Règlement 2013: points à améliorer/changer/conserver

[Antistar]

Entièrement d'accord avec Harold et je dis pas ça parce que je viens de me réveiller

[clbrun]

moi aussi je suis assez d accord avec harold : peu de gain de temps, et en + des désavantages qu il a pointés, il y a le fait que ca coupe la phase de poules en 2  pour certains ca sera peut etre un avantage de faire une pause au bout de 2h, mais pour moi c est un désavantage car on s'arrête juste quand on (je) commence à être bien chaud 
commençons par des mesures de bon sens qu on évoque depuis des années sans les appliquer (le respect des horaires) avant de commencer à tout bouleverser et à créer d'autres problèmes 

@karel
i agree harold, but he didn't speak about the number of matchs that matter. i think we first have to apply some basic rules we have been talking about for years without applying them (respect of the timing) before creating brandnew calendar with new problems
btw i still wait for an example of a double elim system (or something other that you would find more accurate/ fair) and your apologizes

[KVD]

Don't hold your breath for a more detailed proposal of the double elim system. As far as I know Neo is cooking on one to try out. Also Patrick will be thinking about how to impliment it, but it doesn't seem they are in a hurry.

but i wait some concrete proposition from you or anyone else for a double elim system. not just to demolish it, but to point out the weaknesses of this system (mainly the time increase)

You already decided what the weaknesses are, eventhough there hasn't even been a proposal yet! Do you see what I mean with inflexible / too conservative mindset?!   
It demontrates narrow-mindedness, as you don't even consider the possiblity of a change having a net positive effect. Even if we could somehow come up with the theoretically perfect set-up, you would still attack it anyway, so I wonder if it's even worth spending our effort on presenting it? 


As for the apologizes, I still don't see what you intended to express when you wrote the sentence below. And what it adds when we're discussing the CDM set-up.

"I can understand Drew and Karel don't want to invest the effort, if they can't even win a medal in their favourite mode".

As stated before that would clearly not be the reason behind our absence. We won't come if the CDM refuses to evolve to facilitate a more accurate competition. Not because we're incapable of winning stuff. If that were the case, it would only be worth it for Sami to travel from outside of France.   
You were putting your own reasoning behind our thought processes, and in a flawed manner. So I'm not sure if an apology would be merited. I'll read it again to make up my mind. 

[Antistar]

"I can understand Drew and Karel don't want to invest the effort, if they can't even win a medal in their favourite mode".

As stated before that would clearly not be the reason behind our absence. We won't come if the CDM refuses to evolve to facilitate a more accurate competition. Not because we're incapable of winning stuff. If that were the case, it would only be worth it for Sami to travel from outside of France.   
You were putting your own reasoning behind our thought processes, and in a flawed manner. So I'm not sure if an apology would be merited. I'll read it again to make up my mind. 

Don't wanna play the devil's advocate role, but I understand what Cédric meant at first saying this, which has not the meaning you — obviously — read there. I think he wrote this as a consequence of the current system (which makes you more unable to win stuff you deserve in the end), much more than a primary reason that would make you stay at home. Not sure if this is clearer though...

[KVD]

"même si je comprends qu'ils soient dégoutés de venir depuis très loin et de dépenser pas mal d'argent pour un cdm sans gagner de médaille dans leurs modes favoris"

Then why add this bit in?

Well, it's possible I'm applying my own reasonings to Cedric's thoughtprocesses wrongly (making the very mistake I am accusing him of, oh the irony). So in that case, I do apologize.
But whatever, let's discuss the Championship set-up, instead of petty personal feelings.

[Antistar]

Hey, I don't want anyone to apologize, I just wanted to underline the fact Cédric didn't probably mean to be harsh and maybe used the wrong words.

Anyway I hate this discussion since the beginning as I'm one of the only players who have always liked the current system and don't feel any need to change anything. I just understand why some others do, but don't share their opinions on this.

[Anton]

Guys, focus about the topic please!

[Champion de la TOC]

Just to add some info about original system then...

The poules are good, at least then you have enough matches and chances to try reach the top. If you are 2nd and a dangerous rival is 3rd in other group you will meet in quarter normally. This is just life i guess. But at least you had several poule matches to get a good enough result. The more players that come to CDM could mean more poule matches and more accuracy slightly.

Bit like science experiemnts at school, they would say repeat it 10 times and take an average of the results, rather than just once or twice, because the result could be different each time.

Me and Florent still ended up in the semi in match, i guess we were in same poule also which was strange. Normally i might expect previous year's 1st and 4th to be in same group, and 2nd and 3rd in the other. Which would place him over there. But not to worry im happy to face anyone anywhere and just do the races. If we mess up the poules its just life and part of the game.

So maybe something can be slightly improved there or left the same, or the bracket round improved or left the same. Or perhaps a balance of both. As i said before maybe someone good at vlookups on excel can create a few different things to use test data on early enough now, then we can visually see what works well for the real thing, well in advance.

[clbrun]

I'm one of the only players who have always liked the current system and don't feel any need to change anything. I just understand why some others do, but don't share their opinions on this.

so do i 

[Antistar]

so do i 

You mean "so do me"

[djo]

Don't hold your breath for a more detailed proposal of the double elim system. As far as I know Neo is cooking on one to try out. Also Patrick will be thinking about how to impliment it, but it doesn't seem they are in a hurry.

If I understand what Karel mean, maybe it could be like that :

Winner bracket (= classic finals) = Gold


Loser bracket (= more matches) =Silver (and Bronze) = best of the ones who loose one match

For the loser bracket you do the order according to the poule level
The loser bracket add more matches to play during the finals :
+4 during the 1/4 finals
+4 during the 1/2 finals
+3 instead of the match for 3rd
+2 after the final
+1 again after for the final match for silver and bronze

I'm wrong?

[KVD]

I think it's largely correct, except at the ending. The loser of the winners final (person B), will only have to play 1 more match to get silver or bronze and in that he would face the winner of the losers bracket. The loser of that match would get the bronze.

I'm not sure how that ending would fit with the set-up you have currently, but I'll leave that up to you to try and fix. 

[djo]

I think it's largely correct, except at the ending. The loser of the winners final, will have to play 1 more match to get silver or bronze and in that he would face the winner of the losers bracket. The loser of that match would get the bronze.

I'm not sure how that ending would fit with the set-up you have currently, but I'll leave that up to you to try and fix. 

The loser of the winners final must enter one round before otherwise you have 3 people to decide for the final of the loser bracket

[KVD]

Yeah obviously I noticed that problem too. I will let Neo reply, I think he had a particular system in mind and he can comment if this is the type he meant. 
Also, note how these extra matches can be facilitated by the number of TVs and could be played largely in parallel to the winners bracket (which is equivalent to the current set-up).

[djo]

Also, note how these extra matches can be facilitated by the number of TVs and could be played largely in parallel to the winners bracket (which is equivalent to the current set-up).

Of course but only if these people plays well their matches instead of watching the matches of the winner bracket