Jump to content


Photo

Proposal Log Discussion 5 - Champions League Format


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#41 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,117 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 24 April 2018 - 06:59 PM

My initial reaction to the proposal listed 3 advantages:

Champions League format is traditional

Each game in the Group Phase takes on slightly more significance (as only 2 qualify)

Europa provides a unique arena where the competition is likely to be contended by the middle-ranked players (as opposed to the usual suspects)

---

The first advantage doesn't apply if the number of participants isn't 32, and the Europa section of the proposal is independent really (we could easily run a Europa League following the group stage this year if we desired from the non-qualifiers)

So it seems to be that there isn't really a good reason to make the change. Is a tournament with 32 players so much better that it warrants constructing a qualifying round? (that needs to be lengthy in order to be fair).

My feeling is that the Europa idea has merit - but not at the expense of some players not qualifying for the Champ League - and then having to wait 3 weeks.

Additionally, the Champ League had 45 (not 47) entries, and one has withdrawn so we are down to 44. If 32 formed the Champ League, then this would only leave 12 for the Europa - if they all registered. It seems to me that the Europa could really do with some more players to make it a competition worth running.

#42 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • WC Online Team
  • 814 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 24 April 2018 - 07:24 PM

Few comments:

The difference between 64 and 32 is negligible in my opinion. 64 with 32 advancing is the CL format with one extra knockout round. This is closer to the actual CL than the current system.

Let's consider a 32 player CL because qualification for a 64 player tournament will be less extensive. With 44 players, we need to eliminate 12, giving the top 16 ranked players automatic spots.

Elimination can be done as a best of 3 or a best of 1. I would choose a best of 1 because qualification does NOT need to be lengthy to be fair. Any seeding system implicitly has many games built into it. Furthermore, unlike the PL, it makes sense to use past tournaments, the actual Champions League does this. The TC could hypothetically give additional automatic spots for certain performances, ie top 12 finish in the WT.

At this point, any player forced to qualify has not done well in previous TC tournaments and does not have a high rating. Thus many games have already gone into determining who has to qualify. Let's say an additional 6 players qualify from other tournaments, then we have 22 players for 10 spots. The qualification process requires 12 matchups over 2 rounds. This will take 4 weeks and a max of 36 games with a best of 3 or 2 weeks and a max of 12 games with a best of 1.

However, with 4 person groups, the TC would have to organize 52 fewer games in the group stage and save two weeks of scheduling. An additional week could also be saved if there are less make up games, which is likely to be the case. Therefore, the qualification process actually makes the CL less arduous to organize.

Edited by astros, 24 April 2018 - 07:30 PM.

I'm in love with Stacy's mom.

#43 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • WC Online Team
  • 814 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 24 April 2018 - 07:27 PM

My system always uses groups of four, so group stage games are always more significant in my format.

To get a good player group for the EL offer spots to the 12 players who did not qualify for the CL, the 16 players eliminated in the group stage of the CL, and any player with under 700 points who expresses interest before the end of the CL group stage. The TC could get 24 to 32 players using these criteria and host a meaningful tournament for mid-ranked players.
I'm in love with Stacy's mom.

#44 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,117 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 24 April 2018 - 11:39 PM

Why is a Champions League tournament with only 32 players better than the current system? Does that justify having to eliminate between 1-33 willing participants just to get exactly 32 in the competition? What is the problem with groups of 5 or 6 players?


  • roeczak likes this

#45 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,117 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 09 May 2018 - 12:14 AM

Why is a Champions League tournament with only 32 players better than the current system? Does that justify having to eliminate between 1-33 willing participants just to get exactly 32 in the competition? What is the problem with groups of 5 or 6 players?

 

astros, do you have a response you would like to add to the above questions?



#46 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • WC Online Team
  • 814 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 09 May 2018 - 04:05 PM

astros, do you have a response you would like to add to the above questions?


The next CL is 11 months out. I am quite busy at the moment, so I would like to table this discussion until I can put together a more thorough proposal.
I'm in love with Stacy's mom.

#47 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,117 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 09 May 2018 - 04:24 PM

Ok we will suspend this one.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users