Thread has been deleted
Last comment
The lower bracket team already has the disadvantage of having to play more games, why should they have a further disadvantage by the time they get to the finals. Upper bracket teams just want an extra advantage because they stayed in the upper bracket, whoopdefuckindo. The upper bracket should be a safety net, not an advantage going into the final. If you're the upper bracket team and you're the better team then prove it in the finals.
TL;DR: Low brack team have no fair, up brack team 2 ez (unless Vitality).
(unless you're a french team)
Or g2, let's just say unless you are French :)
1 reply
True lol
3 replies
You are right and this format is reatarded.
/closed
Dont lose so you dont have to go from lower bracket. Easy as that lol
8 replies
Yeah but somebody has to come from the lower bracket with this format...shouldn't the final be between the last two upper bracket teams and the lower bracket match for 3rd?
5 replies
it's like saying: you need to breath oxygen if you want to keep living. pointing such a dumb obvious thing out... I'm obviously referring to this dumb gla1ve fanboy
2 replies
Having an entire lower bracket just to figure out who is third is unnecessary
1 reply
Kinda true
stupid and plain argument. didn't expect anything else with this flair
retarded
Normally id agree but in qualifier tournament its fair ,in normal tournament i dont like it
You lost once - the other team didn't. Getting one map for that is more than fair.
34 replies
Isn't losing and having to drop to the lower bracket already enough of a punishment?
33 replies
"having to drop to the lower bracket already enough of a punishment?"
how on earth is that a punishment? they would be already out in like all other formats...thats not punishment at all
15 replies
Because they have to play two extra series' without the safety net of being in the upper bracket. Really the whole format is fucked. The lower bracket shouldn't lead to the final at all.
11 replies
im not saying that this format is good but playing more series isnt really punishment bcs like i already said they would be already out otherwise...i mean how on earth is 2nd chance to reach final and win whole event that they would not have in other formats a punishment?
9 replies
This isn't other formats though, it's double elimination and I maintain that both it, and the map advantage are dumb. Why make a tournament format that blemishes the final like that?
8 replies
you have to give team from upper bracket some advantage tho...not saying that whole map is good but there just has to be some kind of advantage
7 replies
Like I said they have the advantage of not having to play as many matches so they have more time to prep, practice and relax. Why do they deserve more than that? This is it's own format so what would happen in single elimination is of no relevance here.
6 replies
no, i just disagree. thats not an advantage. thats second chance for team from lower bracket. 2 different things.
5 replies
How is having more time to prep, practice and chill not an advantage?? At this level, especially, a lot of CS is mental. And you didn't answer my question why they deserve any more of an advantage than that?
4 replies
because they went through upper bracket without single loss? thats how this system always worked in cs since like 1.5 already.
and yes, if team has a second chance that they wouldnt have otherwise in other formats then they should be punished somehow(again, not saying that they should be instantly 1:0 down but maybe something in veto like team from upper bracket can pick first map before bans or something)
3 replies
If a team has won every match on the lead up to the final, all they need to do is win in the final too, it's not like they deserve some extra advantage IMO. I'm fine with the upper bracket team getting a Veto advantage, though. At least that's not as farcical as a map advantage.
2 replies
Veto advantage sounds good idea cause being 1-0 before the game starts is too much. They should be rewarded something tho cause going upper bracket you will most likely face a team you have already beaten before so it would be idiotic system if throughout the tournament upper bracket team has beaten all and in final they meet the team they already had beaten 2-0 and who should be out of the tournament rallies and manages to win 2-1 just by being a little lucky and magically starting to pop heads. I myself however find swiss system the best tho and bo3 finals better than bo5 although bo5 aint that bad.
1 reply
I mean, they only need to beat them again lol but that's fair enough, a veto advantage is a good middle grounds.
If there would not be the map disadvantage for coming out of the lower bracket, teams could just loose one game early in the tournament to go to the lower bracket, then play weaker teams to get in the final more easily. To prevent teams from doing this there is the "reward" for getting into the finals without being defeated in the playoffs.
This.
That Liquid fan is completely wrong.
2 replies
Hello mens)) I saw a comment you made 2 years ago hltv.org/matches/2318865/luminosity-vs-m..
I just think its really cool that you kept your misfits flair and suggested the addition of zywoo to the team before he become a star
1 reply
Yeah, thank you.
Almost 2 and a half years ago (late January 2018), time flies :(
Pretty crazy seeing that ZywOo directly joined a strong team with Vitality and not a Tier 3 team or something to make the step between french scene (WySix and aAa) and the international one with the tier 1-2 events (even though Vitality builded their success from inferior leagues/tourneys, not starting from the Pro League it was a team with famous players with strong careers).
Who would have thought he would earn the #1 ranking in his first pro year, crazy ...
shox didn't want to make him join his team (G2 at the time) because he believed he was cheating, so when G2 was struggling and Vitality was reaching new heights it must have been quite "awkward" for shox in G2, seeing that ZywOo was doing bettr than him.
Sad to see that seangares is not in a good team anymore, that we don't see Shahzam anymore, (he kept playing on good teams like complexity for quite some time though), that devoduvek completely disappeared unlike AmaNek.
Have a nice day, and stay safe from Covid ;)
No, because sometimes teams have done that on purpose in sports and such so that they dont have as hard a time to the finals, and can focus on preping for whoever they think will be in finals.
4 replies
Throw away the safety net of being in the upper bracket to have to play more matches before the final...seems legit.
except usually the team in the upper bracket has an extra day of free time while the team in the lower bracket has to play, giving the team in the upper bracket an advantage in terms of preparation time.
I see your argument, but I don't think it applies in CS, where the lower bracket can be equally challenging due to unexpected upsets and where matches are played so closely after one another.
2 replies
+1
It especially applies in CS bc teams lose all the time bc they prepped for number 1 then lost to number 2/3 right before finals.
How is that fair for the winning team?
The benefit of the lower braccket is that you are not out like in a normal KO stage.
The system isn't fucked it just sounds like you are a fan of Gen.G.
Why is playing more matches because you lost and should be out unfair? And what does it have to do with a final where both teams come in, one of them unbeaten, and the other not.
11 replies
I never said having to play more matches in the lower bracket is unfair, I'm saying adding a map disadvantage on top of that is unfair. It's fair for the winning team because the lower bracket team is already disadvantaged from dropping to the lower bracket, see #45 and #58. Also I'm actually more of an EG fan than Gen G. I've just always felt the map advantage is dumb and kills BO5s for me.
10 replies
It literally was the first sentence you openend the threat with: "The lower bracket team already has the disadvantage of having to play more games"
And again: What is the benefit of the winning team in your thougts? Do you think the fact that they played a match more is completely taking out their energy so that they can't play to the same level a day later? Come on....
9 replies
I said it's a disadvantage, I didn't say it's unfair, there's a big difference. And obviously I'm not saying it takes out all their energy it just means they have less time to prep, practice and relax, so it's its even. They don't need to be punished beyond that just because they would've been out in a different system. This is it's own system and having a team come into every GF a map down is just plain dumb and feels lame.
8 replies
Really really weak argumentation. Unfair not the same as diadvantage...yes sure but if I need to quote you completely I will do so:
"The lower bracket team already has the disadvantage of having to play more games, why should they have a further disadvantage by the time they get to the finals." - you are talking about it being unfair here. Don't try to wiggle out of that.
less time to prep....the other team doesn't know the opponent yet - so there is no difference in prep time - and before you say "but they could just prep for both teams" - watch some interviews, no team does that. So your entire argument is now: "It's unfair because the winning team already had a day to relax"
Also:
> Other systems are different so they con't be compared
> I like my Bo5s without map advantage like in all other systems!
pick one
7 replies
That isn't my argument at all. Unfair is adding a map disadvantage on top of the the extra match(es) they have to play. The point about prep, though, is fair enough.
And if I were to pick a format it would just be traditional single elimination playoffs but, again, I never said the two formats can't be compared I was just saying "in a different format they would be already be out" is a bullshit reason to ruin every BO5 final with a map advantage. The lower bracket team carries no advantage into the final that warrants a map disadvantage. In the case that they're playing the team that knocked them out of the upper bracket in the first place, a veto advantage to the upper bracket team is more appropriate but not a map advantage.
The next argument you bring try not skewing my words and putting shit in my mouth. What are you, the media?
6 replies
No I am not the media, but you partially use the same argument to attack one part of the system and then don't allow it when its not fitting with your argument. I am not twisting your words I am taking them quite liteally especially the "They don't need to be punished beyond that just because they would've been out in a different system. This is it's own system" If it is its own system why can't they change the final format to fit the double elimination concept better?
Also I fully disagree with your premise that the lower bracket team did not have an advantage. They are not out and are allowed to rematch.
The case that they play against the team that knocked them out is the perfect example FOR this system, because the map advantage the winning team gained in the frist match is basically transferred into the final making it a BO7 over 2 matches.
I get that you don't like the Bo5 final with a 1:0 going into it, but arguing it does not make sense in the context of the entire tournament system is something I have an issue with
5 replies
Where did I use the format argument to attack one part of the system? You're the one who put words in my mouth insinuating I said "I like my Bo5s without map advantage like in all other systems". Tell me where the I said anything like that? The closest thing to that I said is that "I've just always felt the map advantage is dumb and kills BO5s for me." in #73. You should write headlines with the way you twist words bro.
Also I literally just addressed your second point in #108, I'm just going to paste it so I don't have to type it again "The lower bracket team carries no advantage into the final that warrants a map disadvantage. In the case that they're playing the team that knocked them out of the upper bracket in the first place, a veto advantage to the upper bracket team is more appropriate but not a map advantage."
It doesn't make sense because the punishment far outweighs the crime. IMO a map veto advantage would be much more appropriate and wouldn't ruin the spectacle anything like as much.
4 replies
to the last two parapgraphs: Thats why I said I disagree with the premise. I see why you say it - but I disagree. I think if a team wins 2:1 in the semi and they play the same team in the final because they were allowed to continue then they should not need to start from 0:0 again.
To the first: Wait, what? your entire point is that you don't want the map advantage for one team, I liteally say exactly that and thats wrong as well?? Now I feel like you are trolling.
Regarding the format point, I was referring to #30 where you insist that this isn't another format though (forbidding a comparison from #28) and then continuing to say that the format is stupid because of the final setup. This for me is hypocritical. Either you allow a comparison to another format - or you treat it as its full own entitiy and just focus on the internal logic. Which you didn't do (see #25)
I don't put words in your mouth, I try to see your posts as a whole as far as I am aware of them and make connections between them.
If I misinterpret something you say by doing that I apologize
3 replies
I was saying that the argument that a team should be punished because they would've already been out in another format doesn't make sense because this isn't another format and my other points are just about fixing whats wrong with this format (if it's going to be used). I'm not sure how that qualifies as being hypocritical.
As far as your first point is concerned; It's a different series and it's the final no less. I don't see why every game which two teams play against each other in playoffs should be treated as a single series but I suppose we could agree to disagree on that point?
2 replies
Okay then maybe I read too much into it, your statement that the lower bracket path shouldn't lead to the final was for me again changing the format to a different one.
Yep, that was what I meant ;)
1 reply
Oh I gotcha, yeah lol I was sort of between BO5 only using a single elimination format or this format not having the map advantage, in the end I settled on the veto advantage if this format were to be used, I see how you were confused now.
The Map Advantage needs to stay because just then BIG has a challenge in the Grand Final.
At the moment BIG is always throwing the UB Final on purpose to win the BO5 with a disadvantage just to have some kind of a challenge if they would go through the Upper Bracket all the time it would just be 3:0s in the Grand Finals.
#BIGTOP1
#BIGERA
4 replies
1 reply
WE ARE THE BEST
WE ARE TOP 1
WE SMART
WE LOYAL
WE FRIENDLY
WE RESPECTFUL
#GoBIG
LETS GO BUG CLAN
wow how precisely said, I like it
1 reply
omg ffs this dumb obvious pointing. the world isn't black and white it's grey. ffs learn to differentiate..
double elimination is good map advantage is fucking dumb
BO5 map advantage is a good thing
if it wasn't there why would you want to go through the upper bracket facing off the best teams when you can just drop down to the lower bracket and go up against trash teams kekw
1 reply
>safety net
>not having to play as many matches so more time for practice, prep and R&R
>not having to go up against potentially decent rising teams you didn't prep as well for
...didn't know if you were trolling or not so I answered anyway lol
I mean BIG has proven twice now that the map advantage really doesn't matter, atleast against G2 and Zywhotality
Big fat +1
I could argue that the one map advantage is actually a psychological disadvantage. you come into the match, havent played one round yet and already are in the mindset of "better not choke" because, you are 1 map up already, but not earned. you see where im coming from?
10 replies
I get what you're trying to say but, if anything, having a map advantage, even if it's not earned, should only give you more confidence that you can win it the whole thing. I would expect it to make the other team more nervous about choking because they're only 2 maps away from a loss while they have to win 3, to state the obvious.
9 replies
I disagree. the other team has the underdog status and if they lose they can say: well, we tried, we were one map down instantly.
the other team cant do that. people actually laugh at you for not winning a bo5 when 1 map up.
7 replies
What's more important, winning or making sure you don't get laughed at? (something that literally impossible in this community which actually has dedicated laugh threads lol)
6 replies
making sure you dont get laughed at LOL xD
but you are right, what Im describing is a weak mentality. a strong team should not be thinking like that.
4 replies
Shouldn't be any teams at this level that are mentally weak enough to throw solely out of the fear of getting laughed at and if there are, I don't think they deserve a map advantage for that.
3 replies
idk, not every team has a sport psychologist. I think this is really underrated.
2 replies
Oh I don't mean to understate the importance of mentality in pro esports I'm just saying, something like that shouldn't be of much concern to players at this level and even if it were that sort of stuff should be buried in the back of their minds or they won't have their head in the game for, probably, many more reasons than just the map advantage.
1 reply
true
well it can be both ways depending on the individual I guess. for me it would be a disadv
the teams in the lower bracket get to play with easier opponents since you're facing the other "losers"
1 reply
I would say that's offset by the extra games they have to play and by the time they're in the final stage lower bracket the teams are not going to be that easy especially since they've got less to lose and may be more willing to try new things. Also it's less likely they'll have prepped as well for the lower bracket teams as compared to the upper bracket teams.
1 reply
+1
+1
Its so stupid.
But still vitality lose lmao.
MIBR wouldnt win even with 2 maps advantage and 14-1 on Third map.
i mean both g2 and vitality managed to lose despite having one map advantage so is it really that BiG of an advantage KEKW
1 reply
I think it's a pretty BIG advantage which is why you need a BIG team to come up BIG against BIG adversity. yafeeme?
its a good thing
i mean the team who lost 1 match has to be in a disadvantage in front of the team who won every match, it wouldnt be fair otherwise
3 replies
Why wouldn't it be fair?
2 replies
because the team who lost a match was already given another chance to win the tournament by going into the lower bracket... the team who went into the final by winning should be gifted with something too... use your brain
1 reply
Why should they be gifted a map advantage though? If they stayed in the upper bracket because they're the best team then all they need to do is win again in the GF (where it really counts) without some cheezy map advantage bs, right? It's not like the lower bracket team has some advantage that needs to be neutralized unless the two teams played before in which case a veto advantage would be more appropriate.
But consider the last two events
big lost to g2 -> g2 to grand final, big to lower brackett
big lost to vita -> vita to grand final, big to lower brackett
in both cases, big had the chance to analyze their last game and fix their problems
but that is harder for the winning team
1 reply
I mean Vitality and G2 still had the same opportunity that BIG did to analyze their opponents game play game play as well but, yeah, that probably favors the losing team (if, that is, they have time to work on that stuff and counter strat around the extra match(es) they need to play). I still think a map advantage is too much, though, maybe a veto advantage, in this case would be fair.
2 replies
bo1 with 1 map advantage is the way to go
1 reply
+1 would watch.
2 replies
What do you mean they "should have to win 2 bo3s"?
1 reply
1 reply
BO5 major finals would be hype AF but without this map advantage bs.
you're wrong men,just make l=elimination or upper bracket advantage,bcz te team that lost in the upper bracket have a 2nd chance to go to the finals,and thats unfair with the lower bracket teams(that doesn't have 2nd chance) and the upper bracket team that won(they'll have to win again),and the lower bracket system gives u the chance to study the team that you lost and play better in the final,the bracket system is unfair af,but no map advantage would make it more unfair
3 replies
The punishment doesn't fit the crime though. If the final is between two teams that already played each other before then I'm fine with a veto advantage but an outright map advantage is too much and it kills the hype.
2 replies
i understand your point,i would give pick advantage (pick 3 maps in the bo5) or the veto advantage,but i think the bracket system is worse than traditional playoffs
1 reply
Agreed. Veto advantage or single elimination.
I dont care about map advantage BIG win anyways men))
ture , look at DOTA2's Ti
1 reply
It's about: I've never liked this format and it irks me every time I see it but I only recently became able to make posts lol
It's not about any particular result it just kills the hype for me going into BO5s
lol? so why would teams bother winning upper bracket? just lose and win worse teams easily. they gotta have some sword of advantage. i agree 1 map win is absurd tho. playing more games isnt dissadvantage, as they get a chance to fix their mistakes.
in conclusion, i think the advantage should be choosing 3 maps out of the 5 instead of 2.
2 replies
I don't think any teams would take the risk of losing of purpose to drop into the lower bracket because #45. But yeah I've come to the conclusion that a veto advantage is the perfect fix for this.
u forgot about choke esports
Still better than BO3 Major Final
2 replies
I want to argue but BO3s for a major final is so lame...but map advantages are also so lame...I don't know which one is worse lol
BO5 major final with veto advantage is the answer. Someone tag Valve so they can ignore this like every other suggestion from their community.
1 reply
+1
Just make it into single elimination cup
Every team is given a second chance after losing one match, so upper bracket team also needs to have that advantage.
They should do single elimination system instead of this bullshit tho
They should have a minor advantage
Bet value
Amount of money to be placed
Winning
Odds total ratio
-
