Posts from Post-tournament analysis and discussion of the CIS Tournament Regulations.

I decided to chime in as well. Let me explain to some people who are waving their fists around, saying "let's not allow it," "this isn't a tournament, it's something else," "let's reconsider," "he doesn't deserve it." Yes, you're being annoying with your whining.

It's the second round, and we're getting closer to the final stage. Lizard hasn't lost yet and really wants to reach the final. Reddi already has a loss. As a result, Lizard is taking extreme measures, which are technically legal with some caveats, with the sole purpose of preserving his chances in this tournament, and nothing more. There are still many games ahead with skilled opponents. He acted unpleasantly, but this action only gave him a chance; it's not buying the game, it's not buying the tournament. It's a flaw in the system, when the winner faces a loser in the second round. And isn't buying a free slot the same thing? Moreover, it's even cheaper. Essentially, if someone who won the tournament by going through one of the rounds with a free slot was like Lizard. He was unlucky with the free slot in the second round, and he decided to buy it.

Then Mizrael simply gifted the win to Lizard; those who saw their game know this. Mizrael threw the game. The chance of encountering a maximum-level opponent was 10% (go away immediately, mathematicians who are ready to nitpick this; I know everything myself).

Then Aive did something incredible against Hell.

And then the Swiss system made Lizard the winner.

So, who is to blame? Maybe Mizrael, maybe Aive, the Swiss system, and if we remember the generator, it's here too? Everything was very subtle. The moment when Lizard bought Reddi didn't decide anything, but it decided everything. Many things came together, and Lizard's purchase of the game fit well into the overall picture.

P.S.: Everyone understands this, the reasonable people. See how Hell reacted to it. He should be the most upset, but he sees the bigger picture.

Yes, I was rooting for Kostya myself, but I wanted a final between Hell and Lizard, but unfortunately, it didn't happen. This is all thanks to Mizrael, and I feel very sorry for him.

Why aren't the participants themselves writing "disqualify," "strip of the title," and other nonsense? Should we disqualify those who took their places thanks to free slots?

Conclusions: The Swiss system needs to be modified; a final is always needed in tournaments of this kind. Free slots, at a minimum, should be excluded for winners; the pairing of winners with losers should be excluded as well (they were all focused on the result, and I find it hard to imagine a situation where one of the participants would sell out to another in equal tournament conditions); game recordings should be kept (let's say on OBS, which allows almost any laptop to do it) for judging; the tournament regulations and rules should be improved; discipline regarding deadlines and in the venue.

I completely agree with Merlin that such things should be suppressed in every possible way. In my opinion, such victories are worthless.

I'm definitely not good at all these calculations, but maybe it makes sense to reconsider the game system itself? In some sports, there's a simple system without any complications. After the draw, a player has two attempts; as long as they don't lose, they stay in the upper bracket. If they lose, they move to the lower bracket and play against the losers. If they lose twice, they're eliminated. And that's it, without any points or Berger systems. The only one from the lower bracket who wins against everyone there gets the right to play in the final for prizes. Or is this system not suitable for computer tournaments?

I might be missing something in this life, but in my mind, the words "worthy victory" and "agreed-upon game" don't go together.

It's impossible to play a double elimination in 4-5 rounds. Even with 16 players.

It's impossible to play a double elimination in 4-5 rounds. Even with 16 players.

double elimination from May 1st to 8th-9th. I think it's quite manageable with a bracket of 16 players, and there's no need to argue otherwise:cool:

I specifically checked: next year, May 1st falls on a Monday. So, essentially, from April 29th to May 9th, there are 11 days off. Especially if it's a resort location – Crimea or Sochi – it's very easy to double that to 8-10 guaranteed gaming days. I completely agree with Ed on this matter. And, by the way, we are both family men.

What if there are, say, 21 players? Will we "decide on the spot" again? :)

What if there are, say, 21 players? Will we decide on the spot again? :)

Oxy, creating a special registration with entry fees is so easy. "This is perfect for us." And as a last resort, if there are 25+ players, we can make a 32-player bracket with free slots that will disappear towards the end of the bracket and won't affect anything, including the skill level between players...