bracket for the prior round, they are just presented differently but any tournament with double elim groups could be presented as a single bracket too. Meaning a player in the ro16 gets two lives but a player in the ro8 gets one life and no one complains about unfairness. It's just the tournament format. Doing the same with the ro4 -> top 2 could be treated exactly the same.
On July 03 2026 17:55 kajtarp wrote: This finals absolutely shows why i hate the double elimination format.
If that’s the case herO wouldn’t even be in the finals since Serral already eliminated him in the upper bracket
The finals would just have been Serral 4-0 Maru
I am well aware. Yesterdays homestory cup final was the same. I absolutely hate the double elim format. It removes any kind of upset/surprise potential out of the game. You can prepare amazing builds and surprise the big names as an underdog and all you achieve that you push them down to a loser bracket and they can just study and analyze the shit out of the replays and still win the rematch. It should have been a Serral victory over Maru and the HSC should have been a Clem win over Reynor.
Just remember past tournaments with an unexpected winner at the end from the past. Most would have been nullified with the double elim format.
Thank you Funka for the reply, you're right, and it was a great tournament.
On July 06 2026 01:51 JJH777 wrote: It's weird that people say double elim groups into a single elim bracket is fine but having a double elim ro4 and a single elim finals isn't. Group Stages are literally just a double elim bracket for the prior round, they are just presented differently but any tournament with double elim groups could be presented as a single bracket too. Meaning a player in the ro16 gets two lives but a player in the ro8 gets one life and no one complains about unfairness. It's just the tournament format. Doing the same with the ro4 -> top 2 could be treated exactly the same.
Good point. I always saw double elim as the best way to find the best two players of the tournament, you basically have double the chance, since the winner could have slayed the 2nd best player on his way.
But then once you've found your two best contenders to duke it out, you ruin it by adding caveats. But I also just think that our tournaments are so top heavy, or shallow, these days that we should rather want to see more upsets, instead of watching the same few duke it out again and again. That said, this also means that chance plays a bigger role. So, I prefer straight, or double elim with extended series, or double elim. qualifying into the grand finals.
I believe BSL fixes this issue by awarding the top bracket winner with 1 win going into the finals. Although the Bo3 seems more fair in allowing the winner to lose one match as well, imo it becomes a "dessert Bo3". Which is easily a hype killer if the main course was already excellent.
On July 09 2026 15:54 Peeano wrote: I believe BSL fixes this issue by awarding the top bracket winner with 1 win going into the finals. Although the Bo3 seems more fair in allowing the winner to lose one match as well, imo it becomes a "dessert Bo3". Which is easily a hype killer if the main course was already excellent.
I know I sound like a grumpy old man that isn't happy with anything, but on most days I think the +1 advantage is even worse than the "Super Advantage".
On July 09 2026 15:54 Peeano wrote: I believe BSL fixes this issue by awarding the top bracket winner with 1 win going into the finals. Although the Bo3 seems more fair in allowing the winner to lose one match as well, imo it becomes a "dessert Bo3". Which is easily a hype killer if the main course was already excellent.
I know I sound like a grumpy old man that isn't happy with anything, but on most days I think the +1 advantage is even worse than the "Super Advantage".
Which is? The locker bracket finalist playing a regular final vs the winner bracket finalist?
On July 09 2026 15:54 Peeano wrote: I believe BSL fixes this issue by awarding the top bracket winner with 1 win going into the finals. Although the Bo3 seems more fair in allowing the winner to lose one match as well, imo it becomes a "dessert Bo3". Which is easily a hype killer if the main course was already excellent.
I know I sound like a grumpy old man that isn't happy with anything, but on most days I think the +1 advantage is even worse than the "Super Advantage".
Which is? The locker bracket finalist playing a regular final vs the winner bracket finalist?
Apparently on Liquipedia playing a 2nd BoX is called "Super Advantage" now in WC3...guess I should have used "Bracket Reset" instead. I still think the best version is to just give either no advantage to the UB player or just give him a veto-advantage (like in Valorant).
The finals starts out as a Bo7. But if the player from the losers bracket wins the Bo7 the series is extended to a Bo9. That way the winners bracket player still gets an advantage (the opportunity to win sooner and a comeback potential). But nobody gets a free map and the losers bracket player can't go 5-2 map score in the finals and still lose.
If someone thinks this is stupid please let me know why since I am slightly inebriated and currently think it's a really good idea
The finals starts out as a Bo7. But if the player from the losers bracket wins the Bo7 the series is extended to a Bo9. That way the winners bracket player still gets an advantage (the opportunity to win sooner and a comeback potential). But nobody gets a free map and the losers bracket player can't go 5-2 map score in the finals and still lose.
If someone thinks this is stupid please let me know why since I am slightly inebriated and currently think it's a really good idea
Ooo, I actually rather like this! Granted, it's a lot to ask of the players, but more content for the fans regardless.
Yeah, I like it, but from bo7 to bo9 is only 1 win difference, so if you come from bo3's or bo5's from the lower's bracket, going from bo7 to bo11, or bo13 makes more sense. Bo9 only makes sense if loser's bracket is bo1 like the rotto weekly.
I guess it's a slippery slope to wanting every series to be an extended series, if two ppl meet. But then I don't have anything against that.
The finals starts out as a Bo7. But if the player from the losers bracket wins the Bo7 the series is extended to a Bo9. That way the winners bracket player still gets an advantage (the opportunity to win sooner and a comeback potential). But nobody gets a free map and the losers bracket player can't go 5-2 map score in the finals and still lose.
If someone thinks this is stupid please let me know why since I am slightly inebriated and currently think it's a really good idea
The idea isn't bad. It is in the same vain as what MLG did with their "Extended Series" concept. Basically, every match was a Bo3, but every rematch immediately became a Bo7, but they kept the score from the first series. So if A wins 2:1 against B in the first round and they meet again in the finals, it is a Bo7, but the score starts at 2:1 (and I think the Mapvetos were also kept?)
The "bad" thing about your concept, in my opinion, is that it isn't clear form the start what the modi of the Finals are. Of course you can say "the modus is clear, if A loses the Bo7, it becomes a Bo9 instead", but that is, in my feeling, still changing the modus operandi for the Finals DURING the finals. The beauty of the veto idea (and even the one beautfy of the 1:0 leading start) is that all the advantages happen BEFORE the kickoff of the first map. So when the first map starts, everyone is on the same playing field and technically the match is the same for both players. There isn't an "unlock"-moment, were something specific happens and because of that the "rules change", if that makes sense.
Also, another series can't be taken into the finals, if the two players never met before (like Clem / Serral at HSC). But extending the series if the Bo7 is won by the lower bracket finalist seems okish.
Agreed, it would force you to play a veto'ed map, but that is probably also true for the opponent, as the last maps to be played in a Bo9 usually would be the first vetos from both sides.
Edit: My bad, I see the other comments you're replying to now. Ignore this bit please:
//I'm not following Premo, how does whether they met before enter into it? To my understanding the premise is once the double elim playoffs start, all players should have 2 lives. Has nothing to do with whether they met before.//
To be honest I do prefer the bo7 -> bo3 format for double elim brackets, I believe it maximizes fairness while keeping the finals from bloating into 12+ maps. However, I would prefer to see more single elim brackets. I think if you want to pad your tournament run time, you should do so in the earlier rounds. It would also allow for more distinct players to win tournaments. We've seen how rare it is for Serral to lose 2 sets in a day.
Anyway, congrats to herO, I mean Serral! Man that trophy lift was brutal
On July 11 2026 02:28 ejozl wrote: Yeah, I like it, but from bo7 to bo9 is only 1 win difference, so if you come from bo3's or bo5's from the lower's bracket, going from bo7 to bo11, or bo13 makes more sense. Bo9 only makes sense if loser's bracket is bo1 like the rotto weekly.
I guess it's a slippery slope to wanting every series to be an extended series, if two ppl meet. But then I don't have anything against that.
Yeah I thought about that 1 map difference too, but then I thought a Bo11 or more would be too much to ask of the players and casters, especially with the possibility that they actually have to play 11 maps!
There's just something distasteful about this advantage in the finals. Imagine Katowice winner takes all 100k, sOs vs. herO finals, sOs has come from the winners bracket making him the heavy favourite to take home the 100k, and thereby creating less hype. Because of this, he starts the series with a 2-1 adv. in their bo7. Bam! 2 proxy 2-gates in a row, and herO is out, kk thx bye, see you at blizzcon folks.
League of legends spoiler: In the most important international LoL tournament besides the world championship, the winner’s bracket team ended up losing in the finals (they beat HLE 3-1 in winner, then lost 2-3 in the grand finals, so HLE could afford to lose a bo5 while the BLG team from winner’s bracket were eliminated after just one, and with a combined 5w-4l record vs HLE). In the case of LoL, a bracket reset is probably not feasible because a bo5 can last around 5 hours (breaks included), even another bo3 would be far too long. But no advantage can feel very unfair
For sc2 I think bo3 after bracket reset is fine, or 1 map advantage. Double bo7 is probably far too long. Complicated issue though, because scheduling can become a nightmare with bracket reset
On July 14 2026 03:32 Poopi wrote: League of legends spoiler: In the most important international LoL tournament besides the world championship, the winner’s bracket team ended up losing in the finals (they beat HLE 3-1 in winner, then lost 2-3 in the grand finals, so HLE could afford to lose a bo5 while the BLG team from winner’s bracket were eliminated after just one, and with a combined 5w-4l record vs HLE). In the case of LoL, a bracket reset is probably not feasible because a bo5 can last around 5 hours (breaks included), even another bo3 would be far too long. But no advantage can feel very unfair
For sc2 I think bo3 after bracket reset is fine, or 1 map advantage. Double bo7 is probably far too long. Complicated issue though, because scheduling can become a nightmare with bracket reset
But as with most things, it is all about adaptation. In LoL, internationally Double-Elim is relatively new, but it is pretty standard in a lot of seasons. So the fans and players are used to not getting any advantages except for an extra day of preparation. And I think it is the same in DotA 2 with the TI, isn't it?
There are of course always voices and comments, but I don't think the "missing" advantage in the Finals has ever been a big concern in the game.
EPT![[image loading]](/staff/Waxangel/misc/motg/motg2bracket.png)
![[image loading]](/staff/Waxangel/misc/motg/heromotgmistake.jpg)
