respect if you read all of that
Lets just get a swiss system bo5, no upsets. easy.
Well I think the international works pretty well, no one complains about it, 2 round robin groups composed by 9 teams, top 4 from each group go into upper bracket, the last is eliminated, and the others go to lower bracket. Double elimination for ones topping their groups and a bo5 final
Swiss BO3 is the best system, but the one we had at this Major is still a (very) good one.
what if they implement a team rating thing, where top 10 teams the past like lets say 6 months have been consistently in the 10 get invites to major without needing to qualify
Many factors contributed to the increasing tensions amongst the great powers of Europe and the beginning of WWI. In your opinion, which event or ideology had the greatest impact on the beginning of the First World War? While there can be many answers to this question, your grade will be dependent on your persuasive writing and the displaying of facts and examples to support your thesis. Be sure to cite any outside sources using the MLA style.
swiss is not bad, swiss is the a great system JUST NOT BO1!
2 options imo:
1. Do it like the International (+ bo5 final!!!!!!)
2. Swiss bo3 (you could start 2 matches at the same time or play from monday to sunday which wouldnt have been a problem at all)
The draws which some people saw as "unfair" werent, the system is transparent and if NIP, NaVi ... had won their first matches or even not lost it that hard it would have been another story!
I know what you mean and personally i'm a decent fan of the Swiss system atm (bo3 would be better). but you said to compare it with other sport tournaments so here we go.
Champions League in football has Group stage first, which is basicaly 3 bo2 "games" to determine top4 spots. After that there's a seedings draw of playoffs, which is another set of bo2 (in csgo terms we can say bo3 tbh) matches to determine the winner across 2 games, not just 1, and that's the best way to run a tournament.
In tennis you have bo3 or bo5 matches across the entire tournament (bo3 for every tournament and bo5 in grand slams) so each match can last over 5h easily... and its' the same in most sports.
So you can't say that other sports have bo1s and it works, because almost no sports have bo1 games to determine who goes through, even in qualifications there's bo2 in football and bo3-5 in tennis/volleyball/basketball/handball or whatever sport :) The only bo1 match is the grand final, and even then some sports in USA mainly have bo5 system in place....
they should just stop with vetoes. every team should veto only ONE map per team, this way,the selected map would be a surprise. so every team would work properly for everymap. no more "bad luck". just veto your worst map and that's it.
swiss bo3 is good but is too long and have a lot of boring games, but major needs a bo5 final for sure
All I want is remove bo1s, if the event would take too long then play 2 or even 3 games at the same time.
i was just thinking, what would happen if major had 32 teams and it took the World Cup system?
I ain't reading this, but I agree, it fucking sucks
I found it pretty fine.
I think a huge problem comes down to the way the teams themselves approach the format. Seems way to often the favorite team takes a huge underdog lightly, gets upset, and screws the seedings. They need to start taking bo1 seriously, get the underdogs off of their best maps (seriously, when a team makes it through on one map it has nothing to do with the system, and is entirely the fault of the opponents. Pay attention and get them off they map they are winning on), and get the egos in check.
As if Valve would care if they'd change the initial seedings to hltv.org ranking standards.
Retards always go "oh seedings cant change valve doesnt allow". Wtf is valve gonna do when the major is a week away and the seedings have changed ? Cancel major? The investment of these guys into CS:GO is SO INCREDIBLY minimal that they wouldn't even notice (if they did notice and actually cared about CS:GO, THEYD CHANGE THE FECKING SEEDINGS THEMSELVES)
ANY system will be ruined by valves initial seeding of Na'Vi challenger (=pot3) and Quantum shittator fire legend (=pot2), whatever you come up with will be ruined by the retarded valve-seeding from 6 months ago.
So step one is changing the seedings, unite and get it changed, not hard. No point changing anything until then.
p.s. proper seeding + full b03 double elimination bracket (fuck groups) would be amazing and would potentially make up the best storylines, teams fighting it out coming all the way out of the loserbracket is epic. Only 3 legends btw, 8 legends is ridiculous, 3 would make the 3rd place decider match just as epic as the final.
Fact is, if Valve cared about CS:GO and made its majors like The International we would have many more tier 1 and 2 teams, much more variety of regions and many more historical moments to remember of. If Dota 2 can get funds for a $25 million prize pool from selling compediuns, so can Cs:go if there where in game microtransactions that added to the prize, not only the stickers. How nice it'd be if we where rewarded in skins for playing during the major, guessing which player would be the MVP of each map, or who will get the most Aces, how many of them would we see, how long would the longest overtime be... etc.
a system where you dont have a 5 day pause between bo1 games
Dota's TI system is the best imo
Not a long bo3, not a random bo1, ties are ok if teams both win their picks, makes sense
And then you have 2/1 chance(s) in PO, depends on how good you were in the group
the system is good if the team i support wins, that's it.
no legends spots, every team has to qualify, only BO3 games in a simple bracket, team that wins moves on to next round.
seed teams into brackets according to their spot in the qualifier. number 1 in one qualifier plays vs worst team from another qualifier in the 1st round, etc.
this format is the least random you can do without playing either GSL format with BO3s which would take too long, or full round robin which also takes too long even with only BO1s
Swiss is always shit, but what would help: (And Bucholz made it worse)
Stop seeding based on the major happend 6 month ago.
Stop force seeding "legends" against qualified teams.
Either develop an valve ranking system based on the last 6 months performance or, if lazy, use HLTV ranking (all events use hltv stats anyway).
And bring back random maps. Sorry, but only way to stop shit teams abusing having shallow Bo1 mappool with never being able to play Bo3.
A group stage consisting of mainly bo1's where teams have had weeks or months to prepare, together with matching them with "Legends" that performed a lifetime ago as a different roster, if just a recipe for creating a perfect storm of upsets.
And that's why we're probably going to have a set of completely boring quarter finals like the ones we watched yesterday with BIG and CoL.
Just use the same thing that football (soccer for fatties) have for years, seed the best teams to go to different groups, the second seeds also goes to different groups and onward.
After this, do BO2 against each team, a winner gets 3 points, a draw 1 point, and lose 0 points, the best 2 teams go forth (in case of draw use round/kills to decide who goes next), the second best team for each group plays against the 1st of other group.
This freaking works.
Now to be even better, teams should have a championship to enter the major so we have an accurate seeding before the major, could go on through about how to do this but this will never freaking happen
nip fans are all 12 year old children it's expected of them to cry
32 teams, double elimination, like back old days
back to GSL? when u draw against m16r (legend) and navi (challenger) in a group, u have no chance to go through it?
i dont get the point that nip fans complain about their draws. i would agree that they will advance if they had better luck, but then another team would say that theyre robbed. theyre just near the line of top8 in this event, so its quite acceptable theyre in or out.
astralis beat m16r, so i can say astralis is way more stronger than brazilians. if mibr is qualified, then astrais [deserves] a quaterfinal spot. however nip lost to mibr, how can they say that nip deserves a spot? it nip desreves a quarterfinal spot, then what m16r deserves, a semifinal spot? well then, we should just send the cup to astralis, no need to play the rest?
it should be a common sense that team A losing 2-16 to team H and team B losing 10-16 to team H dont necessarily means team B can win against team A. a match, and a tournament is won by a team who wins it in actual games. if u judge "nip do have a shapes that deserves Elite Eight spot, lets put them in", then why dont we do the same with "team C have the best form now, so we just award them the champion, dont waste more time"?
any tournament system that has draw needs luck. the only way to decide a champion with no luck is putting all teams in a round-robin. its impossible to use this form unless u just let a few teams to participate in. this would raise more argue like " a 8-team major with a tier 3765 asian team but without nip is sh*t". but if u put like 16 or 24 teams in the round robin, that needs a lot more time and matches, and produces a lot of matches between weak teams that audiences dont want to watch.
even this cant guarantee "totally fair", cuz how do u decide the best 16 teams in this tournament? like, EU has 9 spots and NA has 7 spots, then u would argue "why NA #8 isnt in while a weaker EU #9 is in?" to guarantee the "totally fair" u want, u should put all teams (yes, all teams in the world) in this tournament so that everyone gets fair chance.
in fact, almost all mainstream sports tournaments (final stage) use single elimination (may or may not with drawn groups) system, and all matches are bo1. this is proven the best possible way for a tournament, and its enough. no matter you are Roger, Rafael or any noname, the system is so simple and fair to every player in the main event: whoever wins 7 bo1 matches, wins the grand slam.
there were so many, and there will be more players who meet the final winner too early and end up in a low rank.
there were so many, and there will be more players who get a lucky draw all the way through to the later rounds or even finals.
there were so many, and there will be more best players and teams that get upset in bo1 matches and lose champions.
there were so many, and there will be more teams drawn in a death group and pack up in the group stage.
no one says we should use another system. we just admit luck and go forward. cuz we know two rules:
if you are better than your opponent, you should win against him.
if you are better than any other opponents, you should win the champion.
GSL is still a million times better regardless.
Use swiss System based on hltv ranking
I wouldn't say tennis is a good comparison for bo1 but yeah, I think it's the best system