INFERNO RANBAT 8 Survey

Azza · 15-03-2010 12:35am

Kirby wrote:

I don't have a link to the evo rules. But if you watch it every year you get the feel for how it works. As I said, Daigo and Wong ended up drawing each other fairly early on. They met again in the final in the end aswell for a rematch.

According to the Evo site they just mention seeding as away of keeping players who regular play each other apart for a while.

Its all double elimination. The winners keep on playing each other. Its a different format to ours so I'm not sure how applicable comparing the two event is.

Kirby wrote:

Nobody is suggesting you are rigging it mate. We know you aren't. But the format needs tweaking. Everything is fine up until the quarter and onwards in both winners and losers. From that point it should be a random draw. Thats all we are saying.

Its your opinon and the opinon of a few others that format needs tweaking, not everyone shares it. We will put this and the pricing issue to a vote soon and let the community decide.

Dreddybajs · 15-03-2010 9:12am

Any interest in this being a 2v2?

D4RK ONION · 15-03-2010 1:03pm

I call Cobelcog/Bush/Newtype!

K.O.Kiki · 15-03-2010 2:45pm

D4RK ONION wrote: »

I call Cobelcog/Bush/Newtype!

Forbidden.

Unless Azza needs a teammate.
He'll explain.

--
Team Taunt commander

ayjayirl · 15-03-2010 7:10pm

Azza wrote: »

..... More Champions League or Heinekin Cup type of deal. Maybe cup would be better suited for the name......

The Terry Cup sponsored by Tiger Beer

ayjayirl · 15-03-2010 7:19pm

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Also we should stop double seeding the double-elim stage.

The seedings should be used for the initial group draw, but after that it should be group placings that decide who plays who in the last 16.

This will speed up the organisation of that side of the tournament.

Couldn't agree more. your group finish should determine your route... Not that I have to worry about that

ayjayirl · 15-03-2010 7:33pm

Liquidswords wrote: »

Yes that's all well and good but that's only the first round of knockouts. Whoever writes up the brackets can shape them so (if the top seeds win) the top seed, seed number 1 will fight seed number 8, 2 fights 7 and so on keeping 1 and 2 away from eachother until the final. This is the way things are currently, no?

In the Champions League however after the first round of knockouts where the winners fight the runners up nobody is protected from anybody else. From the quarter finals onward you are no longer afforded the luxury of a guaranteed weaker opponent. You are forced to prove you can beat anyone still in the competition because you can be drawn against any one of them. Then in the semi finals the same, no pre-defined path, you can draw any of your 3 remaining opponents.

Yeh, I agree with Liquidswords here. Its basically how Porto won the tourney and at that stage you are talking about players being there on merit of todays performance, which imo is what its about. When the groups are finished the draw should ensure a group winner plays a group runner up with the winners of this game going into a blind draw. This would also add some suspense on the day because the draw can be made where anything can happen. I think this would be a great thing for the day so everyone playing at each stage just focuses on the next game and getting into the draw.

I would be all for this!!!

ayjayirl · 15-03-2010 7:48pm

Azza wrote: »

Liquidswords and Kirby are right in that the top 2 seeds are kept apart until the finals, and the top 4 seeds are kept apart till semi's and the top 8 being kept apart till quarters. (This makes the very big assumption they get out of the groups and win all there knockout matches).

Its abit hard for me to rig the tournament when I can't control who wins every match.

However saying the top players getting an easy ride is incorrect, there is steady increase of dfficulty instead as they progress instead of random luck.

Going random means they could get a much more difficult or much easier path to the final.

With a random draw anyone including a player totally undeserving of it could get to the finals not on skill but on pure luck. He gets there and then gets hammered which isn't exactly entertaining for the spectators. He drops down to the lower brackets and gets hammered again. Its not a sure thing to happen of course but its a possibility.

Kirby I stand corrected on your point about contradicting yourself. I did indeed misread your post. Sorry about that.

Just the checked EVO's rules and I don't see anything that say's it format is the way you described. You got a link floating about?

Really its a question of weather you want a pre-determined path from the quarters on (and your making a huge assumption all the seeds win and don't get dump into the lower bracket before hand) or you want random chance to determine the path from the quarter finals which may work out or may just end.

As I said I will go with what the majority wants.

Lads, reading the post about how the structure of the draw should take place I wanted to put in my thoughts.

I think everyone is in agreement that the group setup is fine.

(Assuming 8 groups - for clarity) This would mean that there are then 8 group winners and 8 group runner up. The format now is also fine for this (IMHO) where by winners are kept apart for the draw.

The confusion seems to be after that. My suggestion would be a compromise that uses the benefits of both arguments. After the last 16 matches the draw should be remade. This means that there are 8 slots numbered 1-8 and the draw is structured out up until the final. The names are then drawn for the last time again and assigned the slot starting at 1 through to 8 in a completely random order. This would eliminate the need to perform multiple draws after each round whilst still keeping the draw random. This is after all the quarter final stage. At this point we are not talking about weak players. The argument against this system can then only be that you might meet (12.5% probability) a person from your group but it is the Quarter finals..... If they are there and you didn't beat them, get revenge, if you did, rinse and repeat.

This is the system they use for the Champions League. Please note that I am acutely aware that this may have been what people were suggesting already but I think for my own clarity I wanted to write it out.

Azza · 15-03-2010 8:49pm

ayjayirl I think the confusion has been sorted out by now. By now everyone understand the current system and what the suggested changes to it are.

What you suggest is what others have already suggested and its the only other viable option.

I don't think with any system you can avoid the possibility of players from the group stage meeting again after the first round of the upper brackets.

chopperbyrne · 15-03-2010 11:01pm

Do people also want a random draw for the first round of losers too?

Kirby · 15-03-2010 11:58pm

It makes the most sense tbh. Its the fairest way to do it.

D4RK ONION · 16-03-2010 12:04am

So, 3rd of April it is?

Sairus · 16-03-2010 10:04am

I'd be happy with that anyways. I wouldn't be able to swing traveling costs three weeks in a row.

A-Trak · 19-03-2010 1:50am

D4RK ONION wrote: »

So, 3rd of April it is?

Can we set on the 3rd then so as it seems to suit the majority?

D4RK ONION · 19-03-2010 2:20am

*dances* that's going to be one awesome weekend. Dublin friends meet up Friday, Tourney Saturday and C&H meet-up Saturnight! Excellent!

Sisko · 19-03-2010 5:26am

poor banjoB:(

A-Trak · 19-03-2010 5:32am

Sisko wrote: »

poor banjoB:(

I agree, he'd place top 16 at worse, top 8 more likely.
Really high level player.

BanjoB · 19-03-2010 9:42am

A-Trak wrote: »

I agree, he'd place top 16 at worse, top 8 more likely.
Really high level player.

" my fight money!!!!!" tis a shame lads.thanks Atrak. I dunno bout top 8 though. I've still gotta iron out a lot of bad matchups. I'll Def have to make the next one. Really enjoyed the last one and the casuals during it.

FutureGuy · 19-03-2010 10:47am

I may try and make this. Learning experience at the very least.

Doctor DooM · 19-03-2010 12:04pm

FutureGuy wrote: »

Learning experience at the very least.

I learn more from 1 tournament than I do from about 5 hours of online, tbh.

Robbknoll · 19-03-2010 8:36pm

Doctor DooM wrote: »

I learn more from 1 tournament than I do from about 5 hours of online, tbh.

This is exactly why id love to attend this, to truly see how low my rank is

Hopefully myself and maybe a friend or two can make it up , work depending unfortunately.

Hate to be Dragging it back up, but im sided with Kirby on the tourny layout. Its exactly the way the Champions league is done and thats world renowned.

I think what Azza`s missing is that, when its random after the first knockout stage anyone can face anyone, thats the beauty of it, thats where shocks and upsets happen and in turn thats what makes a tournament good and special. Porto who the champions league a few years back and it was unbelievable and so out of the blue it was a breath of fresh air, that would never happen under ye`re current system as they would have come up against all the top teams the whole way up. Remember the top teams/players still have to win. If they get beaten by a player of lesser rank who can turn around and say he doesnt deserve to be in the next round or the final EVEN if they get hammered, they earned it.

Just to mention i aint reiterating the difference between the two systems, just why i am in favour of Kirby`s/Champ League Format.

:pac:.....Please dont eat me.....

animaX · 19-03-2010 9:05pm

Robbknoll wrote: »

:pac:.....Please dont eat me.....

Genius! It works on so many levels. Mainly two levels

Kinda agree with champs league also but it does add extra time to sort things out and time is our biggest hurdle in these events

Robbknoll · 19-03-2010 9:24pm

animaX wrote: »

Kinda agree with champs league also but it does add extra time to sort things out and time is our biggest hurdle in these events

That for me comes down to just good organization skills, ye probably have too many bulls in the herd on the day. Best thing to do is write everything down on paper with the allocated times clearly stated, its hard to veer off the track if done correctly and efficiently. Altho i know you cant accommodate for someone that really needs a take a ****

They should just focus through the pain for the greater good lol.

Azza · 19-03-2010 9:57pm

Robbknoll I understand the merits of both system. Its not that I don't get what the changes are for, its just that I don't nessecarily agree with it.

Yeah top players can still loose to those who are mean't to be lower in skill, I don't have any issues with that.

My issue is just that the top players could take each out early because they get all get drawn into one side of bracket.

But I think the merits of both systems have been discussed enough and we shall have a vote on it to decide it shortly.

animaX wrote:

Kinda agree with champs league also but it does add extra time to sort things out and time is our biggest hurdle in these events

Changing systems won't really slow things down. Your talking about adding like 5-10 minutes tops with doing a second random draw for the quarters. Its a non issue.

Robbknol wrote:

lThat for me comes down to just good organization skills, ye probably have too many bulls in the herd on the day. Best thing to do is write everything down on paper with the allocated times clearly stated, its hard to veer off the track if done correctly and efficiently.

Everything is pretty much written down on paper already. But we don't have allocated times other than a starting time. Speaking from experience of organizing theses events and co-organizing lans you need a degree of flexibility. Its hard to start on time when a third of your players are still not at the venue but are on the way.

At the last event I was not exactly rushing people because I got the impression they prefered a more laid back approach from the previous events. There was some suggestions before from one or two people that the events where running too slowly but I think we have found a balance between efficency and not pestering people to play games.

No one at the last event came up to me and said "this is taking too long, can you speed things up?", I asked a few who I thought might have to catch buses was time an issue but it seemed they had time to spare after we where done.

All in all things run pretty smoothly, there was just 2 delays at the last event due to a misunderstanding and missing players.

Robbknoll · 20-03-2010 5:11am

Azza wrote: »

Robbknoll I understand the merits of both system. Its not that I don't get what the changes are for, its just that I don't nessecarily agree with it.

I do agree with you in the sense that its each onto his own and each person as a different view of fairness, your right to put it to a vote to clear the air. Should probably do it soon haha.

Azza wrote: »

My issue is just that the top players could take each out early because they get all get drawn into one side of bracket.

I see your point as seeing it through a round-robin structure, but in the other system would it not be a random drawn for each successive round hence eliminating the bracket structure? Therefore having all the top seeds fighting each other early is close to impossible odds. The final would still probably end up with 2 top players anyway if you think about it but i think this just gives other players a better opportunity to play better players at important stages and learn alot more. And at the end of the day its not just about the top ranking players its also about upskilling others and getting people into it more and focusing more heavily on that and i personally think the other system promotes this more. (and i aint sayin ye havent been doin this by the way just incase i get a back lash from you, talking solely from the lay out of the tourny)

But hey you've been doing this for a long time and its been a success and we should all be greatful to ye for it. Either way id love to attend and have a blast with everyone and learn new stuff.

INFERNO RANBAT 8 Survey

Comments