Warning: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/helpmekim2dhsefl3pwmseak8ismo2/wwwroot/wp-content/plugins/ad-injection/ad-injection.php on line 824 Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/helpmekim2dhsefl3pwmseak8ismo2/wwwroot/wp-content/plugins/ad-injection/ad-injection.php on line 831

For the cup competition system, the double-loss system must be greater than the single-loss system in terms of fairness. However, the LPL added a double-loss system in the first year of this year. There are still some imperfections. Why is the double-loss system more fair? Avoiding upset is actually not the main reason. The so-called “weak team” through better tactical preparation and state adjustments, to win the strong team, we must respect the result. Similarly, the team that is beaten into the loser’s group must bear more Big pressure, tighter schedule, and prepare to go home if you miss a little bit. The biggest significance of the double-loss game system for LPL is to weaken the lottery results and reduce the relationship between team restraint and produce a more convincing ranking and annual ranking. S game points We know that there is sometimes a restraint relationship between teams. Teams that are good at attacking must like to meet wretched teams. This also includes the restraint of the hero pool and so on. The most extreme example is LGD of S10 last year. As the LPL4 seed in the world’s strongest division, LGD was also given high hopes. However, it was later discovered that the gap between LGD and SN, TES, and JDG was not a little bit; I thought it could kill indiscriminately. In the wild card squad, it was abruptly played a breakout game, perfectly integrated into the segment! Is it because LPL has only 3 strong teams? Think about it carefully: LGD only won WE and IGFPX in the playoffs and global trials. Whether V5 is really inferior to LGD may really be unknown. (After V5 lost to SN, the points were not enough, and the next opportunity was completely missed. FPX I regret defeating IG.) If LGD just restrains IG, then they are the biggest gainers in the trials. LPL has always played an important role in the playoffs. The order and draw have played important finals. Assuming this is not a double loss system: RNG fans Whether it will be sad or not, I can only win the title of the semi-finals. Ignore the final result for the time being. Through the double-loss game system, RNG actually defeated TES and EDG. There should be no controversy in this part, right? According to the current performance of the game, the ranking is: FPX>RNG>EDG>TES. If the single-loss system: FPX>EDG>TES ~ RNG produces completely different results, then what is the criticism of the LPL double-loss system? 1. Due to the schedule time, only the top four have the chance of the loser group, and the fairness angle is not good. 2. Too friendly to the loser group, this greatly weakens the advantage of the winner group champion. After watching the FPX game, I think about it. , Can you say that JDG is really weaker than RNG/EDG/TES? If JDG is called in to play a wild card match, some viewers may agree that the current situation may be different but I am sorry, because JDG has a low rank in the regular season and there is no chance for a wild card match. If FPX loses at that time, the result is the same, this part is accidental. But the biggest problem with LPL is that the loser group is too friendly: this is what many people say that the winner of the winner group has only one life, and the loser group champion has already enjoyed one life in traditional e-sports competitions. The advantage of this part is through the following ways : 1. The loser group is very close in the schedule. 2. With one point, the game starts directly from 1:0. 3. BP and other methods to neutralize the Dota game. I tried all the above methods, and finally chose the first one, the purpose It is to weaken fairness a little bit. But let the final finals become an independent chess match, but the Dota game makes the loser’s championship very difficult. When Ti7, Team Liquid is really a series of sevens through the loser’s group. On the final day, it first defeats DC by BO3 and then wins by BO5. Get the championship under NB. From a physical point of view, NB has the advantage. Counting BP, OG has played for 5 hours. (At this moment, I feel distressed for a second of Snake.) In the LPL playoffs, the knockout of the loser group was very fast, which put a lot of pressure on both sides, but it was relatively fair, because neither side of the loser group had time to prepare. Waiting until the final loser’s group championship, on the contrary, there is plenty of time to prepare. From the result of the game on Tuesday night to the game on Sunday afternoon, there are five full days. If someone says 5 days, it can be called a tight schedule. It is really recommended not to watch e-sports. The whole world will have to wait for your baby to adjust. This completely weakens the advantage of the champion of the winner group. The only advantage at present is that through the fight of the loser group, you have seen enough tactics from the opponent. Reserve, but this advantage is negligible, otherwise RNG has been watching for so long, and when FPX comes up, isn’t it also 3:0?


By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
7 months ago

The LCS and LEC double-loss game system takes Bimei LCS as an example. The playoffs in this region will be promoted to the first six of the regular season, the top four are the winners group, and the five or six are the losers group. The first round of the loser group is not a civil war, but is divided into two groups to wait for the losers in the first round of the winner group. This is a relatively traditional and normal double-loss game system. The biggest difference between LEC and LCS is to advance the internal fighting of the loser group to the first round. They also use the first 6 of the regular season to advance to the playoffs, the top four winners, and the fifth or six losers. The difference is that the first round of the loser group is a single scoring between 5 and 6, the victory goes forward, and the defeat goes home. Then the team that loses in each round of the winner group will airborne into the loser group and the winner of the previous round will be singled out. Because of the limitation of the number of teams, the European and American divisions adopt the more traditional double-loss match system. The LPL only takes the top four due to the expansion of the playoffs to ten teams. There is one thing to say. There is really no need for a total of ten places. There are 18 teams in total. There are more players than those who didn’t make it, causing the LPL playoffs to be quite bloated. Besides, the main purpose of LPL’s switch to the double elimination system is to regulate the points of the spring and summer games, to ensure that the world can have the strongest team of LPL to play, and at the same time reduce It’s troublesome and no one watched the third or fourth qualifying. The benefits outweigh the disadvantages. The winner group is unfair. This has been questioned in countless matches. The Dota is not the first case. Some people take this example to accumulate first. It’s not realistic at all. Ti was given for a year and it was boring. I decided to change back to the ban position and the right to choose the side. The rules should be standardized and implemented as soon as possible. I only learned from my personal information that the right to choose the side was two times. I haven’t found the official announcement of LPL. I know someone will ask this question sooner or later, but it’s still a bit early. If RNG wins FPX, then this question will immediately open dozens of times and hundreds of times of traffic, such as why it keeps losing. To be able to play in the finals with the winning team, the RNG princes have a real hammer. Quotations such as the resurrection game script will definitely be refreshed. But I can still say in advance that the double elimination system is the fairest competition system, that is A team failed two games and was eliminated until the last team was left to win the championship. That is, after the teams are drawn, the winner will remain in the winner group, and the loser will fall into the loser group. Once defeated in the loser group, they will be eliminated. In the end, the winner of the winner group and the loser group will determine the championship. This competition system is not the first of lpl. The next door Dota and chess tournaments represented by Go have been used early. Compared with the traditional game, it reduces the luck factor. For example, s8’s kt theory strength should be ranked in the top three, but the result is eight. The strong match meets the champion to play early. Generally speaking, the double-loss match system guarantees relative fairness and reduces the luck factor, but it is relatively unfair to the FPX winner group champions. After all, the so-called “Resurrection A” is useless. Dota once chose to accumulate a small point for the winner of the winner group, but the change from bo5 to bo4 also reduces the game time and viewing degree. For example, lec seems to adopt an absolute double loss system, that is, the winner of the winner group and the loser group. The champion hits a bo10. The champion of the loser group needs to win the champion of the winner group twice, but the physical exertion of the players is relatively large, and the viewing degree is low, and most of the audience will be bored. For example, some will shorten the loser group finals and totals. The time of the finals allowed the winners to wait for work, but the damage to the players was really too great, which was not conducive to the long-term development of the league. This time seems to give FPX two more times of priority to choose sides. The current version of the red and blue sides have a big difference in winning rate. , Can be regarded as a big benefit, but it is also for version reasons. In the future, the red and blue team’s winning percentage will definitely need to be adjusted back to balance, so that the two priority selections are better than nothing. It is recommended that the league give the winner group championship afterwards. More advantages, such as the ban position, such as FPX reaching the finals in a series of four. If you win the championship, you must win five consecutive games without any fault tolerance. If EDG wins RNG and then plays the finals with FPX, in fact For the coaching staff, it has more experience in swordsmanship. It is really hard to talk about fairness for FPX. Of course, if FPX takes away RNG again, then no one should question the fairness of the game.

7 months ago

I saw that many people suggested a 1:0 start. Although this start was fair, it was very bad for the audience and sponsors. Once the winner group won two games in a row and 3:0 was taken away, only two games were played. The audience did not enjoy it, and the advertisement did not finish. It would be better to change your mind. The winner starts with 0:1, the loser group must win four to win the championship, and the winner group wins three. This not only takes care of fairness, but also takes care of the audience and sponsors. Of course, some people say that the players are too tired, so they can be replaced. The replacement itself is also part of the competition. It is necessary to start with 0:1

7 months ago

The double-loss and single-loss systems have their own advantages and disadvantages. The single-loss game system gives the dark horse a more chance to get upset. Under special tactical arrangements, strong teams are likely to overturn. The double-loss game system can better distinguish the strength of the team. After all, losers have two lives, which greatly improves the fault tolerance rate of strong teams. As for the unfairness, people may think that the winners of the winner group have won all the way, and in the end they lost a bo5 and went home. In fact, this place is optimized. For example, the winner group leads by 1 point, or has the priority to choose sides. Moreover, there is no reason for the team that enters the loser group to hide its big moves. Basically, all the things at the bottom of the box are taken out. The sooner the tactics are exposed, it is more convenient for the opponents in the winner group to conduct research. As for the rest, I think this place is advantageous. It’s not a good thing to rest for too long. It’s easy to relax. For example, when the Cavaliers swept 3-0 in the first two rounds of the playoffs during the 1.0 period, the Eastern Conference finals would kneel down, right? It is difficult to achieve an absolute fair single defeat in any format. , Fans complain that there is no double loss and double loss and complain that it is unfair to the winners group. E-sports cuisine is the original sin. You are really good. You can win the championship.

7 months ago

How can there be absolute fairness, but compared to before, it is definitely fairer for Fpx to win the championship. It deserves its name, 1 wear 5, win the championship, the competition system is not the competition system, I am the strong Rng to win the championship, the regular season First, I got a bo5 fan in the playoffs, recovered my status, and got out of the loser group. I am still strong. In any case, the competition system must have improved, and there is a big difference between the blue and red sides. Picking sides, it looks pretty good. I just hope that no matter who wins the championship, go to Iceland and play in the style of the competition. Don’t be ashamed.

7 months ago

It is absolutely fairer and more reasonable than a single loop. Even if there are unfair or unreasonable factors, it is just ‘can it be more fair and reasonable’. Some people may think: If RNG wins FPX in the finals, then RNG will directly win the championship. This is too unfair! In the last BO5, FPX just got RNG 3:0. Why can RNG have two lives, and my little Phoenix was taken away in a wave? In fact, this logical error is like a math class in elementary school or junior high school (I can’t remember exactly when), the teacher told us: If you throw a silver coin ten times are positive, then the probability of being positive for the 11th time is still 50%. . The students were stunned and could not accept that it was the same. The ‘unfair’ you now think of is actually a kind of ‘prophet’ attitude towards the problem. You ignore the fact that RNG got out of the loser group after playing two BO5s. During this process, RNG may be killed directly at any time. You did not take it into consideration. The other two TES and EDG who fell into the loser group and died suddenly. You didn’t take it into consideration either. Let’s put it this way, assuming that the strength of the four teams of the top four is infinitely close, at the moment when the top four places are determined, each team has the same 25% probability of winning the championship. After the semi-finals, the team that enters the winner group only needs to win two more BO5s, or lose one BO5 to enter the loser group, and then win two more BO5s to win the championship. At this time, the probability of winning the winner group comes to 37.5%. . The team in the loser group must win three BO5 in a row to win the championship, so the probability drops to 12.5%. No one wants to go to the loser group, because your probability of winning will drop directly to 1/3 of them compared to the team in the winner group. To sum up, some people will think: Why is your RNG run 3:0 by my little phoenix before, but now it is back to the’same starting line’ (the reason why the quotation marks is because FPX in the world still has more sufficient preparation time And less tactical exposure advantages). This question is easy to answer now, just like the eleventh coin toss, this time the probability is indeed 50% correct, but to get to this point has already been in the ‘underworld’.

7 months ago

I know that some people don’t read the full text. I was lazy and didn’t bold it. Now I have to come back. 1. This plan is only a relatively fair plan that I personally think. If you think my plan is not appropriate, you can open a new one in the comment area or by yourself. Answered your plan, I also hope that there is a better plan with the enlightenment of God, if you really make sense, I directly praise 2. I said that I know that this is a great challenge to the players’ body and mind. So I also hope that the big guys with this knowledge reserve can give a more scientific method. Don’t tell me one by one that it’s unscientific and tired of the players. I just want to give a good idea no matter how the qualifier system is played, there will always be people who say it’s unfair. However, considering that there are World Championship points in the Spring and Summer Games, double defeats can maximize the strength ladder and allow the teams with corresponding strengths to get the most suitable points. However, double defeats are also unfair, and they are the final winners. The champion of the group has only one life, which is indeed unfair for the champion. In my opinion, the conditional conversion of Bo5 to Bo7 is relatively fair. The first situation is relatively fair. The champion of the winner group wins with 3 points. , That is, regardless of the score is 3:0, 3:1 or 3:2, it is considered the winner of the winner group to win the final victory. In the second case, the score of the winner of the loser group to the winner of the winner group is 3:1 or 3: 0, because this score shows that there is indeed a difference in strength between the two sides. The winner of the loser group is judged to be the final victory. The third situation is that the score of the winner of the loser group to the winner of the winner group is 3:2. Bo5 is well played and it shows the strength of both sides. In order to make up for the disadvantage that the winners of the winner group do not have a second life, Bo5 is converted to Bo7 at this time, that is, if the winner of the loser group takes another point at this time, the score is 4:2. It shows that the champion of the loser group is more powerful, and the champion of the loser group wins the final victory. If the winner of the winner group scores the third point, it enters the Bo7 decisive game, which side gets the last point (fourth point) and which side wins I personally think that the final victory of this conversion to Bo7 is a better remedy mechanism, but there are still unreasonable points. The full Bo7 is a huge challenge for the players and the coaching staff, and it tests their physical fitness. It also tests the psychological quality, but in my opinion, simply giving the winner group one point reduces the game viewing, and it is too unfair. Others, such as preferential side selection, feel that there is no more life advantage. If there is any A great god has a better way, please enlighten me

7 months ago

Fairness or unfairness is hard to say, but the spring championship decided in this way is definitely the season champion with the highest gold content in the history of LPL. The 18th Finals, whether it’s FPX or RNG, this season can be said to be a team that fought hard. Which team wins is no less than a miracle. FPX stretched for a whole year last year. Xiaotian played in a sluggish state until the blogger appeared to save FPX and brought a winning streak. However, during the season, FPX was pulled across again due to the fake match storm. Xiaotian was ordered to be in danger and played well. According to the public opinion, a lot of rhythm broke out in the team, and even the skull was insecure. At the end of the season, Xiaotian re-awakened and took FPX from the bottom of the rankings to the finals. He was in a hot state. He even took away the first RNG3-0 in the regular season and cut the second EDG away. , Can be called a miracle. RNG pulled across a whole year last year. Due to management’s reasons, the transfer period failed and it was unable to reinforce. RNG, who lost Uzi, lost its way. In the new season, the once domestic talented mid laner, the World Championship was pulled across. The 2200 resolutely turned to the top lane for the team, amidst a crowd of ridicule, the German Cup lost, and even the second team of the former rival IG. Wei awakened, and he took Xiaohu back to his former self. He passed through the spring games, from the least promising B+ team to the first place in the regular season of the spring games. Everyone felt that RNG had recovered what it used to be. When I was myself, I was taken away by FPX 3-0 in the playoffs, and I lost no backhand. RNG, who fell into the loser group, broke out his last strength, Lien Chan TES and EDG, from the loser group to the final! Is the re-awakened FPX stronger, or the self-redemption RNG stronger? After dawn, can he keep his skull? Is there a tiger in the future world? Who will go to Iceland to recast the glory of the world’s strongest competition area? Everything will be decided in Wuhan on April 18th! Do you think that e-sports novels are just too much? This kind of spectacle, regardless of his fairness and unfairness, how exciting. The only thing that feels unfair is that the protection of the top few in the regular season is not very strong, and the first and second place are the same. But now it seems that the same may be a good thing, because the playoffs version changes, playing a few more BO5 games, can rectify the team’s state faster. For a strong team, more games are not a burden, but a touchstone for them to become steel.

7 months ago

unfair. For the first time, the LPL adopted a double-loss match system, but it did not clearly stipulate what compensation the winner group has always won in the finals. The team that has been victorious has no second life and no clear compensation. It is recommended that bo3 be used in the final. If the winner of the winner group wins the championship directly, the winner of the loser group wins the second bo3 to decide the outcome. In this way, even if the game is full, it is 6 games, and the bo5 is full 5 games. This has less impact on the fatigue of the players and is more fair to the winners of the winner group. Since there are still people who question the audience’s sense of experience. Then I’ll come up with another plan: 1. It’s still bo5, and the loser’s score is -1, which is 0:1. Why not start with 1:0, because it prevents the winner from 2:x taking away the opponent, there is no meaning of bo5 In the 0:-1 start, the winner group still has to win three games, and the loser group has to score a point for the previous defeat against the winner group in order to unify the starting line, which also makes up for the fact that the winner group has not been resurrected. A factor.

7 months ago

Many people talk about the playoffs and simply ignore the situation in the regular season. Originally, EDG RNG was first and second, so there was no need to hit the first two bo5. The original intention was to reward teams that played well in the regular season. As a result, 10 teams were scored as a result of the playoffs. Instead, the schedule becomes longer. RNG can’t even make a training match at all. 10 days had passed by the time RNG played. And it’s still a new version. Not to mention e-sports, even in traditional sports, it is prone to have not played for too long, and finally played in a mess. On the contrary tes fpx, there is a lot of adjustment time. Is it fair from this perspective? It is relatively fair in itself, not absolutely fair. The chance of resurrection is not not given, but it is not available. For example, in the group stage, Fnc double-killed IG, and the IG finals were 3-1. At this time, Fnc said it should actually be 3 to 3 and asked for an extra match. Do you think it is reasonable? You didn’t lose when you could lose, then there would be no excuses when you couldn’t lose.

7 months ago

There is no absolute fairness. You have to pick the issue of the competition system. It is even more unfair to lose in singles. Anyone who is eliminated by the championship may be the runner-up. If you are eliminated according to the single defeat. Then this year is edg runner-up. As a result, edg is actually the third runner-up. Although the competition is aimed at the championship, the actual ranking and points are still very important! Single defeat in the knockout matches reduced the probability of top teams playing against each other, resulting in the second half of the game being not exciting enough, and even the finals were not beautiful. In recent years, the finals of the s match were not good. This problem also exists!

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x