Tournament history means nothin when tournament actually begins. China D won all their games in quali stage,,,, of course they deserve higher seed than VNS. Thats how tournaments work
Tournament history means nothin when tournament actually begins. China D won all their games in quali stage,,,, of course they deserve higher seed than VNS. Thats how tournaments work
Tournament history means nothin when tournament actually begins. China D won all their games in quali stage,,,, of course they deserve higher seed than VNS. Thats how tournaments work
This is the kind of thinking that allowed KGB to be seeded above SY in the previous tournament. And even if one would argue that China D should be seeded above Vietnam, it doesn't explain how Norway or Turkey were also seeded ahead.
I think the only thing funnier than a 3rd seed ending in 4th place is a 3rd seed ending in 8th, but I doubt you need to be reminded of that. The poor seeding meant we would not see a matchup between what was the #2 seed and #3 seed at that point in the tournament. With your logic, a Canada vs China match in the Round of 16 would be totally fine, since you're going to have to beat everyone anyway, right? What we're discussing is simply a less grievous case of exactly that.Tournament history means nothin when tournament actually begins. China D won all their games in quali stage,,,, of course they deserve higher seed than VNS. Thats how tournaments work
This is the kind of thinking that allowed KGB to be seeded above SY in the previous tournament. And even if one would argue that China D should be seeded above Vietnam, it doesn't explain how Norway or Turkey were also seeded ahead.
Yes that was the funniest moment in aoc. 30 pages of arguing that sy deserve a different seed so they can get 2nd instead of 3rd. Guess what? They ended 4th 11
Edit: to win the tournament, you have to win everyone. No point crying about seeding
told you, money > all, you pay the money, you decide the seed, so simple.We are all geniuses saying how the seedings should have been made when the tournament is about to finish.
http://aoczone.net/viewtopic.php?f=1062&t=113351
As soon as they were published people were asking wtf, actually, not when the tournament is finished.
Even if you ignore what happened in NC II and just use the information available from before the tournament, there's no way Vietnam A should have been seeded so low, or that group D should have been stacked with top 8 teams from a higher level tournament than this one. Unless you wanted to make Brazil A's QF as difficult as possible.
Can you explain why Vietnam A which has never finished below top 8 since TMW in 2012 was seeded 9th-12th, whereas a random Chinese team that's never finished top 8 in anything was seeded 7th?
It's not like he was making that up, SY lost to L Clan and really did end 4th. Look at the result thread.I just don't understand how RA reply in this post, he argued that SY only ended with 4th, 1111111111111111111111111111
Vietnam was actually seeded 12th. T. In the previous NC, the 5th and 6th place teams had 2 opportunities to play in the final stages vs the top 4 teams, while in this NC the 5th and 6th place teams only had a single opportunity. Because of this, NC#1 had more definitive results. Maybe some think that the amount of matches played before was unnecessary, but I personally found it more conclusive overall.
I think that the current system would be great if seeding could be perfected, but since we live in an imperfect world and people are prone to making mistakes, very obvious mistakes in this case, the more matches/rounds that are played, the less affect that poor seeding will have on the result.
What ******ed logic. Seed will never match final placement. You would cry about it every tournament by default (like you are now).
By the way if someone should complain about seed, it's Canada. Compare our bracket to Brazil a for example. I know the Brazil a guys and they would never complain about seeding being behind their loss. They had a bad match and lost their chance.
Anyway go back and make another 30 pages of ******ed seeding comments. Which other top 8 team should they have met instead? Because I can't even seed the top 8 (I'm sure you can). If they lost to Vietnam , they could have lost to any of them.
Vietnam was actually seeded 12th. In the previous NC, the 5th and 6th place teams had 2 opportunities to play in the final stages vs the top 4 teams, while in this NC the 5th and 6th place teams only had a single opportunity. Because of this, NC#1 had more definitive results. Maybe some think that the amount of matches played before was unnecessary, but I personally found it more conclusive overall.
I think that the current system would be great if seeding could be perfected, but since we live in an imperfect world and people are prone to making mistakes, very obvious mistakes in this case, the more matches/rounds that are played, the less affect that poor seeding will have on the result.
Tournament history means nothin when tournament actually begins. China D won all their games in quali stage,,,, of course they deserve higher seed than VNS. Thats how tournaments work
This is the kind of thinking that allowed KGB to be seeded above SY in the previous tournament. And even if one would argue that China D should be seeded above Vietnam, it doesn't explain how Norway or Turkey were also seeded ahead.
Yes that was the funniest moment in aoc. 30 pages of arguing that sy deserve a different seed so they can get 2nd instead of 3rd. Guess what? They ended 4th 11
Edit: to win the tournament, you have to win everyone. No point crying about seeding