Chariot of Fire wrote:I have to ask a very important question. Are the CDs going to use the F400 or the previous results of the Cup to determine seedings? Personally I have always been in favour of using the previous cup results (mainly because those clans still have an obligation to play a 60 game challenge) so if seedings = byes then it makes sense. There now appears to be another very good reason.......
F400 is the best determination for seedings. If we go with your suggestion then for example, if CC4 started last month, someone unseeded will play vs damaged BOTFM (seeded), get easy win, and just because of that draw luck, they would get next year seeding place (assuming that 1.b option with 16 seeds win). The example is even worse if we use random draw (option 2.b), then someone will get golden draw and ticket for final 16 or final 8, which means they were not lucky just in this Cup by having great draw but are also lucky for next edition by getting seeding place. F400 presents clan performance over 2 years period and is for sure the best determination of clan strength/seedings. Placement in last Cup a lot depends on draw, so it is not the best determination of clan strength.
Chariot of Fire wrote:If the F400 is used then it may be said that a clan's standing on it is very important, right? Well a recent result in the Random League which went 10-2 in TOFU's favour actually cost us points. We would have had to win 11-1 not to lose points on the F400. This I find pretty ridiculous and is a very good reason why I support Josko's earlier statement that top-ranked clans should not be drawn against low-ranked clans - not when a 90% win rate is needed to maintain position on the F400.
Chariot of Fire wrote:If so much weight is going to be given to the F400 then I feel it is imperative to avoid inequitable challenges.
I do not see problem here. You were played vs the last clan on ranking so it is really normal to expect 11/1 win, lower result penalizing your clan, and that or higher give additional points to your clan. As IP said, if some from top of scoreboard plays vs Cook and achieve 10/2 result, he will lose more points than gain. If you think 11/1 is unreal to achieve, look at last KORT results in CL5. 8-0 in away field vs DB, 7-1 on away field vs OSA, 7-1 vs HH. And all those clans are much higher ranked than MB, so I do not see why expectation of 11-1 result to improve your rank is unreal expectation. It is very real expectations for given ranks of each clan, and you achieved lower result than expectation was so there goes your losing points.
Chariot of Fire wrote:So Eddie's proposal has merit - create two tournaments that run in synch, one for the Top 50% and one for the Bottom 50% and prevent the lopsided match-ups that we've witnessed in the past (e.g. #1 vs #32) because those challenges don't produce winners - they produce one clan that lost (probably badly) and the other clan that also lost (position on the F400) which is a ridiculous scenario.
That was something indirectly proposed as option 3 in previous voting, but option 3 was even better because both of "tournaments" are at the end included in one tournament. There were bottom 50% in round 1, bottom 75% in round 2, and then winners of those small "tournaments" buy their ticket to join top 8 in "their" tournament. In essence that was already proposed but not everyone is able to read between the lines.