NA challengers

What’s the format? It says Swiss but teams are playing 3 matches. Is it a higher number swiss or a straight up group stage?

It's a scuffed swiss, I think it's 7 matches

229fn [#2]

It's a scuffed swiss, I think it's 7 matches

7!? At that point why not just do groups

Blue_Iced_Tea [#3]

7!? At that point why not just do groups

I like Swiss much better. There’s a chance to play any team which makes it more exciting

Blue_Iced_Tea [#3]

7!? At that point why not just do groups

idk, i been thinking the same thing, mickey format, group stage would be 10x better

they literally qualify 8 teams from 16

if you want to have them play 74 quattuordecillion matches at least do 2 8-team double elim brackets and promote the top 4 from each one

UBClears [#4]

I like Swiss much better. There’s a chance to play any team which makes it more exciting

yeah but they could easily do a full 16 team swiss in 5 games not 7

after round 1:

8 (1-0)
8 (0-1)

after round 2:

4 (2-0)
8 (1-1)
4 (0-2)

after round 3:

2 (3-0)
6 (2-1)
6 (1-2)
2 (0-3)

after round 4:

1 (4-0) [qualified]
4 (3-1) [qualified]
6 (2-2)
4 (1-3) [eliminated]
1 (0-4) [eliminated]

after round 5

3 (3-2) [qualified]
3 (2-3) [eliminated]

5 rounds instead of 7

229fn [#5]

idk, i been thinking the same thing, mickey format, group stage would be 10x better

they literally qualify 8 teams from 16

if you want to have them play 74 quattuordecillion matches at least do 2 8-team double elim brackets and promote the top 4 from each one

The problem with groups is they are always imbalanced. You will usually have a really strong group (group of death) or a really weak group. Then the playoffs will potentially have teams that are weaker than teams that didn't make the playoffs.

Swiss is just better because every team is on equal footing. Also a lot of these NA Challenger teams are unknown which would make it hard to group them.