+ That would mean the final would be THEORICALLY #1 vs #16. I guess nobody wants that. Of course the first round wouldn't be the most interesting with my system but ALL the other rounds would be interesting.CptHampton wrote:
With your system there would be NO interesting games. A seeding system like this is meant to ensure that the teams that deserve to get into the next round do, while creating heated contests among the teams that are in the middle of the pack. Obviously first seed should pretty much always be expected to go through barring a miracle or freak occurrence. But now the games that are most interesting are #16 v. #17, #14 v. #18, etc., and part of the exciting thing is to see how far up the chain the matches will be close, like whether or not a #21 will be able to upset a #12, or a #25 upset a #8. With the system you propose, all teams that are higher seeded should always advance, since there is a considerable skill gap in every single match.Tshemmp wrote:
Mh, I don't like how Challonge puts the #1 team vs the #32 team and so on. Wouldn't it be more exciting if #1 would play #17, #2 vs #18 and so on? This would make sure the best 16 team still advance but prevent shit like #1 vs #32 were the results are totally clear from the very beginning (not saying #1 vs #17 wouldn't be clear either but it would be a bit more interesting to watch). I doubt these matches would be very fun for anybody.
This live drawings will happen. "Top-seed1" just mean that a top-seeded hold this place. It will determine who will be put against who on later rounds.mayank0 wrote:
Are the challonge brackets final or the live drawing thing on 6th is happening?