Finals of a Tournament, The Play offs...

[manike]

OK, I've though for a long time that the way we have our finals and decide a winner at big events could and should be better.

It sucks to see the event winning team celebrate from the sidelines as the last game finished on field! I want to see the team on field win the game, and the tournament and celebrate.

If we were to change how the finals played to make it more like other competitions and more 'knockout' I think it would play better to spectators and outside sponsors etc.

So make it such that qualifying top in the prelims is an advantage, rather than having the slate wiped clean. Top team in the prelims plays a lower scoring team in the finals.

Thus if you have 4 teams in the finals maybe...

1 V's 4 = The winner (say team 4) goes to Final to play for the title, team 1 plays in losers bracket for 3rd place.

2 V's 3 = The Winner (say team 2) goes to final and loser plays play off against team 1 for 3rd place)

So then we play 1 V's 3, the winner is third and the loser is 4th.

Then we have the GRAND FINAL (wahoo!) Team 4 plays Team 2, Winner gets the lot, loser get's second

We all watch the great finals game and see the winners celebrate on field.

This is how it's done in so many other sports, why not paintball? If you have 8 teams (or any multiple of 4) in the finals it works also.

manike

 

[TJ Lambini]

That's

how it worked at Euroball and Robo is advocating it for Millenniums right now...

 

[manike]

That's

Originally posted by TJ Lambini
how it worked at Euroball and Robo is advocating it for Millenniums right now...

Oh ****, I swear I didn't know! HONEST!

 

[Andy]

always more fun to see the team celebrate on the field then in the sidelines ,i agree with the spectators make it easier for them to understand whats going on.

 

[Beaker]

Seems a sensible idea to me, and it's been done before and worked.
Semi's could work out seeding for final play offs. but you could just work down from the 8, which is similar to the US sports system of league play followed by play offs, just all in rolled up in one tournament rather than over a season.

And that would a) be much easier to understand for an outsider b) slightly less games to fit in so easier to "promote" each one.
c) get's rid of tactical game throwing at a stroke.

 

[Buddha 3]

Plus it would also force teams to play balls to the walls paintball, instead of just hanging back, because they only need to shoot one guy in order to win the event. So it should make for more viewer friendly paintball.

 

[raehl]

Well..

Makes you pull the flag before you hang back.

Pretty common in the US, especially out east and it's the way Skyball does the last 16 teams - single elimination.


I, personally, hate it - seeding into finals is fairly arbitrary, so who ends up being in second place is determined just as much by the luck of seeding as it is any skill on the part of the teams.

It's a band-aid solution to the real problem, which is trying to declare a winner from 50-100 teams in a 3-day time frame, and then trying to collate the results of 5+ separate events run like that into a season score. Single elimination makes sense at the END of the season, it does not when you're talking about multiple events counting towards a season total.


- Chris

 

[Beaker]

Chris - but what it does do is give you the ability to recreate a whole season at each event. If you look at it that way it's that much more sensible.

And while I do agree it's a harsh system, it's fair and every team is only responsible to itself for it's result. There is none of this were teams are deprived of their position by results outside of thier control - which the current semi/finals system does.

Plus it also negates the problem of people needing to see a scoreboard in order to work out whos in the running.

I watched pretty much all the finals at every Millennium this year, and I can only think of Magued at Joy who told the crowd what was going on score wise, the rest I only followed through some good mental arithmetic (sp?).

 

[swysocki]

Well..

Originally posted by raehl
I, personally, hate it - seeding into finals is fairly arbitrary, so who ends up being in second place is determined just as much by the luck of seeding as it is any skill on the part of the teams.

- Chris

What luck? Either you play well in the semi's and get a top seed or you don't.

We have been playing tournies like that for quite some time here as well. The only people that complain are the low seeds from the semis...

 

[raehl]

When you're at a NPPL/PSP like event...

And you're advancing one team from 4 different brackets, your seeding is essentially arbitrary. Winning abracket with a score of 290 is statistically the same as winning a bracket with a score of 288; even then, which team performed better, the one with a 288 in the top seeded semifnals bracket, or the one with the 290 in the bottom seeded one?

Seeding into finals has very little to do with how well the teams are playing, and that's not an opinion, that's a mathematical fact. It's *LUCK* of the draw.

- Chris