EPTLet's have a look at a few such instances from the past two seasons where two players who had played each other before did meet. The scores listed are that of their first series, second series, and total score for the night. The advancing player is listed on the left. The better player is assumed to be the winner of the final score.
Highlighted in blue are nights where the better player came within a game of not advancing to the next round.
Highlighted in green are nights where the players were tied on final score, but only one of them advanced to the next round.
Highlighted in red are nights where the better player did not advance to the next round.
GSL 2012 Season 1 (round-of-32 + round-of-16):
Mvp 2-0 Lucky
Mvp 2-1 Lucky
Mvp 4-1 Lucky
GuMiho 2-0 Mvp
GuMiho 2-1 Mvp
GuMiho 4-1 Mvp
MMA 2-1 Oz
MMA 2-1 Oz
MMA 4-2 Oz
PartinG 2-1 Jjakji
PartinG 2-0 Jjakji
PartinG 4-1 Jjakji
Genius 0-2 MarineKing
Genius 2-1 MarineKing
Genius 2-3 MarineKing
GSL 2012 Season 2 (round-of-32):
TaeJa 1-2 Jjakji
TaeJa 2-0 Jjakji
TaeJa 3-2 Jjakji
HerO 2-1 Curious
HerO 2-0 Curious
HerO 4-1 Curious
Mvp 2-0 Ryung
Mvp 0-2 Ryung
Mvp 2-2 Ryung
Oz 0-2 Fin
Oz 2-0 Fin
Oz 2-2 Fin
Mvp 2-0 Lucky
Mvp 2-1 Lucky
Mvp 4-1 Lucky
GuMiho 2-0 Mvp
GuMiho 2-1 Mvp
GuMiho 4-1 Mvp
MMA 2-1 Oz
MMA 2-1 Oz
MMA 4-2 Oz
PartinG 2-1 Jjakji
PartinG 2-0 Jjakji
PartinG 4-1 Jjakji
Genius 0-2 MarineKing
Genius 2-1 MarineKing
Genius 2-3 MarineKing
GSL 2012 Season 2 (round-of-32):
TaeJa 1-2 Jjakji
TaeJa 2-0 Jjakji
TaeJa 3-2 Jjakji
HerO 2-1 Curious
HerO 2-0 Curious
HerO 4-1 Curious
Mvp 2-0 Ryung
Mvp 0-2 Ryung
Mvp 2-2 Ryung
Oz 0-2 Fin
Oz 2-0 Fin
Oz 2-2 Fin
Blue: For example, it's unfair to Mvp (in Mvp 4-1 Lucky) that he comes within a game of elimination even though, by final score, he is decidedly better than Lucky.
Green: By final score, these players were tied at the end and to be fair to both players, additional games should be played until the better player is determined.
Red: The worst one of them all. MarineKing, in total, was actually 3-2 over Genius in his round-of-16 group of death which also had DongRaeGu and NesTea. Yet, it was Genius who advanced, eventually all the way to the finals.
It is proposed that an extended series rule be implemented. Players who have met before should play a best-of-seven series starting with the results from their previous meeting.
Thoughts?
Poll: Extended series in GSL groups?
No, the system is fair as it is (666)
82%
No, the system is unfair but extended series is not the solution (76)
9%
Yes, it would be more fair to the players (66)
8%
808 total votes
No, the system is unfair but extended series is not the solution (76)
Yes, it would be more fair to the players (66)
808 total votes
Your vote: Extended series in GSL groups?
(Vote): Yes, it would be more fair to the players
(Vote): No, the system is fair as it is
(Vote): No, the system is unfair but extended series is not the solution
Bazinga's example hits the nail right on the head.
On April 15 2012 09:28 Bazinga wrote:
The point is that it considers each players performance in the groups till that point, discarding the first match between both players does not. I hope i can explain it by the following example:
Player A, B, C and D are playing in the groups
C won against D and B
D lost against C and A
A lost against B but won against D
B won against A but lost against C
So the group standings are now:
C 2-0
A 1-1
B 1-1
D 0-2
At this point the only players that are left to be evaluated are A and B and in order to do that you have to determine which one of both players is better.
There are a few ways of doing this:
The first option would be to say that B already won against A so B should advance. This is the worst option because it results in less content.
The second option would be discarding the first evaluation of A vs B and starting anew, which can be done and is a valid way of determining the better of both players. The problem here is that you are not rewarding player B for his win in the first game, but you are instead punishing him because he had to play C, the tougher opponent, in his 2nd match, while A had to play D, the worst player in this group.
The third option would be using an extended series format to determine the order of Player A and B more accurately than with another bo3.
From the player standpoint this should be the favored option because it rewards the overall better player.
As a viewer you get the 2-5 more games which means likely more content.
The point is that it considers each players performance in the groups till that point, discarding the first match between both players does not. I hope i can explain it by the following example:
Player A, B, C and D are playing in the groups
C won against D and B
D lost against C and A
A lost against B but won against D
B won against A but lost against C
So the group standings are now:
C 2-0
A 1-1
B 1-1
D 0-2
At this point the only players that are left to be evaluated are A and B and in order to do that you have to determine which one of both players is better.
There are a few ways of doing this:
The first option would be to say that B already won against A so B should advance. This is the worst option because it results in less content.
The second option would be discarding the first evaluation of A vs B and starting anew, which can be done and is a valid way of determining the better of both players. The problem here is that you are not rewarding player B for his win in the first game, but you are instead punishing him because he had to play C, the tougher opponent, in his 2nd match, while A had to play D, the worst player in this group.
The third option would be using an extended series format to determine the order of Player A and B more accurately than with another bo3.
From the player standpoint this should be the favored option because it rewards the overall better player.
As a viewer you get the 2-5 more games which means likely more content.
