Brazil A vs China Frantic Game 1: SYNC_Arabia - Game 2: SYNC_Islands (homemap Brazil A) - Game 3: SYNC_Nomad (homemap China Frantic) - Game 4: SYNC_Ghost_Lake -
[Frantic]CL_ = happyhappy
[Frantic]5cm = vivi
because of VIVIWas looking pretty bad for Brazil, but nice comeback :D
Why brasil 1. In the group?
Since the first three are the same for these teams, the fourth point was used and Brazil had a higher original seed.
- The teams will first be ranked based on the gathered points.
- If there are 2 or more teams with the same number of points, the game difference (Wins-Losses) will be the deciding factor.
- If game difference cannot decide then the Neustadtl rule will be the deciding factor. This rule means that the sum of defeated opponents' scores plus half the sum of drawn opponents' scores of the teams in question will be added to said team.
- If there is still a tie, the last tie-breaker will be the original seed of the teams.
+1It's kinda silly. Not that the seeding will matter too much. But really they should play a tie breaker. Especially when they're both online: just make them play a 5th game.
+1+1+1It's kinda silly. Not that the seeding will matter too much. But really they should play a tie breaker. Especially when they're both online: just make them play a 5th game.
Why brasil 1. In the group?Since the first three are the same for these teams, the fourth point was used and Brazil had a higher original seed.
- The teams will first be ranked based on the gathered points.
- If there are 2 or more teams with the same number of points, the game difference (Wins-Losses) will be the deciding factor.
- If game difference cannot decide then the Neustadtl rule will be the deciding factor. This rule means that the sum of defeated opponents' scores plus half the sum of drawn opponents' scores of the teams in question will be added to said team.
- If there is still a tie, the last tie-breaker will be the original seed of the teams.
A decider game would be good, but I also liked pedro's suggestion on Nili's stream to let the team who was ahead 2-1 advance, since the other team got to pick a second homemap out of the small pool.In my opinion this is so bad. If you take a look at the seeding the achievement of China ( the lower seed) is better. So China should get the first place.
It is bullshit to let the higher seed benefite two times from the seed: not only by getting weaker enemies but also by getting better place in a draw.
Better do a decider game
What a pity, the city of vivi was hit by a typhoon, and the whole area's electricity was interrupted
It's kinda silly. Not that the seeding will matter too much. But really they should play a tie breaker. Especially when they're both online: just make them play a 5th game.
Snyper1_ said:In my opinion this is so bad. If you take a look at the seeding the achievement of China ( the lower seed) is better. So China should get the first place.
It is bullshit to let the higher seed benefite two times from the seed: not only by getting weaker enemies but also by getting better place in a draw.
Better do a decider game
You claim the system is "so bad" and then proceed to argue that China Frantic should have been higher seeded than Brazil, thus making it sound that what is bad is the seeding not the system.
The seeding was the 4th criteria for a tie-breaker, so it's not like the whole system is deeply flawed because of that.
A decider game would in theory be better, but that needs to be clear right from the start of the tournament. And it would add an extra week to the tournament.
+You claim the system is "so bad" and then proceed to argue that China Frantic should have been higher seeded than Brazil, thus making it sound that what is bad is the seeding not the system.
The seeding was the 4th criteria for a tie-breaker, so it's not like the whole system is deeply flawed because of that.
A decider game would in theory be better, but that needs to be clear right from the start of the tournament. And it would add an extra week to the tournament.
I dont say China should be higher seeded than Brazil. I just said in the case of a tie, the achievement of the lower seed is better because they tied a higher seed. The seedings systems "expects" the higher seed to win, so if this is not the case the lower seeded team has done a good performance.
I know it is only the 4th criteria, but dont think that this is so unlikely to happen. In every group where the difference between 1+2 and the rest of the group or last two spots and the rest of the group is big, this will happen if these teams will make a draw in their match.
Surely a decider game would be best, but i understand this is diffucult to organize. Nevertheless this does not change the fact that the "Neustadt-Rule" priviliges the higher seeded team without any reason which makes the rule simply unfair. You could flip a coin which would be even more fair. :ugeek:
Was that rule with higher seed there from the start? If yes every team read the rules. Did anyone complain?
Was that rule with higher seed there from the start? If yes every team read the rules. Did anyone complain?
It is a very bad rule imo. But changing the rule after games are played is even worse.
Just find a better solution for next tournement please.
I dont say China should be higher seeded than Brazil. I just said in the case of a tie, the achievement of the lower seed is better because they tied a higher seed. The seedings systems "expects" the higher seed to win, so if this is not the case the lower seeded team has done a good performance.