Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2011 16:54:52 GMT
+++News+++News+++News+++News+++News+++News+++News+++News+++News+++News+++
We have got a decision:
Group Stage games of CWT '11 are running in a best of five (bo5) system. That means, player A plays 3 times (if the group contents 4 players) a bo5 game in his group.
Points award system has changed too:
3-0; 4pts 0pts 3-1; 3pts 1pt 3-2; 3pts 2pts
With this decision we want to minimize the fall-out risk of not played games. Following Zemkes calculation of last years group stage ("only 8 out of 90 games were won by the loser of the first game") the influence of outcoming results is very low, but the work of match dating is strongly reduced.
|
|
|
Post by khamski on Jun 14, 2011 18:09:09 GMT
I suggest the admins team (and few friends) maybe play a mini tourney using his new system. Make a test drive. Watch if its fair or not. Just an opinion tho. I am ok with this new rule.
|
|
|
Post by Zemke on Jun 14, 2011 18:21:50 GMT
I guess I'll have a test run with the new site.
|
|
|
Post by Koras on Jul 20, 2011 21:20:16 GMT
bleh, it was such a nice tradition....
|
|
|
Post by Zemke on Jul 21, 2011 14:22:18 GMT
There was a discussion about that for almost two weeks. Why didn't you say something back then?
|
|
|
Post by Koras on Jul 27, 2011 15:48:41 GMT
There was a discussion about that for almost two weeks. Why didn't you say something back then? Are U serious ? ok I will ansver, cause CWT starts in 2 months.... and I did not visited forum I dont like this idea, but its not a problem for me. Anyway in last year everything was ok, so no point to change it. btw who is in "mods group"? Joschi.Zemke and??
|
|
|
Post by Zemke on Jul 27, 2011 18:56:00 GMT
Yes, I am serious. It wasn't everything okay last year, read my first post. Domi replaces Random00, because he didn't want to do it again. More information about that here paragraph 4).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2011 19:06:01 GMT
Yes, we are serious Koras, since we linked the discussion 4 times in NNN forum and also at the NNN shout box. We can't do more then that to invite you to a discussion.
And the discussion started so early, because zemke has to programm the stuff...
|
|
|
Post by Koras on Aug 4, 2011 14:10:17 GMT
not a big deal one more thing, i think its not good idea to run site only for tournament... It should be available for all the time. Especially history section with previous CWT results.
|
|
|
Post by Zemke on Aug 4, 2011 20:17:58 GMT
Yes, I agree. The website is off because I am working on it.
|
|
|
Post by Dario on Sept 1, 2011 16:12:35 GMT
Player A plays 4 games: 3-2 ; 3-0 ; 3-0 ; 0-3 . 14 rounds played, 9 points. Player B plays 4 games: 2-3 ; 2-3 ; 3-2 ; 3-2 . 20 rounds played, 10 points.
Player B gets ranked above player A. Player B had 50% winning ratio, player A had 64% winning ratio. Player A lost only 1 game, player B lost 2 games. Player A beat player B. Player B was allowed to play 20 rounds, player A was allowed to play only 14. --Not fair--
Talk about chances of that happening if you want, it's still not fair.
|
|
|
Post by Zemke on Sept 2, 2011 15:31:54 GMT
Player A plays 4 games: 3-2 ; 3-0 ; 3-0 ; 0-3 . 14 rounds played, 9 points. Player B plays 4 games: 2-3 ; 2-3 ; 3-2 ; 3-2 . 20 rounds played, 10 points. Player A does actually have 11 points.
|
|
|
Post by Dario on Sept 2, 2011 17:14:47 GMT
k, pwnd xD Edit: of course that even though the maths in the example failed, the idea behind it is still valid .
|
|
|
Post by Zemke on Sept 3, 2011 9:57:31 GMT
Player B gets ranked above player A. Player B had 50% winning ratio, player A had 64% winning ratio. Player A lost only 1 game, player B lost 2 games. Player A beat player B. Player B was allowed to play 20 rounds, player A was allowed to play only 14. --Not fair-- Player A gets ranked above player B. Player B had 50% winning ratio, player A had 64% winning ratio. Player A lost only 1 game, player B lost 2 games. Player A beat player B. Player B was allowed to play 20 rounds, player A was allowed to play only 14. Now that sounds fair to me. Player A has better winning ratio, less defeats and Player A beat Player B. Player A is now ranked better than Player B. What's not fair about that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2011 16:41:20 GMT
I also think that every player plays 3 games, not 4 games.
|
|