So, I got this thought.
When playing a set in a tournament the rules typically say sets should be Best of 3/5/7, but in practice the set ends as soon as one of the players has won 2/3/4 games. Let’s say a player wins 3 to 0 games in a Best of 5 set. The winner of the set has been determined, but what about the remaining games? Does the winner forfeit from the these games because he doesn’t have to win more matches, meaning the final score becomes 3-2, or does the losing player just agree on the idea that the winning players would have won the last 2 games, making the score 5-0? The final score can’t really be 3-0 in a Best of 5 set, right?
Now, let's say these 3 games were really close and the losing player thinks he should have been able to win some of them. He feels that he could win the following games if they played again. If this player wants to play the remaining games of the set for whatever reason, then shouldn’t he be allowed to? Then, if the winner of the set refuses, the final score would become 3-2.
Imagine this scenario: A Fox and a Peach player meet in bracket. The Peach is a new and upcoming player who isn't used to play in a tournament setting. The Fox is a routinized tournament player but isn't used to the Peach match up. The Fox wins 3-0 and sends the Fox to losers bracket in 3 really close games. The Peach didn't play as good as he had hoped due to nerves, and the Fox got catch off guard by Peach's weird stuff. The Peach would like to play more matches to get rid of his nerves before playing his next match in losers. The Fox sees that he is about to face another Peach in winners and would like to play the match up a little more before playing his next match. They decide to play the last two games of the set. The final score becomes 3-2 and both players are ready for their following matches in bracket. You could argue that "they can just play some friendlies after the set if they want", but I find that people are not allowed to play friendlies during tournament.
Another, more likely, scenario: Two players are facing off in GFs. The guy coming from losers wins the first set 3-0. The guy coming from winners isn't sure about how he should turn the tides in his favor. He wants to try out a secondary and asks if them could play the remaining games of the first set before moving on to the last. If both players agree, they can do it (even if the TO disagrees IMO if it's really a Bo5 and not first to 3). If one player disagrees, the score becomes 3-2 (or 5-0) and they move on to the last set.
The main reason why this matters to me is because I’m trying to get better at this game. I focus more getting better than I focus on results. I don't get to play top level players that often, and when I meet them in bracket, the set is often nearly over before I start to figure out what I should do be to win. If I was given the opportunity, I'd rather play and lose 5-0 than 3-0 if that makes me better in the long run. And I'd rather lose 3-2 than 3-0 just for the heck of it.
Obviously, it's going to take longer to play a set this way, but if it really is a Best of 5 (or Best of 3/7) and not first to 2/3/4, shouldn't the players be able to play all 5 games if it says "Bo5" in the rules and both players agree on doing it?
TL;DR:
If a set really is Best of 5 games, would a "3-0" be "3-2" or "5-0"?
And if both players agree on playing the remaining games after the winner of the set has been decided, shouldn't they to allowed to? Or is "Best of 5" just another way of saying "First to 3 wins".
So, yeah, just a thought. It's not going to change much, but I'm curious.
When playing a set in a tournament the rules typically say sets should be Best of 3/5/7, but in practice the set ends as soon as one of the players has won 2/3/4 games. Let’s say a player wins 3 to 0 games in a Best of 5 set. The winner of the set has been determined, but what about the remaining games? Does the winner forfeit from the these games because he doesn’t have to win more matches, meaning the final score becomes 3-2, or does the losing player just agree on the idea that the winning players would have won the last 2 games, making the score 5-0? The final score can’t really be 3-0 in a Best of 5 set, right?
Now, let's say these 3 games were really close and the losing player thinks he should have been able to win some of them. He feels that he could win the following games if they played again. If this player wants to play the remaining games of the set for whatever reason, then shouldn’t he be allowed to? Then, if the winner of the set refuses, the final score would become 3-2.
Imagine this scenario: A Fox and a Peach player meet in bracket. The Peach is a new and upcoming player who isn't used to play in a tournament setting. The Fox is a routinized tournament player but isn't used to the Peach match up. The Fox wins 3-0 and sends the Fox to losers bracket in 3 really close games. The Peach didn't play as good as he had hoped due to nerves, and the Fox got catch off guard by Peach's weird stuff. The Peach would like to play more matches to get rid of his nerves before playing his next match in losers. The Fox sees that he is about to face another Peach in winners and would like to play the match up a little more before playing his next match. They decide to play the last two games of the set. The final score becomes 3-2 and both players are ready for their following matches in bracket. You could argue that "they can just play some friendlies after the set if they want", but I find that people are not allowed to play friendlies during tournament.
Another, more likely, scenario: Two players are facing off in GFs. The guy coming from losers wins the first set 3-0. The guy coming from winners isn't sure about how he should turn the tides in his favor. He wants to try out a secondary and asks if them could play the remaining games of the first set before moving on to the last. If both players agree, they can do it (even if the TO disagrees IMO if it's really a Bo5 and not first to 3). If one player disagrees, the score becomes 3-2 (or 5-0) and they move on to the last set.
The main reason why this matters to me is because I’m trying to get better at this game. I focus more getting better than I focus on results. I don't get to play top level players that often, and when I meet them in bracket, the set is often nearly over before I start to figure out what I should do be to win. If I was given the opportunity, I'd rather play and lose 5-0 than 3-0 if that makes me better in the long run. And I'd rather lose 3-2 than 3-0 just for the heck of it.
Obviously, it's going to take longer to play a set this way, but if it really is a Best of 5 (or Best of 3/7) and not first to 2/3/4, shouldn't the players be able to play all 5 games if it says "Bo5" in the rules and both players agree on doing it?
TL;DR:
If a set really is Best of 5 games, would a "3-0" be "3-2" or "5-0"?
And if both players agree on playing the remaining games after the winner of the set has been decided, shouldn't they to allowed to? Or is "Best of 5" just another way of saying "First to 3 wins".
So, yeah, just a thought. It's not going to change much, but I'm curious.
