Leehar wrote:The feeling was that this [Option 3] was even more elitist and inequitable than option 1. It's not about having a better chance to win in round 1, it's about all clans being treated equally in how the competition is set up.
Whats your response Josko?
I'm just trying to grasp the differing opinions here, and why in essence being Seeded seems grossly unfavourable to some clans.
Edit: Perhaps the Bye's are an issue? Why should a low-ranked clan have to fight similar quality opponents for 2 tough rounds before coming up against rested and refreshed Top 8 clan
Ok, my answer about byes. Top clans would get byes in rounds that nobody ever beat them. Clans ranked #1-8 (KORT, TOFU, AOC, AFOS, TSM, EMP, PACK, IA) NEVER in CC history were beaten by some clan who is ranked #9 or lower. Easy way to check this is see column "Best Showing in 1 Year" in F400 ranking. NOBODY ranked #9 and lower beat any of top 8 clans in last 1 year. This statement includes big wars but also includes Clan League 4 where top clan from each group was advancing to Division 1, and (is it surprising?) in every of the 7 group some of top clans won the first place, and in one group where top clans were together, they won the first and second place. So, in 7 groups there were 4 or 5 other clans who tried to reach #1 place and NOBODY of those total 31 "lower" clans achieved to do an upset.
So this is consideration of last one year. Let's consider last 2 years. Look at F400 ranking, March 1 2012. Look below 9th place (THOTA was at that time among top clans) and see who beat some of top clans? Only one case, FOED beat IA, but on that time when they beat IA they were ranked among top 8 clans, so it still falls into my statement that nobody ever outsied of top 8 beat any clan inside of top 8. Now look 2 years ago in Clan League 3. PACK and AFOS did not participate, IA and AOC were top placed in their group, KORT and TSM were top placed in their group, EMP was on top of their group, and TOFU was on top of their group. In quarterfinals KORT beat LOW, IA beat MYTH. So again, even
if we look 2 years back and even if we consider League results played in very small sets where luck can have big role so upsets are more likely to happen, NOBODY out of top 8 ever eliminated anyone who is in top 8. So now when I prove this fact, is getting bye until top 16 really some undeserved privilege? Is being in top 16 something that those clans would not get with or without bye? They will get top 16 place anyway, with or without bye, which is enough proven by tracking their results in past 2 years. Now, it comes question, will we put them in round 32 and sacrifice some (no matter random chosen or seeded chosen) mid-ranked or lower-ranked clan to be hard beaten and kicked out of the tournament in non interesting match, or we will give them bye and allow mid-ranked and low-ranked clans to have some real fun playing amongst themselves, together with /bragging rights/skill/organization/motivation/self-confidence/improve as clan/ which are going together with that win? I am very sure second option is much better. Essence of any tournament is that it produces interesting matches. In interesting matches everyone enjoys, both players and spectators. In non interesting matches nobody enjoys. And option 3 is ensuring that we will have the most possible interesting matches, in every round.
Armandolas wrote:I would like to give my opinion.My opinion is only based om my competitive view and not on personal matters or my own clan interests.
I believe option 3 is the best until round3. In round 3 ALL matches should be pure RANDOM. Enough of seedings, because this is still a cup and a cup should be unpredictable.
(to illustrate this try to imagine old days Champions League draws..you have seedings in early stages, then its pure random)
I think this is by far the most fair and entertaining system.
By proving in previous statement how much are top 8 clans above all others (fact that NOBODY out of top 8 in last 2 years beat any of top 8 clans proves it enough), I think this suggestion can be used, but not from top 16, but rather from top 8. I personally like qwert's 3.a) suggestion, where just top half of the draw is seeded. And we can do that way in round 1,2,3, and make it completely random from Quarterfinals. If there were some cases in past that clans #9-16 or lower beat any clan #1-8 then random in round 16 could be considered, but since it is not case, then we should have at least those 8 seeds in round 16. Who prove themselves to be able to beat any top 8 clan, they can have random draw after that because top 8 clans already proved in past that they can play very competitive matches amongst each other, while clans lower than #9 did not prove that they can play competitive matches vs clans #1-8.
Vid_FISO wrote:Again, regarding random draws, the followers of teams/ clubs in an open sport cup competition will have the very basic viewpoint, to win the cup you have to beat the 2nd best team (or the team that beat them) somewhere along the way, whether it be round 1,2,3, the semi or in the final itself.
CC is not a spectator sport and neither does it have fans, there is absolutely no need to manipulate/ seed to a "spectacle" final, beyond those involved and a mere handful of others, no-one cares!
More important point than (trying to) win a cup is having fun in playing games. Fun is primary, result is secondary. Or you put result over fun? Would you agree that someone gift you CC4 win without fun (let's say every other clan sign out so only your clan stays in competition and get default win)? You would probably not be happy in that case, because fun and adrenaline in playing competitive games is what we want, and result is secondary. And option 3 will ensure the most fun and adrenaline for the whole range of clans. With option 1 clans #25 and lower nor clans #1-8 have fun. They play very uncompetitive matches which nobody enjoys. With Random draw number of uncompetitive matches can even be much bigger, even in later rounds. About Random draw, I am not afraid that my clan will get top clans in Rounds 1,2,3, it would be good in my opinion. What I am afraid is that my clan can get clans lower than #25 in rounds 1,2,3, if we "luckily" enter in "easy" side of draw. One round lasts approximately 2 months, so "luckily" entering my clan into easy side of draw means 6 months of not having fun in playing my games. It means 6 months of sending my lower maps in home set in order to try lower my playing field and have more interesting matches. Thanks, but majority of us play this game for fun, and there is really no fun in beating someone hard by big margin, and there is even less fun if draw put someone very strong in side of draw with many others very weak. Several months of not having fun in playing games. Great deal! If top clans wants to play vs lower clans they can easy arrange normal war. The fact that there are ZERO normal wars between top clans and lower clans obviously is telling that we do not want to play vs weak opponents.
ahunda wrote:I actually think, that joskos ideas are a serious attempt to accommodate the interests & wishes of those lower ranked clans. His suggestion would avoid any one-sided challenges in the early rounds, where the top dogs beat up the lower ranked clans, but instead let the lower ranked clans have some serious challenges among themselves, against clans of similar rank, giving them a chance get some wins in the course of the tournament, earn themselves a reputation (and medals, yawn), gain experience and then get a shot at a top clan in the later rounds, that they will likely not get outside of this tournament.
This sounds to me like a fair enough incentive for lower ranked clans to participate in the CCup, have fun playing it, taking something out of it. Whilst at the same time preserving the main character of the tournament, that has been the incentive for the top clans in the first 3 editions.
Maybe a compromise could be reached, if the bye system was not quite so extreme ? Not giving 8 clans bye´s for 2 entire rounds, but maybe only 4 (the semi-finalists of the last Cup) or even only 2 (the finalists) ? Give the others (3-8 or 5-8) only 1 round ?
The lower ranked clans, who are opposing the bye idea as *unfair* and/or *advantageous for the top clans* should consider here, that this system would in fact give them a much more even playing field in the early rounds, guaranteeing them opposition of similar rank & skill, whereas a total random draw could still put them up against one of the top clans in Round 1.
ahunda said so much great points so it was really hard choice what to quote and what to eliminate. He is better English speaker than me so you may read his (or Foxy) posts if you do not get my point from my posts.
Also, you suggested reducing number of byes for top clans. That is already adressed. If 32 clans sign in, 8 clans get byes to round 16, and for every 2 new clans signed in, 2 less clans get a bye to round 16. If 40 clans sign in, then just 4 top clans get a bye to Round 16. I did not make graphics but the format and reducing number of byes according to more clans signed in are explained here:
viewtopic.php?f=438&t=186880&start=60#p4085818My initial idea was seeded draw, but after reading qwert's suggestion about half seeded and half random draw, I agreed to that here:
viewtopic.php?f=438&t=186880&start=60#p4085887. The fact that there are options 3.a) and 3.b) is just to show that both draw typed can work with Option 3, but I am actually more supporting Option 3.a) where just half of the draw is random.