(1)KC v SEN(4) makes sense
(2)GENG v EDG(3) makes sense
(5)TH v PRX(6) doesn't make sense (!)
(7)LOUD v FPX(8) doesn't make sense (!)
Shouldn't have been (5)TH v FPX(8) and (6)PRX v LOUD(7) instead??
0
DAY2 MATCHUP DETERMINATION??
posted in
General Discussion
Comments:
Threaded
Linear
XtraChrxs [#2]i thought the matchups after day 1 are just depending on if you won or not.. like the 4 teams lost one game so they just got assorted randomly
Yeah it was a random draw. 1-0 teams face each other, 0-1 face each other
XtraChrxs [#2]i thought the matchups after day 1 are just depending on if you won or not.. like the 4 teams lost one game so they just got assorted randomly
hmm if that's the case I don't quite like the randomness of it.
I though seedings (edit: pairings, not seedings) would be:
Score (1-0 v 1-0 and 0-1 v 0-1)
INTO
%MapsWon (higher v lower)
INTO
%RoundsWon (higher v lower)
DirtInc [#3]Yeah it was a random draw. 1-0 teams face each other, 0-1 face each other
logical, but that's not enough for me, I think
I don't like the randomness after the first criteria, should go into deeper criteria, not just the score
see #4
Vengaa [#4]hmm if that's the case I don't quite like the randomness of it.
I though seedings (edit: pairings, not seedings) would be:
Score (1-0 v 1-0 and 0-1 v 0-1)
INTO
%MapsWon (higher v lower)
INTO
%RoundsWon (higher v lower)
i mean that makes sense but the overall maps won/lost weren't incredibly different so i dont think it would matter
XtraChrxs [#8]i mean that makes sense but the overall maps won/lost weren't incredibly different so i dont think it would matter
call me meticulous but I think it always matters
Vengaa [#9]call me meticulous but I think it always matters
even more so in an official competition where randomness should always be minimized, no matter the small of the detail
Vengaa [#6]any explanation from riot for this specific format choice?
The Swiss-system for a tournament is pretty common in esports, just not in Valorant. Many pros praised it when the format was revealed.
DirtInc [#11]The Swiss-system for a tournament is pretty common in esports, just not in Valorant. Many pros praised it when the format was revealed.
yeah I agree, it's not a rant against the swiss-system tho
I'm pretty familiar with it since I play chess and MTG from time to time, and I'm glad riot impremented it
It's just about the randomness after the initial criteria
Selex [#15]You're talking about non-existent seeding. The only thing that matters in swiss is whether you win or lose your match. 1-0s vs 1-0s and 0-1s vs 0-1s all randomly drawn. That's it.
my bad, as the guy above you said, I should've said pairings, not seedings (on #4)
The issue still remains tho
But I get what you say, I suppose a bit of randomness is more enjoyable for some, I just don't quite like it for this level of play, personally
Vengaa [#16]my bad, as the guy above you said, I should've said pairings, not seedings (on #4)
The issue still remains thoBut I get what you say, I suppose a bit of randomness is more enjoyable for some, I just don't quite like it for this level of play, personally
Randomness is the only way to make it fair. You, nor I have any idea how strong the teams are compared to each other. How would it be fair to penalize what potentially could be the strongest team for winning a close series against another team that could hypothetically be the second strongest team in the tournament? How would it be fair to reward what could potentially be a mediocre team smashing what could hypothetically be the weakest team in a tournament by far?
I'm not saying this describes what's happened thus far in this tournament, but in any tournament with this format (where you aren't in groups and given the chance to play all other teams in said group), you can't just arbitrarily decide all teams are equal and use hyper-specifc criteria of performance (maps/rounds won) when you don't have the same opponents. It doesn't make sense to do that.
Discord