|
|||
Prior to the CPL GotFrag asked BSL to guest write a few articles following his experiences in Dallas. Jonas "BSL" Vikan kindly obliged. This is his first submission.  In Dallas, the week before Christmas saw the most intense, competitive tournament in the history of the game unfold before the eyes of the world. E-journalists and e-media from all corners of the globe added fuel to a fire which really didn’t need extra motivation to burn by predicting seeds and announcing “world rankings” based on democratic- or result-driven models. Complexity - arguably the best performer of 2005, Mousesports - the most menacing force in e-sports this last year, Team 3D - the most hyped team in American e-history and Team EG - the most unlikely 4th ranked team ever. They were all casualties of the dreaded #9-12th placing, usually reserved for the good teams that never quite got their stuff together. How can so many extremely skilled, experienced and sponsored teams fail their potential to this extent? Can we blame this on bad preparation, a foul map cycle or the randomness this game brings to the table? If your answer is a resounding yes you are not only in error as a bearded British professor would put it, your opinion is most likely based on air and not the e-sport reality 2005 brought with it. 05 will go down as the year when everything changed. History fanatics will recognize 2004 as the year when it all started, the reign of the dominant Swedes in SK came to an abrupt end and low-profile teams started getting decent placing at major events. Between 2004 and 2005 we’ve seen an intense increase in the overall level of Counter-Strike, while the first years of the games competitive history featured a select few individuals with skills rivaling those Michael Jordan outplayed his opponents with time and time again - the rest basically lived on another planet called no-chance-at-all. This winter CPL showed that nearly every team at this level is able to compete with quote/end quote the best. With the skill gap narrowed down or even closed, games will keep getting closer and closer, not only because of mistakes made by different teams but because of their abilities. The frequency of the term upset will increase, but given the opinions expressed in this article we might need to find a new term for it, at least for a few years when even more teams will reach the level of play needed to compete at events like the CPL. The Swedes regained their throne for once, instead of just retaining it in a timely fashion as tradition would have it in those early years. They fought hard, played their hearts out and won because they were the best team when they were on the ropes. That quality won them the world championship but it does not guarantee them another one as they now know better than anybody. 2006 is now going to be THE year for e-sports and competitive Counter-Strike and I hereby strike the word “random” from my vocabulary while I wait, as a competitor and e-sport fan, for the announcement on the CPL World Tour. Did you think Dallas was burning up? My guess is you ain’t seen nothing yet… |
Friday November 27 2009 | |||||
| |||||
User Comments
Great match in dallas
looking forward to a rematch
i just don't understand what you're saying. you say that you like it when there are clear-cut better teams so that when they lose it means something...if they're unquestionably better, all it means is they got randomed or unlucky, which is what you later say you don't like?
But I highly doubt this would ever happen because this would take A LOT more time to go through, especially with more and more teams joining the tournaments next year. It'd be way too exhausting for the players, but I think double elim best of three is the true way to do it.
If what you says is right then wooohoo im loooking forward to a good year of Esports.
duely noted, I will actually give you that opportunity - what do you think about me predicting cal results at random(since i have no idea who the teams behind the top4 are? hehe)
#32
thank you sir!
#28 - I understand the time issue, hence I mentioned eliminating the amount of teams allowed to attend. In the end, there will almost always be some kind of drawback or opportunity cost that will be addressed, but we are looking for the most accurate and overall picture of a team and the deserving nature behind the win or championship.
If we are complaining about seeds being unfair for higher skilled teams facing each other earlier than they "should" play, you can really ask is it fair for one team with nuke as their worst map that has to play a team with nuke as their best map. In the end, most people will say it is the team's responsibility to become better at the map, and it will inherently prove their skill, teamwork etc... by whoever loses or who wins.
To continue, the same logic can be applied to seeds. We as a community are so bent on deciding where teams should place based on a mix of facts and opinions. If you didn't have this tournament, the placings would be fairly decided in your own mind. The purpose of the tournament is to shape each team versus each other to see where they stand in the big picture. Seeds are based on the same facts and opinions the community holds and in a sense, tries to predict or help those teams accomplish what they "should" do.
However, we know that is not the case. Teams have bad games, bad rounds, and others simply step up their game. I suppose the whole point through all of this is until e-sports finds and relies on a more mathematical approach to the aspects involved, it'll be hard to find any "truth" or we as a whole have to shed this need to question the formats and methodologies involved in deciding winners.
Looking at "real" sports, and their playoff format, or tournament format can possibly bring some clarity to how we should or should not work with CS. That in my mind would be a good article for a Gotfrag staff member to do. Or if Gotfrag would allow publication of such a task, I'd be willing to take a look at it.
OT: Group play as a first stage without the maybe top 20/10 seeds then the rest of the tournament play best of 3 double elimination. Best possible layout, but if it's doable, that's another thing :)))
More Pages
Submit Comments
Registered Users Only
In order to post comments, you must be a registered member. If you have not registered, it's free and easy!