|
|
I like the idea but Bonyth's format seems to reward and penalize a little too much. I would propose using his format but removing one layer as follows:
#1 and #2 are seeded into RO4 automatically #5 vs. #8 and #6 vs. #7 will produce 2 winners, who will fight seeds #3 and #4. Two winners of this round will move on to RO4
This way, you still have reward/penalty for seeding but the top seed needs to play more than once to take the championship.
|
Bulgaria750 Posts
On November 27 2019 07:30 Jaeyun wrote: I like the idea but Bonyth's format seems to reward and penalize a little too much. I would propose using his format but removing one layer as follows:
#1 and #2 are seeded into RO4 automatically #5 vs. #8 and #6 vs. #7 will produce 2 winners, who will fight seeds #3 and #4. Two winners of this round will move on to RO4
This way, you still have reward/penalty for seeding but the top seed needs to play more than once to take the championship. This is a solid idea.
|
On the other hand, please remember, that all teams are gonna keep playing for 12 weeks, twelve weeks. Now imagine being the top 1 team with undefeated record and then you lose a match in the play-offs. Now the question, does the team deserve to be placed as #2 team or #3-4 team in the end?
I think the best system depends on the lenght of the initial swiss round format. If it lasted 4 weeks then sure, single elimination format would be probably the best. But here we are with as many as 12 rounds, rewards for top teams are needed. We may also want to think what's better for casting and creating hype.
Which system is better? Start voting now!
|
top1 team not surprising :D
|
On November 27 2019 08:57 Bonyth wrote: On the other hand, please remember, that all teams are gonna keep playing for 12 weeks, twelve weeks. Now imagine being the top 1 team with undefeated record and then you lose a match in the play-offs. Now the question, does the team deserve to be placed as #2 team or #3-4 team in the end?
totally right. Team should be rewarded by Good perfomance in the regular season.
|
On November 27 2019 07:30 Jaeyun wrote: I like the idea but Bonyth's format seems to reward and penalize a little too much. I would propose using his format but removing one layer as follows:
#1 and #2 are seeded into RO4 automatically #5 vs. #8 and #6 vs. #7 will produce 2 winners, who will fight seeds #3 and #4. Two winners of this round will move on to RO4
This way, you still have reward/penalty for seeding but the top seed needs to play more than once to take the championship. very good idea, this is the best format imo
|
On November 27 2019 10:30 XenOsky wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2019 08:57 Bonyth wrote: On the other hand, please remember, that all teams are gonna keep playing for 12 weeks, twelve weeks. Now imagine being the top 1 team with undefeated record and then you lose a match in the play-offs. Now the question, does the team deserve to be placed as #2 team or #3-4 team in the end?
totally right. Team should be rewarded by Good perfomance in the regular season. I agree completely. This is how it was done back in the Proleague days too.
Jaeyun's format seems like the best idea to me
|
Norway28240 Posts
I also like jaeyuns suggestion a lot.
Tourneys should be a mix of excitement and fairness, not just the latter, imo.
|
|
what happened to the Mexico-A team btw? I can't find them anywhere in the standings.. they played week 1 but then nothing after that.. weird.
|
On November 27 2019 07:30 Jaeyun wrote: I like the idea but Bonyth's format seems to reward and penalize a little too much. I would propose using his format but removing one layer as follows:
#1 and #2 are seeded into RO4 automatically #5 vs. #8 and #6 vs. #7 will produce 2 winners, who will fight seeds #3 and #4. Two winners of this round will move on to RO4
This way, you still have reward/penalty for seeding but the top seed needs to play more than once to take the championship.
This is by far the fairest and probably best suggestion for the playoffs imo. I see several comments in support of Jaeyun's proposal. Let's include that in the vote or maybe at least consider it as part of the available options.
|
|
|
|