Double elimination tournament based on seedings is a very usual method, especially used in offline Starcraft events. The method works in a way that lets the highest seeded player face the lowest seeded one, the second highest seeded player face the second lowest seeded one - and so forth. Let's make an example related to our community:
Example: Retired Maynard ends up 5th - 8th without an effort?
The old school player
Maynard starts playing again and participates in an offline event and a 32-player tournament. Maynard becomes seeded as number three due to his experience and merits. Let's assume that his current skill level of Starcraft gaming is far lower than it used to be - still, he is ranked number three since the tournament administrators do not know of his current level. Maynard starts in the middle of the tournament bracket with a walkover versus the 29th ranked player and advances to top 16. He thereafter beats another low-ranked player in the second round on a zergling rush ("6 pool") and advances into top 8. Let's say that he now loses to Day, and is out of the tournament.Maynard would by this end up ranked as 5th - 8th simply because he got a good seed (and thanks to a successfull 6pool). An achivement any of the participants in the tournament could master. This would give an imbalanced final rank once the tournament was fininshed. The player who might be second best - but new and therefore unknown with a bad seed - might have to play the best player first - and losing. He would become ranked as the 17th to 32nd best player when his real skill is far above the other's with the same final rank.
Time for Cyberathlete Professional League to re-think?
Myers from UKTerrorist explains the problems with the seeding and double elimination method and encourages the Cyberathlete Professional League (CPL) to re-think when organizing events. His article is directed to the Counter-Strike community but applies fairly well to any E-Sport (not to mention regular sport) tournaments and leagues. Myers suggests an alternative method of adding group stages instead - dividing each event into five different event days. The suggested method would include seedings but they would play a much less important role in the final outcome of the tournament. "There are an equal number of people that say it is more far important to follow a tournament that, once ended, has separated the teams fairly in terms of ability", Myers explains. The article is written with a rather high level of English but explains the experienced problems with seedings very thoroughly. The final point and message of the article, however, is easy to understand and perfectly formulated. Check it out for yourself in the link below.
Agree or disagree? Feel free to post your comments below.
Links
UKTerrorist.com - Segregated By Seedings
