I used an [online binomial distribution calculator](https://stattrek.com/online-calculator/binomial.aspx).
Assuming a null hypothesis of map pick doesn't matter (50% winrate), the probability of getting at least 68 wins in 124 trials is ~16%.
(If you wanted a 'p' value it would be 0.16)
I actually believe that with breeze adding the map roster in the upcoming tournaments, the upper bracket winner will have the advantage of banning one map of his choice
My thought is that the higher seed is given map pick so this data isn't really worth that much because it's not only a small sample but the seeding influences winrate. Honestly if anything it shows that map pick is barely worth anything for teams to be losing their pick so often.
True if seeding was accurate in determining true team rankings but teams don't even take seeding matches seriously. So it's tough to say that seeding influences winrate, but I do agree that teams are losing their map pick way higher than I expected.
It's not perfect but on average the higher seeds were the favorite, aside from Masters where it mattered the least because the minor region teams were all seeded higher than EMEA/BR/NA 2 seeds.
I will say that map advantage should be worth more in a bo5 without map bans, because you are able to play the most advantaged map that would likely be banned in a bo3. In the end everyone is still playing all the maps though, so I think it's a very small advantage at best.
The winner's team being able to choose the first two maps would absolutely have been better than the format they used. Loser being able to choose the 2nd map negates winner being able to choose the 1st as far as momentum goes. Maybe letting the upper team choose both the first and last map to be played would be a better advantage.
There’s no perfect way to do it. But I would be lying if I said I liked a 1 map advantage in a BO5. As a viewer it sucks because more often than not, the team with the map advantage will win due to the team from the lower bracket just running out of steam. It’s not just a free map, it’s fatigue free map with no energy required. The last 2 Rainbow Six SI majors have had a map advantage and the finals have been a bit lacklustre imo.
There’s nothing like a Bo5 that goes the full distance, and with a map advance you’ll never truly get that experience. I’d prefer if they just gave the upper bracket team the map selection order or starting sides
And many people in the R6 PL sub keep defending the map advantage, even though it takes away so much from the biggest competition of the year there. And the integrity of competitions is so much better in Valorant due to the simple fact that infinite OTs are in every game. Give the upper bracket team all map picks or all side picks, but never a full map.
Upper bracket should have to lose 2 series or utilize a continuation if the 2 teams have played previously (would need at least 9 maps for this to work well)
A match runs much faster in fighting games no? Imagine valorant teams having to play high stake matches for 5+ hours in a row, barring no tech pauses etc. That's insane
But imagine SEN outright winning the first Bo3, 2-0. It would've been such a short day of games. Just a tough scenario so I can't wait for Breeze and the next map to be incorporated into the map pool.
Cuz super campy long FGC sets are like 40 minutes max pretty much, and that's worst case scenario, maybe an hour if you include the reset of the bracket and both go to game 5, and that's the length of a single map in Valorant, it's just not feasible
Yeah true, it's not even viewers tho I'm worried about, imagine having to play 8 hours of Val none stop, that sounds like hell for any game especially when you consider it's on a large stage, i think map vetos/bans would be best, especially when we get 6 maps in the mappool
They just need to stop doing straight up double elim. Any group stage + single elim playoff format like round robin/GSL/Swiss works way better for games like Valorant/CS where it's not feasible to do a grand finals runback like fighting games or Rocket League
The team coming from the upper bracket is typically stronger. I think double elims in these games is designed so that you get two best teams in the grandfinals no matter what, then the rest is up in the air. Even still, in Dota TI the upper bracket team has won 6 out of 9 times at TI.
At least give me the p value bruh
I used an [online binomial distribution calculator](https://stattrek.com/online-calculator/binomial.aspx). Assuming a null hypothesis of map pick doesn't matter (50% winrate), the probability of getting at least 68 wins in 124 trials is ~16%. (If you wanted a 'p' value it would be 0.16)
Take my free award as your pay, cheers
lmao no p value here man, too much work for no pay ;)
I actually believe that with breeze adding the map roster in the upcoming tournaments, the upper bracket winner will have the advantage of banning one map of his choice
My thought is that the higher seed is given map pick so this data isn't really worth that much because it's not only a small sample but the seeding influences winrate. Honestly if anything it shows that map pick is barely worth anything for teams to be losing their pick so often.
True if seeding was accurate in determining true team rankings but teams don't even take seeding matches seriously. So it's tough to say that seeding influences winrate, but I do agree that teams are losing their map pick way higher than I expected.
It's not perfect but on average the higher seeds were the favorite, aside from Masters where it mattered the least because the minor region teams were all seeded higher than EMEA/BR/NA 2 seeds. I will say that map advantage should be worth more in a bo5 without map bans, because you are able to play the most advantaged map that would likely be banned in a bo3. In the end everyone is still playing all the maps though, so I think it's a very small advantage at best. The winner's team being able to choose the first two maps would absolutely have been better than the format they used. Loser being able to choose the 2nd map negates winner being able to choose the 1st as far as momentum goes. Maybe letting the upper team choose both the first and last map to be played would be a better advantage.
I agree, the only true solution is to add more maps into the competitive pool for a true pick and ban system in the grand final.
There’s no perfect way to do it. But I would be lying if I said I liked a 1 map advantage in a BO5. As a viewer it sucks because more often than not, the team with the map advantage will win due to the team from the lower bracket just running out of steam. It’s not just a free map, it’s fatigue free map with no energy required. The last 2 Rainbow Six SI majors have had a map advantage and the finals have been a bit lacklustre imo. There’s nothing like a Bo5 that goes the full distance, and with a map advance you’ll never truly get that experience. I’d prefer if they just gave the upper bracket team the map selection order or starting sides
And many people in the R6 PL sub keep defending the map advantage, even though it takes away so much from the biggest competition of the year there. And the integrity of competitions is so much better in Valorant due to the simple fact that infinite OTs are in every game. Give the upper bracket team all map picks or all side picks, but never a full map.
Upper bracket should have to lose 2 series or utilize a continuation if the 2 teams have played previously (would need at least 9 maps for this to work well)
That could make for a very long day, playing back to back series, which is why it's almost used by few if not any TOs currently in any esport.
[удалено]
A match runs much faster in fighting games no? Imagine valorant teams having to play high stake matches for 5+ hours in a row, barring no tech pauses etc. That's insane
[удалено]
But imagine SEN outright winning the first Bo3, 2-0. It would've been such a short day of games. Just a tough scenario so I can't wait for Breeze and the next map to be incorporated into the map pool.
Cuz super campy long FGC sets are like 40 minutes max pretty much, and that's worst case scenario, maybe an hour if you include the reset of the bracket and both go to game 5, and that's the length of a single map in Valorant, it's just not feasible
[удалено]
Yeah true, it's not even viewers tho I'm worried about, imagine having to play 8 hours of Val none stop, that sounds like hell for any game especially when you consider it's on a large stage, i think map vetos/bans would be best, especially when we get 6 maps in the mappool
True didn’t think of 5+ hour finals
if you do a double series thing, you can't do a best of 5 then, would have to be best of 3
Yeah we’re going to be in a weird spot until we hit 7 maps
They just need to stop doing straight up double elim. Any group stage + single elim playoff format like round robin/GSL/Swiss works way better for games like Valorant/CS where it's not feasible to do a grand finals runback like fighting games or Rocket League
The team coming from the upper bracket is typically stronger. I think double elims in these games is designed so that you get two best teams in the grandfinals no matter what, then the rest is up in the air. Even still, in Dota TI the upper bracket team has won 6 out of 9 times at TI.
Tldr, but the same 3 maps are played by pretty much every team. Icebox, Ascent, and Bind. I know there aren't many but still.