One for all and all for one 5

So, you're suggesting removing the explanation along with the quoted text. The point is that with an even number of participants, the captains are in equal conditions: the "last captain" (A) picks from the first two tiers, while the "first captain" (B) picks only from the first tier. Therefore, in a draft with 4 players per team, the team whose captain received fewer votes should theoretically have the following situation: Player 1: B > A Player 2: A > B Player 3: B > A Player 4: A > B This seems more balanced than if you add another participant to the draft.

So, you want to "balance" the teams in this way: in one team, the first two tiers clearly dominate in terms of skill, and in the other team, the third and fourth tiers do the same, leaving some percentage for randomness, so that one of the obvious underdogs, with a bit of luck, can sway the situation in favor of their team, right? I think this is fundamentally the wrong approach. If you want to create more balanced teams, it should be done by reducing the skill difference within each individual tier, and this is achieved by increasing the number of players per team, which in turn reduces the number of players per tier.