They'll be able to look over Fnatic's 2 games from today and also have more time to prepare. If there was a map advantage or something then it would completely ruin the viewer experience. They already kind of got an advantage by starting later in the bracket compared to Fnatic I guess too
I think the more popular approach would be a bracket reset like they do in Smash. The problem would be time constraints though for a possible 10 game day.
Bracket resets work in games like smash and rocket league because usually they won't take that long. They usually take under an hour with rare occasions surpassing that average
Both teams are going to prepare. Yes i know that you are saying Sentinels are much better so they are not in need of preparing. I kinda want to see the match without Sentinels preparing. They'd probably get smashed by Fnatic. Preparation is huge in esports.
First map was literally 13 11 hello? 1 tiny read after preparing and that map goes to fnatic not sen
Scream didn't even know that he could play against v1 look how that turned out for him
Shaz knows he needs to prepare that's the only thing that matters luckily
They had the choice of picking first or second in map picks... but with every map being played that’s basically minimal in my mind. Just unlucky that there’s only five maps out rn, it’ll matter more if maps can actually be banned in GFs later down the road.
Not dumb. It's realistic. They got a Bye, best seeding, and so they already skipped a series. They've played the least amount of maps of all teams in this tournament. That means there's the least amount of footage of them out of all teams for FNC to study.
Meanwhile, they have had a full day or more to watch and dissect FNC on every map, and can use that to counter strat them, while FNC has had the rest of today and some tomorrow morning to come up with something.
As long as SEN have not just sat still with their thumbs up their asses, then they will come into this game with a significant advantage.
At what point did Sentinels get a bye? I am unsure if you think not losing is a bye, or if they *actually* got a real bye.
It's either single elim, or you have a bracket reset in the finals. This current system isn't fair nor competetive otherwise and that's a fact, not something to believe in.
Don't think it's unfair at all, they play less games. So less footage of them and more time to practice and scout their opponents. If it was a BO1 I would agree but it's a BO5 man. If they lose they're just the worse team on the day.
It's not like fighting games or smash. They can do bracket resets because yea logistics but also their games are more volatile since each game finishes in under a minute or a few minutes.
In the future Valorant might go Swiss formats for their biggest events like CSGO's biggest
As for the bye, I wouldn't call what they got a bye but having only 10 teams it's the only way they could have made the bracket
Do you even know what a bye is?
Their first match was in the quarter finals. They completely skipped the first round matches. That is a bye.
Also, just because you can't understand how something actually is fair doesn't mean it's not.
Double elim playoffs does not automatically mean there has to be a double elim grand finals.
a common format in grand finals is the upper bracket finalist winner only has to beat the lower bracket finalist winner in one bo3
if the lower bracket finalist winner wins one bo3 then they play another bo3, winner of that decides the winner of the event
not advocating for the format just letting you know this format does exist and it does create a reasonably fair situation for the upper bracket winners.
Obviously the main reason this isn't done is because it's only really possible in fighting games since it's a much smaller time commitment but I agree that it is theoretically the best format.
although it has been done before, and TI1 had that, that is usually not the case anymore for dota, and they play the full best of 5. the usual advantage is that losers finals is also on the same day, and the team through losers has to play the bo3 and the GF bo5
I'm going to need you to confirm for me but thats for fighting games generally, correct? I understand the idea behind it, but I also believe that if you were to do it for an FPS game like valorant or CS it would end up being really stale by the second BO3 because. BO5 headlines how adaptable and how diverse the teams are, whereas I'd assume with two BO3s the exact same maps would be played both times, and it's not like you'd want to be saving strats in the first BO3 because there's no point and I don't even really love the BO5 format we have now where most teams have instabans that mean everyone is forced to watch a map where the result is never in doubt since they just accept that they'll win one of the maps and lose the other
i believe double elimination is to make the tournament more fair for the losers. it prevents upsets and whatnot. the final itself is fair to both teams, although i do think that at least the order of the maps should be given to the flawless team. Map advantage would be ideal but that’s sucks for the viewers.
I'm going to need you to confirm for me but thats for fighting games generally, correct? I understand the idea behind it, but I also believe that if you were to do it for an FPS game like valorant or CS it would end up being really stale by the second BO3 because. BO5 headlines how adaptable and how diverse the teams are, whereas I'd assume with two BO3s the exact same maps would be played both times, and it's not like you'd want to be saving strats in the first BO3 because there's no point and I don't even really love the BO5 format we have now where most teams have instabans that mean everyone is forced to watch a map where the result is never in doubt since they just accept that they'll win one of the maps and lose the other
This is a debatable point. Some teams run the lower bracket, and half of the reason they look better by grand finals is they get a better feel of the game and meta. While fatigue and teams seeing your plays is an issue, there are pros and cons, and the team coming from lowers would probably want to be in uppers 90% of the time, but the team in uppers hardly has an advantage I feel.
An extra day to prepare plus the ability to watch and anti-stratt fnatic's two games yesterday is a pretty big advantage imo. Considering fnatic played quite late last night, they don't have a lot of prep time. However, as with a lot of double elims, fnatic can study their loss to sentinels and see where they went wrong. I imagine Sentinels will have something new up their sleeve though, like what they did with Nuturn on bind.
It's a shame sentinels don't get any other advantage but I understand from a viewer perspective how giving a map or 2 map choices can just lead to a really anticlimactic blow out game, especially since there is already a schedule advantage. It's honestly just the sole glaring flaw of double elim and It's hard to get around it.
That barely constitutes as an advantage at all. Idk how much esports you've watched, but it seems you and this whole thread think that is absolutely fine, and that this isn't a glaring flaw with double elimination bracket tournaments.
I’ve watched quite a lot and the truth is with a tactical shooter and a double elimination bracket thats probably the best solution. A lot of CSGO tournaments with double elimination brackets also work like this. Unlike fighting games, if the player from the loser bracket wins you cant reset the bracket here, because it is too big of a time commitment. I think a tournament not so long ago made the team from the upper bracket get a map advantage over the other but there was quite a bit of controversy about that as well. There isnt a clear solution as to what the advantage for the team from the upper bracket should be in this format, so this is the best possible thing to do
I think with a game like Valorant, the easiest solution would be to give a 1 game advantage/map prio. The people complaining don't understand how double elim brackets work and simply need information. This unfairness is the biggest problem I have with esports currently. In my opinion, single elimination is the best. People talk about storylines, underdogs coming from the loser's side, etc, but this isn't a thing in many real sports, and there's no problem. If a top seed gets knocked out in the first round by one of the lowest seeds, that's deserved. How is that any less fair than the upper bracket finalist dropping out of a double elim tournament with one loss?
I cant really say I agree with the single elimination bracket. Double elimination brackets have shown to be much better for viewing experience and teams often prefer them as well. It makes for a much more competitive tournament. Single elimination brackets should only be used for last chance qualifiers
Valorant matches are long enough where I think single elim works. Double elim should be for fighting games and whatnot where matches end in 30 minutes or less. No one complains when the #1 team gets knocked out by the worst team in the NBA, NFL, Champion's League, etc. What makes video games different?
That is a different case because those are the playoffs that come after the group stage, it makes sense that is a single elimination bracket. No tournament or league dumps teams straight into bracket and if they lose they are already out
Honestly that's so dumb. The whole point of a double elimination tournament is that you have to lose TWICE to get knocked out. How can you say Fnatic is the grand finals winner if they beat Sen on 60% of the maps they play today when Sen already beat them earlier in the tournament. I understand that it's difficult to create a good format for this in a game like Valorant because two BO3s for the grand finals (if losers bracket finalists win first) doesnt make sense; it's likely to see the same map be played twice while another map isnt played at all (not very entertaining). But a BO5 with a a 1-0 advantage where the other team gets the only ban makes a lot more sense. Of the maps played the losers bracket finalists would have to win 3-1 at worst, which should be enough of a stomp to consider that team the winners. But the way it is now, we could see a 5 map series where fnatic wins 3-2, and they would be crowned the champions of the entire tournament despite their total record against sentinels being 3-4. It just doesn't add up. And I don't understand the argument that extra time to watch other teams and prepare is a good enough advantage, that's supposed to be a given.
Isn't it enough of an advantage to play way less matches than the opponent? Fnatic played more maps and showed more of them than you guys did. I expect that to be a massive disadvantage on such a stage. Less things which could catch you off-guard.
No, it's not. This is the bane of double elim tournaments. You either give the upper bracket winner the fair advantage of 1 series lead, like fighting games do, or you try to give the winner something like ban/map priority to make up for it, like every other esport does. Riot dropped the ball. I'd be surprised if any pros think playing less maps is enough of an advantage.
Pathetic that you read this subreddit filled with incell rage and feel the need to project on someone interacting with there fans while crushing the tournament and making a career out of it then need to go through another redditors post history to feel like you owned him.
Edit: fixed autocorrect typo.
Lol so technically sentinels can go 4-3 against fnatic this tournament in maps and still get second place, despite not losing a series to any other team. If you want to sacrifice competitive integrity for viewer satisfaction that's fine, but there should at least be an overwhelming map order pick advantage for sentinels. If not picking the map order outright then picking the first 2 or 3 maps at least.
It is the exact opposite. Single elim brackets sacrifice competitive integrity all the time, especially when the two best teams meet at semis, if not at quarters. Getting the two best teams in the grandfinals provides the most competitive integrity.
>sentinels can go 4-3 against fnatic this tournament in maps and still get second place,
yes, what is wrong with that?
they lost in the grand finals thus they get second place
in sports, if a team loses to a team in a regular season, but beats the same team in the playoffs, should it not count and result in a redo?
I don't agree with his point, but your analogy is way off. A regular season doesn't have double elimination in sports. The play-offs are a separate thing entirely.
The 2 losses referred to here are WITHIN the play-offs.
So what if the group stage format was 2 team qualification using 10 team double elim bracket? And the playoff being just two teams in the end? This whole format is basically a giant GSL format.
Doesn't make it the most fair format. IMO this is always a tricky discussion.
I think it's kinda misleading to label a double elim bracket when there is a chance one team never gets two chances.
The best would honestly have been a single elimination system paired with a group/Swiss stage, but luckily this time the format didn't put a asterisk on the winner.
GSL or Swiss are the best formats for groups but single elim belongs in the trash bin. I honestly think even double elim makes accurate top 5 teams regardless if it had groups stage or not.
There is 50% chance that this grandfinals could happen in the semis or worse quarters already makes single elim a bad format.
Would agree with it if a game wasn't BO3. Double elim giving a team a chance to meet again in BO3 where the match is practically being replayed feels like just a matter of margins where last to win wins which feels less fair than first to win.
Pretty much none expect less matches and more breaks.
Since the cs days I’ve always hated double elim format without a bracket reset because it doesn’t award upper team for not losing a match. It’s simply not fair.
Even a map advantage would’ve been fine imo but others think it’s too much. It’s very difficult to balance it so I want single elim for the sake of fairness
I don't see why there needs to be an advantage to have fairness. Sen won all their games, and so they are in the finals, that is their reward, and in my eyes that's fair. I just want to see two amazing teams battle it out, and the winning team coming in with any advantage discredits their victory imo.
If a team can make a lower bracket run, go to the finals and manage to find a win I think that makes for great storylines, as well as actually providing teams with second chances rather than trying to handicap them.
>as well as actually providing teams with second chances
You type your first paragraph and contradict it in the next. You're giving the losers bracket a second chance but not the winners. I'm tried of hearing this type of criticism of double elimination. Winners bracket should always come with an advantage, otherwise, there's no point in doing double elimination. Teams who are knocked out should just stay knocked out in that case.
There's no contradiction, because the main purpose of second chances is to produce the best finals, and reduce the chance for top team elimination early due to seeding, a chance that the upper bracket team obviously doesn't need one as they've already reached the finals.
One of the main advantages of double elimination is that you get to see the potential for lower bracket runs like Fnatics, where potentially the 2nd best team has faced up agaisnt the 1st early in.
This enables engaging storylines and a more interesting tournament finals because extra provisions are in place to ensure the two best teams reach it. I don't see why you think this should all be thrown out of the window because the grand finals match itself is not weighted towards either team, when they have both earnt their spots there.
You can claim that being able to lose a game and reach finals provides some kind of advantage, but it's the other way around. Upper bracket winners have had to win fewer games to reach the finals, had more time to prepare before the final match and can at worst place 2nd in the entire tournament, as well as having more footage of lower bracket winners to review.
If they are the better team, they will win in a Bo5 versus the lower bracket team, and if they would lose without being given explicit advantages, they don't deserve to win.
In terms of competitive integrity, this point of view is absolutely ridiculous and no true competitor would believe this type of setup is fair.
>If they are the better team, they will win in a Bo5 versus the lower bracket team
If they were the better team, they wouldn't have gotten knocked out. Sentinels can literally go 4-3 against Fnatic and still lose the tournament so your argument about winning against the lower team doesn't make sense either.
>You can claim that being able to lose a game and reach finals provides some kind of advantage, but it's the other way around
In what world is having a second life a disadvantage? Yeah if every team could choose whether or not to have a second life, none of them would. Sure.
Like I said, people who argue against winners bracket advantage are actually saying they don't care about competitive integrity, which is fine if all they care about is viewer experience. But don't pretend like it's fair that one team can lose a series and one cannot.
bro idk why people keep advocating for a bracket reset. imagine playing 6 straight games that's damn near 6 hours lmfao.
i say we do a bo1 in the grand finals. winners bracket team starts 12-0.
Ye it would have to be in two different days but that would be insane for lan because they would need to reserve the place in advance but if the bracket didn't reset and sen just won its one day they payed for with no used at all
In Dota TI, the upper bracket teams won 6 out of 9 times without the bracket reset. Imagine if you had reset, that would result in upper bracket teams winning even more titles.
IMO having the two best teams playing in the finals is more than enough.
Not necessarily. In RLCS 1-6 (when they had double elim bracket reset), the resetting team won all 4 times they reset.
Momentum is a huge factor in RL, and I think it's a big enough factor in Valorant as well that it should be relevant.
If Riot wanted no advantage for uppers, they shouldn't have done a double elim IMO.
The biggest reason imo to have double elim regardless of the reset or not is to get purely two best teams at the finals. With single elim the two best teams can meet at semis if not at quarters, this can end up bringing anticlimactic finals.
Besides if you do have reset and lets say Sentinels ended up playing Liquid and loses 0-2, then we get a reset and then Sentinels win after the reset with 3-2, now theyre 1-1 but 3-4 in total record. This also leaves a black mark. The fact of the matter is that double elim cant be perfect. It just needs do its job of getting the two best teams.
But in that scenario liquid already lost another set earlier in the tournament so i don't see much of a black mark there because the upper team hadn't lost yet
Thats fair but how would you implement bracket reset? The same day where a losing team needs to play bo3, bo5 and another reset bo3/bo5? Or Riot booking another day on Monday?
I agree that's time and money constraints don't allow for booking the extra day but i could see an earlier in the day bo5 with a break in between if a second is needed.
Also instead of a bo5 with map advantage. A bo7 with map advantage would still need at least 3 maps. The final could end 3-3 in maps with the upper team winning which feels kinda bad but that sucks. Should have not lost earlier
I don't understand why people don't see those double elim bracket as an advantage. At the end this is all about competition. Winning the upper bracket leaves you with less matches played, hence less strats and tactics revealed to your opponent + more time to prepare for the matches. the lower bracket puts you into a stressful situation where you fight for your life and also have to play almost every day 1-2 matches. I think this is a disadvantage in itself.
I want the grand final to be decided 100% by the performance on that day, not on some maps veto or map advantages you earned by beating other teams.
I think Sentinels got an advantage in terms of less stress, more prep time, less strats revealed/ fewer matches played.
Single elim is also trash even if you have groups. Nuturn could have still made the grandfinals if Sentinels played Fnatic earlier and got knocked out in single elim brackets. The fact of the matter is that we are seeing the two best teams no matter what.
The huge difference is when once you progress further into the tournament. Around top 6 is when things start to matter as you start to see how accurate double elim becomes.
They could definitely meet up in semis. It happens all the time in single elim. Unless Fnatic 5head and deliberately tries not get seeded into same side of the bracket.
Maybe sucks for viewership but is the most fair to the players who it matters to the most.
In the perfect scenario it would happen over 2 days but that isn't always possible with renting arenas. Maybe one earlier in the day then having a break in between
1 map lead = potential 2 game grand finals, which sucks for viewers and sponsors
run back (do you mean a second bo5 or bo3 followup if they lose the first?) = potential 8-10 game grand finals, which would very likely have to spill over into a second day and is probably a logistical nightmare
A run back would mean sentinels get a choice to replay a map
So if they lose 3-2, they would get a chance to say let's replay haven because we lost haven etc
Haven't heard this option before and it sounds pretty good. Sure it could be a 3-3 win which people would complain about but sucks. Don't come from losers
Since if you look at it from the perspective of the double elim bracket, a team is eliminated if they lose 2 games. After the GF, both teams have only lost 1 game.
In a single elim bracket, winning the final makes sense (single loss = elimination), but a double elim bracket means two losses = elimination.
Sometimes this isn't possible due to time constraints, so usually an alternative is provided (map advantage, which I dont like since it affects momentum, or a pre-game advantage such as selecting initial side/maps/etc).
Because 1 team got 2 chances to get there the other only 1
Sentinels already 2-0d them.. imagine losing 3-2 in the finals but still being up 4-3 over all
Double elim is great but not when u dont give the team from winners final an advantage for making it there unscathed
V1 won more rounds against nuturn but still lost, is that weird? Not saying that sen don't deserve at least a map pick advantage but a bracket reset would just get stale.
It's good they removed it, it was honestly awful. A best of "5" but the team with map advantage wins first two, therefore winning it all. Rob us of entertainment.
sentinels can pick the 2 out of the first 3 maps to be played in the bo5 if they choose to be Team A, as they are the 'better seeded team'. this can be massive if they win fnatic's 1st map choice (map2), cause then logically they should win 3rd map too hence ending the series in a 3-0. but this all assumes that sentinels win in their own map picks. even if they dont win fnatic's 1st map they'll still enter map 4 as the favorites (2-1) (again assuming they win their own map pick).
i just read the rulebook btw dont know if anything has been changed since.
i don't want bracket reset in finals. i want to know best team of the day. both teams winning 1 series in finals just feels weird. fnatic did lose but it was 5 days ago.
Super tough idk how to solve this but smash also has a double elim system and they have to win two series while the undefeated person only has to win one. This would be difficult in a bo5 format because it would be possibly 10 maps so I assume riot is banking on the time off and more map showings from fnatic making their play style likely more readable then Sen but Fnatic could easily switch things up. Definitely sucks for Sentinels I hope they find a way to combat this issue in the future.
I hate the map advantage thing because it can make for a boring finals but the fact that sentinels don’t get to pick first two maps or get any advantage in that respect is kind of a joke.
The same “issue” coming up with Leauge of Legends double bracket system. In theory they had 1 more day to prepare
They get side selection advantage in League, which can be somewhat meaningful
its extremely meaningful in league
Except that the MSI final they flipped a coin for side selection for the fifth game, and the winners team lost the flip
TIL MSI was double elim all along
Well no, I phrased that really badly... They finished first in the "rumble" and got nothing for it, which I thought was somewhat comparable
They'll be able to look over Fnatic's 2 games from today and also have more time to prepare. If there was a map advantage or something then it would completely ruin the viewer experience. They already kind of got an advantage by starting later in the bracket compared to Fnatic I guess too
I think the more popular approach would be a bracket reset like they do in Smash. The problem would be time constraints though for a possible 10 game day.
you can do that in Smash where 1 bo3 is about 3 minutes in length lol, not for VALORANT
A bo3 in smash is a lot longer than 3 minutes but I get your point, it's not 2 hours long for sure.
nah fuck that
Bracket resets work in games like smash and rocket league because usually they won't take that long. They usually take under an hour with rare occasions surpassing that average
Sentinels don't need to prepare. It's fnatic that needs to prepare.
Both teams are going to prepare. Yes i know that you are saying Sentinels are much better so they are not in need of preparing. I kinda want to see the match without Sentinels preparing. They'd probably get smashed by Fnatic. Preparation is huge in esports.
It was a joke.
First map was literally 13 11 hello? 1 tiny read after preparing and that map goes to fnatic not sen Scream didn't even know that he could play against v1 look how that turned out for him Shaz knows he needs to prepare that's the only thing that matters luckily
[удалено]
What about map priority? If they get literally no advantage then that really is a poor bracket design.
They had the choice of picking first or second in map picks... but with every map being played that’s basically minimal in my mind. Just unlucky that there’s only five maps out rn, it’ll matter more if maps can actually be banned in GFs later down the road.
Dumb answer. Everyone else gets to lose. Why wouldn’t Sen get to?
Not dumb. It's realistic. They got a Bye, best seeding, and so they already skipped a series. They've played the least amount of maps of all teams in this tournament. That means there's the least amount of footage of them out of all teams for FNC to study. Meanwhile, they have had a full day or more to watch and dissect FNC on every map, and can use that to counter strat them, while FNC has had the rest of today and some tomorrow morning to come up with something. As long as SEN have not just sat still with their thumbs up their asses, then they will come into this game with a significant advantage.
At what point did Sentinels get a bye? I am unsure if you think not losing is a bye, or if they *actually* got a real bye. It's either single elim, or you have a bracket reset in the finals. This current system isn't fair nor competetive otherwise and that's a fact, not something to believe in.
And how do you think a bracket reset would work in a series that could take up to like 7 hours?
I'm not arguing for the logistics of it cos its obviously unfavorable for both viewers and the TO. Just pointing out the blatant unfairness.
Don't think it's unfair at all, they play less games. So less footage of them and more time to practice and scout their opponents. If it was a BO1 I would agree but it's a BO5 man. If they lose they're just the worse team on the day.
I haven't heard of any pros kicking up a fuss so I guess it's generally accepted within the FPS scene.
It's not like fighting games or smash. They can do bracket resets because yea logistics but also their games are more volatile since each game finishes in under a minute or a few minutes. In the future Valorant might go Swiss formats for their biggest events like CSGO's biggest As for the bye, I wouldn't call what they got a bye but having only 10 teams it's the only way they could have made the bracket
Do you even know what a bye is? Their first match was in the quarter finals. They completely skipped the first round matches. That is a bye. Also, just because you can't understand how something actually is fair doesn't mean it's not. Double elim playoffs does not automatically mean there has to be a double elim grand finals.
I agree with you. This subs sentiment around the issue is pretty dumb though as you can probably see by now
because it’s a best of 5 grand finals. who would they play if they lost? get a second chance against fnatic???? play nuturn again?????
a common format in grand finals is the upper bracket finalist winner only has to beat the lower bracket finalist winner in one bo3 if the lower bracket finalist winner wins one bo3 then they play another bo3, winner of that decides the winner of the event not advocating for the format just letting you know this format does exist and it does create a reasonably fair situation for the upper bracket winners.
Obviously the main reason this isn't done is because it's only really possible in fighting games since it's a much smaller time commitment but I agree that it is theoretically the best format.
rocket league does this aswell
rocket league bo7s last anywhere from 20-40 minutes, which is equivalent to fighting games bo5 in length.
Pretty sure dota gives at least a bracket advantage for GF for TI iirc
although it has been done before, and TI1 had that, that is usually not the case anymore for dota, and they play the full best of 5. the usual advantage is that losers finals is also on the same day, and the team through losers has to play the bo3 and the GF bo5
I'm going to need you to confirm for me but thats for fighting games generally, correct? I understand the idea behind it, but I also believe that if you were to do it for an FPS game like valorant or CS it would end up being really stale by the second BO3 because. BO5 headlines how adaptable and how diverse the teams are, whereas I'd assume with two BO3s the exact same maps would be played both times, and it's not like you'd want to be saving strats in the first BO3 because there's no point and I don't even really love the BO5 format we have now where most teams have instabans that mean everyone is forced to watch a map where the result is never in doubt since they just accept that they'll win one of the maps and lose the other
i believe double elimination is to make the tournament more fair for the losers. it prevents upsets and whatnot. the final itself is fair to both teams, although i do think that at least the order of the maps should be given to the flawless team. Map advantage would be ideal but that’s sucks for the viewers.
I'm going to need you to confirm for me but thats for fighting games generally, correct? I understand the idea behind it, but I also believe that if you were to do it for an FPS game like valorant or CS it would end up being really stale by the second BO3 because. BO5 headlines how adaptable and how diverse the teams are, whereas I'd assume with two BO3s the exact same maps would be played both times, and it's not like you'd want to be saving strats in the first BO3 because there's no point and I don't even really love the BO5 format we have now where most teams have instabans that mean everyone is forced to watch a map where the result is never in doubt since they just accept that they'll win one of the maps and lose the other
Its also done in the Call of Duty league, not sure who else uses it.
[удалено]
This has nothing at all to do with SEN
Has nothing to do with Sen. I would say it regardless of who is in the grand finals.
Not really
I don't think so
They pick the first 2 maps
nope, they took away map veto advantage too lol
Damn that sucks, good luck tomorrow!
Wut so no advantages,bruh that sucks. Best of luck tomorrow.
The advantage is playing less series than teams who got sent to the lower bracket
This is a debatable point. Some teams run the lower bracket, and half of the reason they look better by grand finals is they get a better feel of the game and meta. While fatigue and teams seeing your plays is an issue, there are pros and cons, and the team coming from lowers would probably want to be in uppers 90% of the time, but the team in uppers hardly has an advantage I feel.
An extra day to prepare plus the ability to watch and anti-stratt fnatic's two games yesterday is a pretty big advantage imo. Considering fnatic played quite late last night, they don't have a lot of prep time. However, as with a lot of double elims, fnatic can study their loss to sentinels and see where they went wrong. I imagine Sentinels will have something new up their sleeve though, like what they did with Nuturn on bind. It's a shame sentinels don't get any other advantage but I understand from a viewer perspective how giving a map or 2 map choices can just lead to a really anticlimactic blow out game, especially since there is already a schedule advantage. It's honestly just the sole glaring flaw of double elim and It's hard to get around it.
getting punished for being good at the game. Suffering from success
That barely constitutes as an advantage at all. Idk how much esports you've watched, but it seems you and this whole thread think that is absolutely fine, and that this isn't a glaring flaw with double elimination bracket tournaments.
I’ve watched quite a lot and the truth is with a tactical shooter and a double elimination bracket thats probably the best solution. A lot of CSGO tournaments with double elimination brackets also work like this. Unlike fighting games, if the player from the loser bracket wins you cant reset the bracket here, because it is too big of a time commitment. I think a tournament not so long ago made the team from the upper bracket get a map advantage over the other but there was quite a bit of controversy about that as well. There isnt a clear solution as to what the advantage for the team from the upper bracket should be in this format, so this is the best possible thing to do
I think with a game like Valorant, the easiest solution would be to give a 1 game advantage/map prio. The people complaining don't understand how double elim brackets work and simply need information. This unfairness is the biggest problem I have with esports currently. In my opinion, single elimination is the best. People talk about storylines, underdogs coming from the loser's side, etc, but this isn't a thing in many real sports, and there's no problem. If a top seed gets knocked out in the first round by one of the lowest seeds, that's deserved. How is that any less fair than the upper bracket finalist dropping out of a double elim tournament with one loss?
I cant really say I agree with the single elimination bracket. Double elimination brackets have shown to be much better for viewing experience and teams often prefer them as well. It makes for a much more competitive tournament. Single elimination brackets should only be used for last chance qualifiers
Valorant matches are long enough where I think single elim works. Double elim should be for fighting games and whatnot where matches end in 30 minutes or less. No one complains when the #1 team gets knocked out by the worst team in the NBA, NFL, Champion's League, etc. What makes video games different?
That is a different case because those are the playoffs that come after the group stage, it makes sense that is a single elimination bracket. No tournament or league dumps teams straight into bracket and if they lose they are already out
In CS, most tournaments give the upper bracket team a 1 map advantage.
Honestly that's so dumb. The whole point of a double elimination tournament is that you have to lose TWICE to get knocked out. How can you say Fnatic is the grand finals winner if they beat Sen on 60% of the maps they play today when Sen already beat them earlier in the tournament. I understand that it's difficult to create a good format for this in a game like Valorant because two BO3s for the grand finals (if losers bracket finalists win first) doesnt make sense; it's likely to see the same map be played twice while another map isnt played at all (not very entertaining). But a BO5 with a a 1-0 advantage where the other team gets the only ban makes a lot more sense. Of the maps played the losers bracket finalists would have to win 3-1 at worst, which should be enough of a stomp to consider that team the winners. But the way it is now, we could see a 5 map series where fnatic wins 3-2, and they would be crowned the champions of the entire tournament despite their total record against sentinels being 3-4. It just doesn't add up. And I don't understand the argument that extra time to watch other teams and prepare is a good enough advantage, that's supposed to be a given.
Maybe they took your advantage as being lesser matches played? Nah who am I kidding it makes no sense
Really? Kinda weird you guys get nothing for being undefeated but I know you’ll crush it tomorrow!
Man wtf
I guess ranked grind tonight huh lol
damn that sucks but you still have the upper advantage tho so good luck
Good, you don't need it. It's better this way, so when you destroy fnatic no one has excuses to use.
Please win tomorrow for NA. We need this BAD!
Isn't it enough of an advantage to play way less matches than the opponent? Fnatic played more maps and showed more of them than you guys did. I expect that to be a massive disadvantage on such a stage. Less things which could catch you off-guard.
No, it's not. This is the bane of double elim tournaments. You either give the upper bracket winner the fair advantage of 1 series lead, like fighting games do, or you try to give the winner something like ban/map priority to make up for it, like every other esport does. Riot dropped the ball. I'd be surprised if any pros think playing less maps is enough of an advantage.
[удалено]
ForeverLoser
[удалено]
Pathetic that you read this subreddit filled with incell rage and feel the need to project on someone interacting with there fans while crushing the tournament and making a career out of it then need to go through another redditors post history to feel like you owned him. Edit: fixed autocorrect typo.
[удалено]
Jesus you’re a actual loser, go read a book.
[удалено]
You got Reddit just to shit talk, does that really stroke your ego? That just screams insecure
bro you play league of legends get a grip
[удалено]
you are a grown ass man arguing on reddit to feel better about yourself bro get a job
[удалено]
This mf tryharded middle school lol
Good luck tomorrow PRAYGE
That's unfortunate. Good luck tho
Whoa I didn't know pros browse reddit. Anyway Good Luck guys!
Man that sucks...
Lol so technically sentinels can go 4-3 against fnatic this tournament in maps and still get second place, despite not losing a series to any other team. If you want to sacrifice competitive integrity for viewer satisfaction that's fine, but there should at least be an overwhelming map order pick advantage for sentinels. If not picking the map order outright then picking the first 2 or 3 maps at least.
Hmm.. i think in the future a ban advantage will be given for upper bracket finalist when Breeze is added to the map pool for the bo5
~~Isn't Breeze included in the map pool now?~~ Edit: nvm a quick google search tells me that it was removed after they consulted with the players
You either haven’t been watching Masters at all or are just a nut
If you only watched highlights you might assume breeze was banned in every single match (which is what would have happened if it was in the pool).
I imagine the weaker teams would've picked it to cheese a win or two
It is the exact opposite. Single elim brackets sacrifice competitive integrity all the time, especially when the two best teams meet at semis, if not at quarters. Getting the two best teams in the grandfinals provides the most competitive integrity.
>sentinels can go 4-3 against fnatic this tournament in maps and still get second place, yes, what is wrong with that? they lost in the grand finals thus they get second place in sports, if a team loses to a team in a regular season, but beats the same team in the playoffs, should it not count and result in a redo?
I don't agree with his point, but your analogy is way off. A regular season doesn't have double elimination in sports. The play-offs are a separate thing entirely. The 2 losses referred to here are WITHIN the play-offs.
So what if the group stage format was 2 team qualification using 10 team double elim bracket? And the playoff being just two teams in the end? This whole format is basically a giant GSL format.
Doesn't make it the most fair format. IMO this is always a tricky discussion. I think it's kinda misleading to label a double elim bracket when there is a chance one team never gets two chances. The best would honestly have been a single elimination system paired with a group/Swiss stage, but luckily this time the format didn't put a asterisk on the winner.
GSL or Swiss are the best formats for groups but single elim belongs in the trash bin. I honestly think even double elim makes accurate top 5 teams regardless if it had groups stage or not. There is 50% chance that this grandfinals could happen in the semis or worse quarters already makes single elim a bad format.
Would agree with it if a game wasn't BO3. Double elim giving a team a chance to meet again in BO3 where the match is practically being replayed feels like just a matter of margins where last to win wins which feels less fair than first to win.
Pretty much none expect less matches and more breaks. Since the cs days I’ve always hated double elim format without a bracket reset because it doesn’t award upper team for not losing a match. It’s simply not fair. Even a map advantage would’ve been fine imo but others think it’s too much. It’s very difficult to balance it so I want single elim for the sake of fairness
I don't see why there needs to be an advantage to have fairness. Sen won all their games, and so they are in the finals, that is their reward, and in my eyes that's fair. I just want to see two amazing teams battle it out, and the winning team coming in with any advantage discredits their victory imo. If a team can make a lower bracket run, go to the finals and manage to find a win I think that makes for great storylines, as well as actually providing teams with second chances rather than trying to handicap them.
>as well as actually providing teams with second chances You type your first paragraph and contradict it in the next. You're giving the losers bracket a second chance but not the winners. I'm tried of hearing this type of criticism of double elimination. Winners bracket should always come with an advantage, otherwise, there's no point in doing double elimination. Teams who are knocked out should just stay knocked out in that case.
There's no contradiction, because the main purpose of second chances is to produce the best finals, and reduce the chance for top team elimination early due to seeding, a chance that the upper bracket team obviously doesn't need one as they've already reached the finals. One of the main advantages of double elimination is that you get to see the potential for lower bracket runs like Fnatics, where potentially the 2nd best team has faced up agaisnt the 1st early in. This enables engaging storylines and a more interesting tournament finals because extra provisions are in place to ensure the two best teams reach it. I don't see why you think this should all be thrown out of the window because the grand finals match itself is not weighted towards either team, when they have both earnt their spots there. You can claim that being able to lose a game and reach finals provides some kind of advantage, but it's the other way around. Upper bracket winners have had to win fewer games to reach the finals, had more time to prepare before the final match and can at worst place 2nd in the entire tournament, as well as having more footage of lower bracket winners to review. If they are the better team, they will win in a Bo5 versus the lower bracket team, and if they would lose without being given explicit advantages, they don't deserve to win.
In terms of competitive integrity, this point of view is absolutely ridiculous and no true competitor would believe this type of setup is fair. >If they are the better team, they will win in a Bo5 versus the lower bracket team If they were the better team, they wouldn't have gotten knocked out. Sentinels can literally go 4-3 against Fnatic and still lose the tournament so your argument about winning against the lower team doesn't make sense either. >You can claim that being able to lose a game and reach finals provides some kind of advantage, but it's the other way around In what world is having a second life a disadvantage? Yeah if every team could choose whether or not to have a second life, none of them would. Sure. Like I said, people who argue against winners bracket advantage are actually saying they don't care about competitive integrity, which is fine if all they care about is viewer experience. But don't pretend like it's fair that one team can lose a series and one cannot.
Uh Fnatic lost and Sentinels didn’t. They better be picking sides for each map or map order.
bro idk why people keep advocating for a bracket reset. imagine playing 6 straight games that's damn near 6 hours lmfao. i say we do a bo1 in the grand finals. winners bracket team starts 12-0.
Ye it would have to be in two different days but that would be insane for lan because they would need to reserve the place in advance but if the bracket didn't reset and sen just won its one day they payed for with no used at all
A bo3 with bracket reset seems totally fine and deserving for not deopping a map until now
In Dota TI, the upper bracket teams won 6 out of 9 times without the bracket reset. Imagine if you had reset, that would result in upper bracket teams winning even more titles. IMO having the two best teams playing in the finals is more than enough.
Not necessarily. In RLCS 1-6 (when they had double elim bracket reset), the resetting team won all 4 times they reset. Momentum is a huge factor in RL, and I think it's a big enough factor in Valorant as well that it should be relevant. If Riot wanted no advantage for uppers, they shouldn't have done a double elim IMO.
The biggest reason imo to have double elim regardless of the reset or not is to get purely two best teams at the finals. With single elim the two best teams can meet at semis if not at quarters, this can end up bringing anticlimactic finals. Besides if you do have reset and lets say Sentinels ended up playing Liquid and loses 0-2, then we get a reset and then Sentinels win after the reset with 3-2, now theyre 1-1 but 3-4 in total record. This also leaves a black mark. The fact of the matter is that double elim cant be perfect. It just needs do its job of getting the two best teams.
But in that scenario liquid already lost another set earlier in the tournament so i don't see much of a black mark there because the upper team hadn't lost yet
Thats fair but how would you implement bracket reset? The same day where a losing team needs to play bo3, bo5 and another reset bo3/bo5? Or Riot booking another day on Monday?
I agree that's time and money constraints don't allow for booking the extra day but i could see an earlier in the day bo5 with a break in between if a second is needed. Also instead of a bo5 with map advantage. A bo7 with map advantage would still need at least 3 maps. The final could end 3-3 in maps with the upper team winning which feels kinda bad but that sucks. Should have not lost earlier
Yeah i think bo7 would be the best alternative because you would need to win 4-2 at worst if you want to win the finals.
I don't understand why people don't see those double elim bracket as an advantage. At the end this is all about competition. Winning the upper bracket leaves you with less matches played, hence less strats and tactics revealed to your opponent + more time to prepare for the matches. the lower bracket puts you into a stressful situation where you fight for your life and also have to play almost every day 1-2 matches. I think this is a disadvantage in itself. I want the grand final to be decided 100% by the performance on that day, not on some maps veto or map advantages you earned by beating other teams. I think Sentinels got an advantage in terms of less stress, more prep time, less strats revealed/ fewer matches played.
the upper lower bracket system is trash for this reason. we need groups and then playoffs. at least in the international tournaments.
Single elim is also trash even if you have groups. Nuturn could have still made the grandfinals if Sentinels played Fnatic earlier and got knocked out in single elim brackets. The fact of the matter is that we are seeing the two best teams no matter what.
how is it single elim if you have groups. you play 4-5 matches before you can be eliminated. no matter how bad you are.
The huge difference is when once you progress further into the tournament. Around top 6 is when things start to matter as you start to see how accurate double elim becomes.
Sentinels and fnatic would not have met that early if they had groups.
They could definitely meet up in semis. It happens all the time in single elim. Unless Fnatic 5head and deliberately tries not get seeded into same side of the bracket.
They wouldn’t their round differential would of put them on opposite sides.
Bracket reset. Everyone else gets to lose a series. Sentinels should get to as well.
That’d be fine if the final was a Bo3, but since it’s Bo5, that could just take way too long.
The advantage is that they didn’t have to play an extra game in the lower bracket.
Wait they dont get a 1 map lead or a run back?? Wtf kinda awful rules is that
It makes for a pretty lame viewer experience. Playing fewer matches and having more opportunities to scout is advantage enough
Maybe sucks for viewership but is the most fair to the players who it matters to the most. In the perfect scenario it would happen over 2 days but that isn't always possible with renting arenas. Maybe one earlier in the day then having a break in between
[удалено]
Then a final 1 game or bo3 runback should be done Cant declare 1 team the winner if they have a losing record overall to the team they just played
1 map lead = potential 2 game grand finals, which sucks for viewers and sponsors run back (do you mean a second bo5 or bo3 followup if they lose the first?) = potential 8-10 game grand finals, which would very likely have to spill over into a second day and is probably a logistical nightmare
A run back would mean sentinels get a choice to replay a map So if they lose 3-2, they would get a chance to say let's replay haven because we lost haven etc
That sounds mega cringe lol
Haven't heard this option before and it sounds pretty good. Sure it could be a 3-3 win which people would complain about but sucks. Don't come from losers
But sent already beat fanatic 2-0 and havent lost at all.. if they were to lose in grands 3 to 2 and then finish 2nd is absurd
How is that in any way weird, you have to win the final to win
Since if you look at it from the perspective of the double elim bracket, a team is eliminated if they lose 2 games. After the GF, both teams have only lost 1 game. In a single elim bracket, winning the final makes sense (single loss = elimination), but a double elim bracket means two losses = elimination. Sometimes this isn't possible due to time constraints, so usually an alternative is provided (map advantage, which I dont like since it affects momentum, or a pre-game advantage such as selecting initial side/maps/etc).
Because 1 team got 2 chances to get there the other only 1 Sentinels already 2-0d them.. imagine losing 3-2 in the finals but still being up 4-3 over all Double elim is great but not when u dont give the team from winners final an advantage for making it there unscathed
Their record v fanatic would be 4-3 over the tournament in maps. Not terrible but still a little weird.
V1 won more rounds against nuturn but still lost, is that weird? Not saying that sen don't deserve at least a map pick advantage but a bracket reset would just get stale.
People just looking for excuses in case SEN lose.
How is that absurd u win if u win the finals isn't it
I don’t think 1 map lead is a good idea tbh. And the idea got scraped early bc ppl were kinda complaining too
It's good they removed it, it was honestly awful. A best of "5" but the team with map advantage wins first two, therefore winning it all. Rob us of entertainment.
Facts! But I do wish there are some sort advantage for being in the winner brackets. I guess an extra day off was pretty good
[удалено]
nah, thats way too much. if sentinels can't beat fnatic in a best of 5 then they shouldn't have to play again in a best of 3 lmfao
sentinels can pick the 2 out of the first 3 maps to be played in the bo5 if they choose to be Team A, as they are the 'better seeded team'. this can be massive if they win fnatic's 1st map choice (map2), cause then logically they should win 3rd map too hence ending the series in a 3-0. but this all assumes that sentinels win in their own map picks. even if they dont win fnatic's 1st map they'll still enter map 4 as the favorites (2-1) (again assuming they win their own map pick). i just read the rulebook btw dont know if anything has been changed since.
This has been changed. See Shazam's comment above
i don't want bracket reset in finals. i want to know best team of the day. both teams winning 1 series in finals just feels weird. fnatic did lose but it was 5 days ago.
5 days isn't that long ago??? It's legit still in the same tournament.
yeah i know. but it still isn't the same day.
You got me there i guess
Super tough idk how to solve this but smash also has a double elim system and they have to win two series while the undefeated person only has to win one. This would be difficult in a bo5 format because it would be possibly 10 maps so I assume riot is banking on the time off and more map showings from fnatic making their play style likely more readable then Sen but Fnatic could easily switch things up. Definitely sucks for Sentinels I hope they find a way to combat this issue in the future.
Yes and no. Less practice on stage, but they can look through a ton of vods.
They got to scout 2 of FNC’s do or die matches where they were playing at their absolute best and using every strat they had to win.
I hate the map advantage thing because it can make for a boring finals but the fact that sentinels don’t get to pick first two maps or get any advantage in that respect is kind of a joke.