What's the deal with Double Elimination tournaments?

[X-13]

What is it about the Double Elimination format that tournament players are in love with? Personally, I like the format from the world cup: Several Groups, Round Robin, top cut of a multiple of 8, and single elimination the rest of the way.

Also, there are a lot of tournaments that feature players from all across the country. That's cool and all, but why not have region specific tournaments where several players qualify for one National tournament at a rotating venue? This opens competition up and we get to see new players at different tournaments instead of always seeing the same 15-20 guys at every tournament.

I'd like to spearhead a new tournament standard if anyone is interested in thinking outside the box. I'm just really tired of the traditional format and think there should be an alternative format or something.

Thoughts?

 

[Strong Badam]

Most big tournaments do round robin pools that seed into a double-elimination bracket. Smaller locals do straight double-elim because of time and other stuff.
The Smash community doesn't have the organization nor capital to set up a true "qualifier" system. It'd be cool, but, probably isn't happening any time soon. Closest thing was Melee's MLG runs, where player gained circuit points and it led up to a championship and was seeded based on those points. Was pretty cool.

 

[X-13]

I don't think Capital would be a big problem at all, what you need is a dedicated few individuals willing to put together and organize the tournaments. Yes, it's a lot of work. No, you probably won't be paid for any of it. However, isn't the PMBR doing the same thing?

I think if there's enough demand for it, people will come around. I've had arguments with a few people complain and argue the "time" thing with me but every tournament I've run has progressed faster as pools into single elimination than the traditional double elimination format.

I'd also like question why the 4-stock, 8-minute time limit as that creates extra long tournaments. Why can't you set matches to 5-minute kill fests? First, it fixes all tournaments to run exactly on time and if people no show their matches, it makes the tournament run faster. Also, if somehow we find a way to record kills and self destructs, we then have tangible evidence with statistics to back up certain match ups. I might be over my head, but I've run a tournament using this format. The tournament was quick and I had loads of information.

 

[Fortress]

Yes, it's a lot of work. No, you probably won't be paid for any of it. However, isn't the PMBR doing the same thing?

Actually, it's time that I make my appearance as the HAL Laboratories whistleblower. We've been paying the PMBR. Obscenely. It's an absolutely disgusting amount of pay for the work that, frankly, most of us are disappointed in. However, nobody's willing to step forth, publicly, and reveal this. Sakurai keeps this Face Raiders dungeon at the bottom of the building, and traitors just get strapped into gurneys to be forced by men in Kirby suits to play the game. Forever.

 

[Fortress]

THEY'RE ONTO ME.

 

[Strong Badam]

capital is a huge issue. you need a LOT of money to fund an organized circuit. you're not talking about doing work for free, you're talking about paying money out of pocket to do work for free with potentially no way of recouping losses.

just lol @ 5 minute ko fest. really dude?

 

[Fortress]

capital is a huge issue. you need a LOT of money to fund an organized circuit. you're not talking about doing work for free, you're talking about paying money out of pocket to do work for free with potentially no way of recouping losses.

just lol @ 5 minute ko fest. really dude?

I thought the same about the five-minute deathmatch thing. I think that it's a silly notion that a player at a much higher level than me can zero-to-death me for five agonizing and humiliating minutes, when they can do it in twenty seconds with just four stock available. You're going to get the same kind of 'data' from a stock game versus a timed game; either a player's going to goof up and SD a lot, or they're not. One player's going to have a marginal advantage over another, or they're not. You can see this in a four-stock game just as easily as you could in a timed game.

 

[X-13]

Yo, it happens in pro sports all the time. NFL teams score obscene amount of points against terrible opponents, same in basketball. Even at the college level and High School levels. You spend 48, 60, 90 minutes against anybody better than you, YOU WILL BE OUTCLASSED. This is five minutes. If you're good, you better hope you win. If you're bad, it'll feel like the five minutes it took Frieza to blow up Namek.

Play it out.

 

[| Kailex |]

5 minutes... Seriously?
This thread is invalid.

 

[Crescent Monkey]

5 minutes is never going to catch on with anyone ever. It leads to total humiliation of new players for a longer period of time, which is bad for getting them into the scene, and at the same time, is not enough time for really tense, slow paced battles to play out, and will lead to a draw entirely too often. This is not even mentioning the fact that players could just SD to get a fresh stock, instead of letting their opponent get the kill, which leads to their opponent not getting +1 to their score. Lastly, in the case of a draw, who wins? The one with lower %? Everyone who plays at all competitively knows that while % is important, anyone can take a stock at any time. What if player 2 is having a great comeback on player 1? Do we really want to stop them only 5 minutes in and end the match in player 1's favor? What if player 1 is up by 5%? Thats not even a lead. I know this happens in an 4 stock, 8 minute match as well, but in that format games rarely ever time out, while in this system, it is extremely likely that they would, and our system for determining who wins in that case is pretty bad.