Good Afternoon,
Why in the EVO and SF25th tournaments, someone who loses gets a second chance to win that tournaments? I noticed that in the SF25th finals brackets, someone who loses, for example in like the first round, can still be in the final match. Also, I noticed that some of the winners of the EVO 2012 had lost in a previous round. Can you explain this to me please? Thanks.
the tournaments are double elimination, which means u have to lose twice in order to be eliminated from the tournaments. everyone starts out in the winners bracket, those who lose one match go to the losers bracket and are matched up from there. those ppl in the losers bracket who lose again are eliminated.
Thanks for the information, that helps a lot. But do you know why it is like this? In other sports, it is strict elimination. Why are losers even a second chance? Just wondering. Thanks.
In sports, its a time issue. The perfect system would be swiss, the way Chess tournaments are run, but that’s not possible to do realistically with setups and time, so we compromise and do double elimination.
NCAA Div.1 baseball College World Series runs double-elim. IIRC olympic judo is double elim as well.
Single elim is usually run for sporting events simply to cut out on the number of matches that need to be played. Also, single elim doesn’t give accurate placings past first and second place. This is why you have a “3rd place match” in the World Cup. Double elim gives you a natural third place (whoever loses the losers final).
Thanks, I understand. Well I am not a tournament player and I have a D+ rank in SF4 and SFxT so this won’t really affect me 
But I am wondering if it is fair and does it really “give accurate placings”. For example, lets say someone got sent into the losers bracket in the first round but keeps on winning and reaches to the finals. Everyone that person played would have already lost one game. Yet, that person is now in the finals against someone who, has of that point, has not lost any games. Kinda does not seems fair. Also, you could argue that the losers bracket would be easier because everyone has lost at least once. I would purposely lose in the first round to go into the easier losers bracket. Yet, in the finals they got a second chance. What if the finals is a rematch of the first round? What if you, who made it to the finals undefeated, lost the final match against someone you sent into the losers bracket in the first round? I would be pissed. I see the double elimination is trying to reduce luck and flukes but is it fair to the person who made it to the finals undefeated. And does it really produce the strongest player. I dunno just wondering.
In the finals, the player in the losers bracket has to win twice but the one who is in winner’s bracket has to win once.
Anyway, my opinion on single elim vs. double elim is this:
In double elimination, players are given multiple chances and so overall, this kind of tournament emphasize on consistency less than single elimination…however, the lower rankings of a double elimination tourney tell you more about those players - for instance, if someone went 0 wins and 2 losses in a double elimination tournament, it shows a lack of consistency and that their placing is probably accurate.
In a single elimination tournament, there is the issue of good players losing early, whether they get randomed out or they just lose to another good player. Because of this, the lower rankings of a single elimination tournament don’t tell you much about the players (they could have been the best players in the tournament but just lost due to luck or bad pairing). However, winning a single elimination tournament is more meaningful than a double elimination one, because you only have one chance, making consistency a more important factor. However, the more you go down in the rankings of a single elim tourney, the less you can determine about the skill of those players, due to random factors.
Then you play another set since you come to the GF with a twice to beat advantage. All you losing in the first set does is reset the bracket. If you win however, then it’s done and over with.
Think critically about why professional and international sports don’t use double elimination. Think about the time it would take and the toll it would take on the athletes. A grand final with a reset would be exhausting and tough to schedule.
Judo isn’t double elimination. Anyone who loses to a finalist is put in the repechage brackets. Placement is based on how far each player mad it until elimination. The winners of the two repechage brackets win bronze medals.
One thing you’re not considering: going to the losers bracket, can significantly increase how many total matches you have to play. In a larger tournament, someone that gets put into losers early will have to win almost twice as many sets as someone that goes straight up through winners. Being in the losers bracket is a significant disadvantage.
Also, as d3v said, in the example you used, the guy who made it to grand finals without losing would still have to lose twice to get eliminated. In other words, the person coming up from losers has to win two sets.
Unless off course you’re in the MLG and you’re suddenly subject to their continuation rule that no one, not even their commentators, seems to understand.
Well, that’s why the finalist coming out of the Loser’s bracket has to win TWO sets in order to win the tournament. This is a pretty difficult task when you’re talking about high-level play, and it’s an appropriate handicap for having lost prior to GF in the tournament.
Loser’s bracket doesn’t become much easier due to the fact that you only have 1 more match to lose before you’re gone from the tournament, as well as the fact that you still have to face all of the good players in the winner’s bracket that lost later on in the tournament. If you made it through loser’s bracket to reach GF, that means you have to play some very talented players to get to that point, which isn’t an easy task.
I would argue that this type of tournament produces less random results, which is why it was used in the first place, and why so many other tournaments enjoy this tournament format. In a single-elim tournament, you have a high chance of getting randomed out by another player, or simply losing due to a bad matchup, which happens fairly often in Japan, where they do still use single-elim tournaments.
Which begs the question. If the players don’t like the continuation rule, and the commentators don’t seem to understand or agree with it, why is it still being used? E-sports bureaucracy at its finest.
I was going to say something about Sundance, but I don’t want to invoke Godwin’s law.
Thanks for all your feedback. I understand. Do you think a double round robin is more accurate than a double elimination?
Not really…isn’t round robin where a player faces every other players at least once?
That would be way too long.
Well the question is about accurate placings over length of play. You’re both right, it would be more accurate but takes too long to do.
Sent to the Internet with Smoke Signaltalk. Buy your matches and blanket in the Trading Outlet for $20 shipped. Firewood sold separately.
Round robin tournaments do better accurately reveal who the best player is, since the best player should logically be able to win versus the entire tournament more often than others.
However, round robin tournaments take FOREVER. A small 16-man tournament would take HOURS to finish, even with multiple setups, and this is most definitely not an efficient method for tournaments with more than 8 or 12 people.
No such thing as a double round-robin tournament, since there are no actual winner’s or loser’s bracket to be had. You play everyone. The only way this could possibly work, would be to have multiple round-robin pools, and inventing some sort of division whereby the bottom half of the round robin results go on to play in another bracket or pool, but this is a raging waste of time, unless you’re doing it as some sort of training session with HOURS to kill.
By your profile, it looks like you live in Brooklyn. Do yourself a favor and hit up Next Level whenever they have their tournaments and experience the tournament scene for yourself. It will make a lot more sense once you actually attend an offline tournament, and you get to see the various intricacies of tourney logistics, that you won’t see on stream.
Plus, it’ll be a good introduction into the real fighting game community.
I just googled Next Level and got a bunch of different things. But I will look into it. Thanks for your suggestions and for everyone’s feedback. I play chess (and suck at that too) so I am a little familiar with watching (not playing in) tournaments. So, I assumed that the chess tournaments were more accurate and justice so when I saw that Evo and SF25th was different, I assumed it was unfair and inaccurate. I am going to watch the SF25 stream online this weekend (assuming it is free to watch).
by single elimination, ppl wood b potentially paying thousands of dollars just to play one match. that would b a complete waste
Look up there for contact info and tournament listings. Might want to check out the regional matchmaking section of this forum from time to time.
Chess is really quite static. You play on the same board, same pieces, same rule sets, and it’s all down to individual execution, which is much more fair. Chess matches can also take quite a long time to play out, so a double elim standard wouldn’t really be effective in that game type.
Street fighter is more like chess being played in real time with different set pieces. Naturally, you might encounter a bad matchup that won’t go your way, which is a problem that doesn’t exist in chess. 2/3 double elim gives you an opportunity to adapt and come up with a new strategy, as well as simply giving you another chance in the tournament. Also makes your $10+ entry fee last a lot longer.
SF 25th Annv. Tournament is free to watch.