PDA

View Full Version : Explanation to the 1-0 TSM start



pieface
03-30-2014, 05:30 PM
I posted this on reddit, but wanted to put it here as well.

I noticed on twitch many people were complaining about TSM getting a free auto point on Dignitas, and how it 'wasn't fair'. In reality, it is not only fair, but completely necessary.

In a double elimination tourney, there is a winner and a loser bracket. Therefore, a team must lose two games to be knocked out.

If we were playing single game sets, TSM would be 4-0 going into the final, and dig would be 4(?)-1 going in. So, to be eliminated (by losing two games), dig needs to lose once, but TSM must lose TWICE.

In a series, like we have here, playing two best of 3 series would take hours. Instead, TSM fought for and received by going undefeated a one game advantage, which is the upper bracket winner's prize for going undefeated.

TL;DR TSM needs two losses in double elim, dig only needs one, so quit complaining.

Congrats to TSM to dominating and clearly showing their superiority! Good job to all who competed!

Belgabad
03-30-2014, 06:51 PM
The funny part about this is if Dig won, people probably would've complained about Dig getting two chances to win by going through the loser bracket. Anyways, good games to everybody who went to the tourney

Mr357
03-30-2014, 08:57 PM
As a huge DiG fan it made me sad, but we got see some fantastic games and TSM won fair and square.

Andronic0s
03-31-2014, 10:29 AM
As someone who watches a lot of sports and had not really watched Esports before, it seemed very childish, this is the sort of thing I used to do with my buddies when playing street soccer "oh you guys won last match so you get a goal lead for the next one", you will never see advantages the directly influence the result like that in serious sports like tennis or soccer, the fact that the winner of the winners bracket gets a full day of rest is already an impactfull advantage worth fighting for.

In the end I think it backfired on Hirez since the grand final turned into just another match when their intention was to make it more epic with the best of 5 instead of 3.

SenorRaoul
03-31-2014, 12:06 PM
As someone who watches a lot of sports and had not really watched Esports before, it seemed very childish, this is the sort of thing I used to do with my buddies when playing street soccer "oh you guys won last match so you get a goal lead for the next one", you will never see advantages the directly influence the result like that in serious sports like tennis or soccer, the fact that the winner of the winners bracket gets a full day of rest is already an impactfull advantage worth fighting for.

In the end I think it backfired on Hirez since the grand final turned into just another match when their intention was to make it more epic with the best of 5 instead of 3.


it is actually kind of unfair

Andronic0s
03-31-2014, 02:23 PM
double elimination is childish, you heard it here first guys.

Name one serious sporting event that gives the top seeded or best performing team a scoring advantage at the final game.

SenorRaoul
03-31-2014, 06:27 PM
see edit.
I have no doubt that tsm would have won anywa.

Aximundi
03-31-2014, 06:32 PM
Much as i love dig... i don't think it would have mattered even

Deumus
03-31-2014, 06:56 PM
Name one serious sporting event that gives the top seeded or best performing team a scoring advantage at the final game.
Firstly your trying to compare this to a single elimination where in that case u don't have loser brackets and TSM would have won anyway as they won all thier matches and Dig would never had a second shot at a final as u know in ur serious sports once a team gets beaten in a tournament they go home.

And the fair thing in a double elimination is that the team going undeafeted thru winner bracket gets a point on the losers in finals as otherwise u would have had to have 2 finals where if TSM would had lost they also should get a second shot like Dig got when they lost.

And I think all teams in tournament rather see themselfs having a second shot in loserbracket and be 1 point behind in finals than that Dig for example would been sent home after thier first loss

Andronic0s
03-31-2014, 08:33 PM
Don't get me wrong going into the tournament I didn't knew any of teams so I was a bit of a neutral and I think TSM where deserved winners, they won without losing a single game that is impressive! but the 1-0 nonsense I think was unfair on principle, they should have just let it play out.


Firstly your trying to compare this to a single elimination where in that case u don't have loser brackets and TSM would have won anyway as they won all thier matches and Dig would never had a second shot at a final as u know in ur serious sports once a team gets beaten in a tournament they go home.

And the fair thing in a double elimination is that the team going undeafeted thru winner bracket gets a point on the losers in finals as otherwise u would have had to have 2 finals where if TSM would had lost they also should get a second shot like Dig got when they lost.

And I think all teams in tournament rather see themselfs having a second shot in loserbracket and be 1 point behind in finals than that Dig for example would been sent home after thier first loss

There are plenty of tournaments where losers get second chances, for example World Cup group stages you can lose games and still make it through, it will set you up against a tougher team but the stronger team won't start with a 1-0 lead in the knock-out stages that is tipping the scales and is IMO a big no-no in a serious event, but maybe this tournaments wasn't meant to be taken that seriously and I guess that is fine.

Narvik
04-01-2014, 02:30 AM
The word "fair" means nothing more than this: "Everyone starts under the same conditions and rules!" and that's what happened!

Also why are WE, who aren't really that affected making this discussion a thing? The pro's were fine with this (I think?)!

The only thing that backfired is that TSM just won the first 2 games and so we only got 2 final matches ... and that's not their fault!

Deumus
04-01-2014, 04:26 AM
There are plenty of tournaments where losers get second chances, for example World Cup group stages you can lose games and still make it through, it will set you up against a tougher team but the stronger team won't start with a 1-0 lead in the knock-out stages that is tipping the scales and is IMO a big no-no in a serious event, but maybe this tournaments wasn't meant to be taken that seriously and I guess that is fine.

Well groupstages was done the first 8 weeks and this is the next stage and in World cup u don't see anyone beaten in semi etc coming back in finals.

Double elimination where everyone get a second chance work in that way that the winners go in with a lead in finals instead of getting a rematch if they would lose as all other teams have had. Thats the fairness. And if u gonna mock this kind of competition with "real" sports u should know there are such sports too that uses double elimination rules where the winner gets 1 point advantage and only needs 1 win over the losers in final while losers need 2 wins to win finals. And the reason for the 1p lead is that they don't get a second chance like all the others have had.

Or u consider it fair that all except 1 team gets a second chance?

OblivKnight
04-01-2014, 08:49 AM
To be honest, having an entire day off from the tournament was enough of a reward for being in the Winners Bracket finalist, IMO. DIG needed to play through a whole day of the lower bracket and the morning of the finals needed to run through COG before even facing TSM in the grand finals. TSM had a whole day and morning of planning and preparation to face DIG, and in DIG's case battling through the entire loser's bracket to merely have a one game disadvantage heading into the grand finals? It's a huge disadvantage already and sets the tempo for the games. The instant TSM wins one game on account of the already given 1 game advantage, DIG would need to play literally lights out on the highest stage of Smite possible and proceed to sweep the series with momentium outside of their favor. That 1 game buffer was HUGE, and I really feel it set the tone for the series.

Csquared08
04-07-2014, 02:52 PM
There are plenty of tournaments where losers get second chances, for example World Cup group stages you can lose games and still make it through, it will set you up against a tougher team but the stronger team won't start with a 1-0 lead in the knock-out stages that is tipping the scales and is IMO a big no-no in a serious event, but maybe this tournaments wasn't meant to be taken that seriously and I guess that is fine.
You've completely misunderstood the purpose of the Group Stage. The Group Stage is not "part of the tournament," as it were. Instead, think of it like a regular season (in Smite's case, the 8 qualifier tournaments throughout January and February were its "regular season"). What's the point of a regular season? Determining seeding for the playoffs.

A season of games leading into a double-elimination tournament is something entirely different from a season of games leading into a single elimination tournament.

Qubiik
04-11-2014, 02:04 PM
This post is 100% correct. And yeah the game between them in the finals was amazing. great game play and top commentating

LegendaryHAN
04-12-2014, 04:16 AM
It didn't matter at all, indeed.

Donvale
04-13-2014, 06:20 AM
It was disappointing for all of us watching, that one team in the Grand Finals got a "free" game, so to say. Even if, as pointed out by the creator of this thread, that's the standard procedure for double-elimination tournaments in eSports, it' was unenjoyable for everyone watching. It felt like the chances werent even. Maybe double elimination isnt the proper way to determine who's worthy of receiving 104.000 US-$, working your way up all the way through losers bracket takes a lot of nerves after all. Already having a 0-1 disadvantage means you can't play as risky and as freely and DiG deserved to be in the Grand Finals just as much as TSM.

however, TSM definitely a worthy winner of this tourny. no disrespect.