|
Post by Ivo on Oct 1, 2011 21:51:16 GMT
Another topic: Don't know if it would be better to open a new thread with this or just write here. I think it's a good idea, like last years, to do a (subjective) ranking and create the groups based in that. But, as I've read about this some in the past, I'm totally against that the same rank will be used, again, to build the after groups tree. The tree should be build, (like all tourneys, like World Cup) based in 1st of group vs 2nd of group H, 2nd of A against 1st of H, etc.
If that subjective rank would be used twice, it's totally unfair for a not so strong player. And for the sake of transparency, the way that the tree will be build, should be published as soon as possible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2011 8:11:13 GMT
Hm, Ivo, I am not sure if I got you right.
These year I asked Dario, khamski and Koras to make a ranking 1-31. I will reunion these 3 list to one list. 1.-8. -> basket1...
After that, we feed the system with these baskets and he picks one player of each basket for each group.
The pairings for 1/8 runs 100% (there is no 2nd subjective ranking) randomly, with two exception: Restriction 1: Place one will always play against place two. Restriction 2: Players from the same group won’t clash in the 1/8 finals.
We had this kind of discussion last year too. But I prefere to shuffle the pairings for the KO stage once again. Honestly, there isn't a valid contrapoint, is there?
|
|
|
Post by Zemke on Oct 2, 2011 9:04:52 GMT
It's the fairest way. No one can expect things but it's still a clear system we work with.
In spite of that, why should randomness of group pairings affect playoff pairings? That would be boring and maybe double unfortunate and double fortunate for some players.
|
|
|
Post by Ivo on Oct 2, 2011 17:48:49 GMT
I'll try to explain better. Imagine a simply case of 4 groups, A, B, C, D. The first 2 players of each group will go to the ko stage. So, you'll have a tree of 4 players, starting with semi-finals. The way of how the tree should be built should be published before the groups matches starts. Something like: 1st of A, plays against 2nd of B, 2nd of B, plays against 1st of B, so you'll have one player in the final, of group A OR B; the same with groups C and D.... Imagine that in the first ranking, to build the groups, you'll have 1st being Dario and Mablak being 2nd. If you'd plan the distributions of the groups well, and taking into account how the tree will be built, you actually can plan to have Dario and Mablak at the final of the CWT, if they will end their groups in 1st and will win all games of the KO stage before the finals. But for that to happen, they will have to build their way. Pick an old World Cup or Champions League magazine (before the competitions starts). They will show how the tree will be built, like this way.
|
|
|
Post by Koras on Oct 2, 2011 20:01:37 GMT
I totally agree with IVO, it dont have any sense to make it random 2 times!!! And in CWT it was always like that...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2011 21:44:24 GMT
And I contradict you again, Ivo. Since the pairings of groups are fully random, you can't avoid the probability, that Dario and Mablak will meet in 1/4 finals (assuming they get 1. in Group and win 1/8final).
Now I got your point, Ivo. But I don't like your idea. You want to guarantee the probability, that the 2 "best" players meet each other at the final (always assuming that they win all their games). But that also minimize the chances of surprises. And for me, these surprises makes a good tourney. Sorry, I vote against your suggestion.
I don't know Zemkes opinion, but so far I also don't know majorities opinion. If they don't speak up, we should keep it as it is.
|
|
|
Post by Zemke on Oct 3, 2011 10:59:48 GMT
Koras. It has never been like that at least since Joschi and I organize the tournament. And it does surely make sense. Also you're wrong, Ivo. Champions League is exactly like CWT with playoff drawn by lot. Why should randomness of group stage affect playoff? It may be double fortunate or double unfortunate for some players. By the way, that would be so predictable. Isn't that less fun? In the end I'm okay with both ways.
|
|
|
Post by khamski on Oct 5, 2011 9:53:40 GMT
.uck my stupidity. .uck Ivo's way of explaining his quality thoughts.
But finally i got him.
So i translate for lessIQued like me:
Ivo:
Instead of 1-32 ranking list let's do the per-group ranking. It will make pairings more controllable because we will have an oppotrunity to swap groups so _Stars_ won't meet _Legends_ in the early stages.
Deep thought i would say.
But i say "nah". 2 arguments:
1. Don't wanna get Mabak in your first knockees? Get the first place! 2. We can't plan a safe final path to every star. Because there many lol. For example Tomek won Dario in 3 or 4 games in a row without any doubt. Lets path him too? Or no? Or yes?
|
|
|
Post by Zemke on Oct 5, 2011 17:12:47 GMT
I like the "nah"-arguments. I'm still okay with all ways suggested so far though.
|
|
|
Post by Ivo on Oct 5, 2011 18:28:05 GMT
I don't think my opinion was difficult to understand. At least after my 2nd post. I do think the 1-32 ranking list makes sense and it will be used, in my opinion well, to build the groups. One of my main thoughts was, since, for example, if Dario is first in that list, and Mablak 2nd, why not to guarantee that in the final will be the most 2 strongest players if they would manage to win all of their matches?! Another 2nd major thought was to defend the completely clearness of the post group stage pairings. I totally believe in your honesty and I'm sure that the draw will be 100% honest whatever it will be like. BUT, and if a player, for some reason, would not think like me? What can you do? Just saying "I'm sorry that you are putting doubts in our honesty but we can't do nothing about it", right? I could be wrong about CL, Zemke, but it has, actually, a live draw. And WC is, for sure, the way that I was defending. At the end, I'm like you Zemke. Despite I have a preference for one, I agree with both ways. The post that you made on 3rd of October, have made me understand better the good points of your preference.
|
|
|
Post by Ivo on Oct 5, 2011 18:42:09 GMT
Btw, the first "nah" argument doesn't make sense in this discussion. If Mablak will be first in his group, in both ways you will avoid him if you'll be first in your group too. In 2nd argument, ofc there are a lot of great players in this tourney but, with all respect that Tomek deserves, even if he has beaten Dario 3 or 33 times, he is pretty far, at least yet, to be compared with Dario, Mablak or Kayz or Koras. A quick look of the awards history of the players shows it.
|
|
|
Post by Ivo on Oct 5, 2011 19:04:23 GMT
Just another little note. Ofc this has a very low probability to happen but, it is possible, in fact, that even if Dario, Mablak, Kayz and Koras would be first in their groups, that they could be drawn in the same side of the PO tree, so they would play against each other before the final. Would you like that this would happen? It wouldn't be fair to make another draw...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2011 22:19:36 GMT
"Would you like that this would happen? It wouldn't be fair to make another draw.."
Of course it's fair. Get used to the thought that this is a tourney. These dramatic games in early stage make a good tourney. And yea, I wish everybody that he isn't on the tree side of Mablak and Dario xD
Come on, I don't get your point. If you want the most balanced solution, you should suggest a league. What promises more fun/spectacel, a victory by favorit or a victory by underdog??
There are a lot of football tourneys which know a "lucky" placed team. Germany 2002, Greece 2004 etc.
1/8 playoffs will be drawn, too.
|
|
|
Post by khamski on Oct 6, 2011 3:50:22 GMT
Seems like i again create the turbulence that almost sank the cwt2009 boat. So i'll just stfu here.
|
|
|
Post by Ivo on Oct 6, 2011 7:24:54 GMT
Everyone is cool Khamski. At my eyes this is being an interesting discussion and no turbulence or bad vibes has been created so far. I still think that the tree should be designed in function of the groups classification, before the tourney starts. And I would like that more people would join this discussion. But this is only my opinion. I'm not in the organization and I'm ok with both ways.
|
|