Kerz
Nobody wants to play with me!
Full Members
Basic User
  
Posts: 603
|
 |
« on: August 24, 2004, 01:01:01 pm » |
|
I proposed this to Ray, he said to have the people vote. Do it up.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Team Hadley: FOR FUCKING LIFE
|
|
|
Mixing Mike
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2004, 05:35:56 pm » |
|
Heh, 8 votes so far, and it's 100% Top 16 right now.
I did vote for a cut to Top 16, however, it does make the event 1 round longer. I personally don't mind, however, some people might.
The reason I voted for Top 16 is that it's very difficult to Top 8 in such a strong field. Look at GenCon. Shock_Wave was probably 1/2 a point (assuming) from making Top 8. I think Top 16's allow for a better view of the metagame as well, and I feel it allows someone to run into a problem matchup and lose it without having to win out (read: allows for draws).
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Shock Wave
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2004, 05:49:29 pm » |
|
I voted for Top 8. The Top 8 decks are a better representation of the metagame than the Top 16. In my opinion, 16th place is not worthy of finalist potential. It's unfortunate if you finish 9th or 10th, but to end up 16th and have a crack at 1st is ridiculous in my opinion.
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat." - Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
MadManiac21
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2004, 06:07:45 pm » |
|
I think Top 16 is the way to go here; it helps set Waterbury apart from other big tournaments that have followed in its (or rather Ray's) footsteps.
I also think those ultra cool playmats that are for 9th-16th should be played out for.
The addition of another round just adds more pressure to the ironman test; so what if you were #1 after swiss? It's time to buckle down!
|
|
|
Logged
|
Team Hadley: ALL YOUR MOX ARE BELONG TO US Red Sox: 2004 AND 2007 World Series Champs! I pray to Tom Brady.
|
|
|
Whatever Works
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2004, 11:32:53 pm » |
|
Its hard to argue either side, but shockwave has a really arguement. Cutting to top 16 gets more people involved, but it also rewards mediocrity. It also can be really unfair to someone who goes 5-0-1 in the swiss to then have to win another round vs. a 16th seed being the biggest drawback. However, I have always either been a top 4 seed or not even close for some reason. If you have ever placed 9th though i feel your pain, and hope your a fan of the card "goblin game."
Cutting to top 16 I can realistically see happening just by knowing Ray. He really has a passion for magic and loves to get as many people with/without power involved in the tournements, and cutting to a top 16 would just be another way of stretching his ideals of spreading the wealth.
Kyle
|
|
|
Logged
|
Team Retribution
|
|
|
urza_insane
|
 |
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2004, 08:53:43 pm » |
|
I like the idea of cut to top 16 way more than cut to top 8. Take this past worlds for example, so many amazing players were left out of the top 8 due to tie breakers. What kind of game is that?! It would also be very interesting to see and much easier to analyze what decks make up the top tier. I see no real advantages to using top 8 over top 16.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Team Predict: We're amazing maybe!!
"For the first time in his life, Grakk felt a little warm and fuzzy inside."
|
|
|
Mixing Mike
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2004, 09:25:29 pm » |
|
Notice the votes are much closer in the Closed forums, where Top 16 is far far ahead in the Open. Am I the only one who expected this to happen? I mean, making the single elmination games means nearly anyone can win with the right deck match-up's.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Summit
|
 |
« Reply #7 on: August 25, 2004, 10:03:35 pm » |
|
I believe cutting to the top 8 is the correct move here. Play it out with those that have done the best. I can see where some would think it isn’t fair to get close and not all the way, but that is the game. The top 16 isn’t representational of the best decks for the meta in that tournament. Perhaps the top 10 or 11 decks, but that is not feasible. With that though, I do think that posting the top 16 decklists would be not only intriguing but educational. :shock:
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Stupid_Newb
|
 |
« Reply #8 on: August 27, 2004, 09:46:13 pm » |
|
I think they should cut to T16, and give prizes to T8. Cutting to T16 would give a more diverse range of decks and a more competitive way to potentially get into the finals. It would keep players at the tournament for a lot longer than normal.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Stupid_Newb puts Time Walk to Hand from Play <HAPLO> IT'S FORBIDDEN <Stupid_Newb> ? <HAPLO> time walk <Stupid_Newb> what does that mean? <HAPLO> i can play blavk lotus if you want <System> Player Lost
|
|
|
Nazdakka
|
 |
« Reply #9 on: August 29, 2004, 05:18:49 pm » |
|
This question isn't relavant to me... I live a 1000+ miles away... but couldn't you run a cut at greater than top 8 by doing some kind of tiered system?
Say add a preliminary round like this: For top 10: Extra Elimination round: 7th vs 10th (for 7th seeding) 8th vs 9th (for 8th seeding)
Or for a top 12: Extra elimination round: 12th vs 5th (for 5th) 11th vs 6th (for 6th) 10th vs 7th (for 7th) 9th vs 8th (for 8th)
That would reward the top players in the Swiss by giving them 'byes' in the elimination part of the event, while still letting more people into the knockout matches.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Nazdakka Arcbound Ravager is MY Fairy Godmother! Check out Battle of the Sets - Group 1&2 results now up!
|
|
|
|