Auto-translated
As I understand it, only 3 games are played in each group before a winner is determined. This seems unfair to me. Why didn't they implement a system with six games in a group, like a home-and-away format?
Otherwise, it turns out that, for example, I might host in two games, while someone else is the "non-host" in two games. And the host, in my opinion, has an obvious advantage in choosing a race.
The only thing that could justify this tournament organization is reducing the time spent on this stage. But on the other hand, we're not playing full-fledged games, but just duels, so the time spent is reduced not just by a factor of two, but by a factor of ten.
Therefore, I suggest conducting a poll among the participants regarding the addition of "away" rounds. Of course, I understand that many may not like the increase in the number of games, because most of us are adults with our own concerns and a lack of time. Therefore, I suggest conducting only a poll for now. Moreover, there aren't that many of us. Look at the "trios" or "fives" – the number of participants in their tournaments is in the dozens. So, that's it.
P.S. Please don't be too harsh if I'm wrong. And preferably, I'm waiting for approval. :)