Continuation Rule has GOT to go

[Tim Static]

This is probably the most asinine rule I've ever seen for fighting games at any tourney, and MLG is the only tourney that does it. It just doesnt work for MK, and Im sure it doesnt for KoF or SC.

I read something a very smart man tweeted tonight and it hits the nail on the head:

It's still a shame that you can run a set 5-2 and still lose. It throws 20 years of meta game out the window.

I couldnt agree more.

Now Sabin (Arturo Sanchez) defended it with saying it makes the match sets longer with fills up time and makes sponsors happy, but there has to be a way to remove the continuation rule AND still make sponsors happy. And I know how to fix it:

Have 2 setups ready with a match waiting to start as soon as one is done. BAM.

Discuss.

 

[garik16]

From the other thread:

Continuation needs to go.

For the record - we can't say for sure that CD Jr would've beaten PL 3-2 in Losers Semis had there been no continuation.....i imagine PL's play would've been different had he been without a 3 game buffer. We similarly can't say PL would've beaten Denzell.

But the end result is plain stupid. You can't afford to take chances in winners anymore or hide back tech, because god forbid you face that same opponent later you start in a huge hole. Learn from your mistakes in winners? Too bad - those same mistakes now cost you double. And of course the rule doesn't even make sense....the player who loses in winners has to win 4-6 games in losers in a non grand finals match when that happens in no other circumstance.

Oh and all hype is lost because players face insurmountable leads.

The rule won't be changed at MLG. Starcraft players don't like it and MLG keeps it, and Starcraft has been for a while MLG's bread and butter. But it's a horrible horrible rule. Because of it you have no time to learn from your mistakes in a set because if you fail to learn in the first game, you end up in a huge hole. Nice.

Fortunately, GFs didn't take continuation into account.

 

[SunnyD]

I dont understand why anyone would think that the continuation rule is anything but nonsense. What is the benefit?

 

[STB Shujinkydink]

yep tis dumb. but, they're giving us money so they can do as they please


AMURRICA!

 

[Saint]

I dont understand why anyone would think that the continuation rule is anything but nonsense. What is the benefit?

what's the benefit of resetting the bracket?

 

[WayoftheFist]

It's a bad rule for fighting games. But hey just ask Detroit... you could always just not lose.

 

[Dark_Rob]

Ive never liked it, in fact I was vehemently opposed to it, but I was told they absolutely would not change it no matter how much we screamed about it, so I shut up.

 

[Zoidberg747]

I dont understand why anyone would think that the continuation rule is anything but nonsense. What is the benefit?

Happiness of the sponsors I guess. I still do not have a problem with it, because it doesnt seem to affect much until someone faces the person that 3-0d them. IMO if you dominate someone like that and have to face them again they should have an advantage. Some people prefer people to pay for getting 3-0d, instead of getting to start fresh and pretending like the old one didnt happen. I personally dont mind it and would not miss it. but I dont think it had much of an effect on this tourney at all, save for MAYBE Denzel and PL(Still think Denzell would have won regardless.

 

[Jimmypotato]

Ive never liked it, in fact I was vehemently opposed to it, but I was told they absolutely would not change it no matter how much we screamed about it, so I shut up.

This, There giving away 10K for first place, they can do what they want. PL ran it back to 5-5 wich made that last match super fricken hype, it is dumb. But it's there, and theres nothing we can do. Bitch enough, and they'll be like, see ya later guys.

 

[Relaxedstate]

Mehhh was still hype. I think the rule is good with this much money on the line. Denzell out-performed PL. I kinda like that his 3-0 counted for something later. Makes sure the best player takes home what they deserve...even if some of the hype is lost
Edit: and of course PLs runback was the definition of hype...only possible with continuation lol

 

[PND OmegaK]

It's a big hype killer IMO

 

[Euphoric]

Lol, good luck. Halo has been trying since MLG started. Lol.

 

[SrirachaSC2]

I dont understand why anyone would think that the continuation rule is anything but nonsense. What is the benefit?

The logic is that if you e.g. go 5-3 in overall games (3-0, 2-3) against someone, they shouldn't advance over you.

However, today's matches are pretty clear examples of how it breaks down in actual tournaments.

This is not a case of Starcraft rules being misapplied to fighting games, either. The Starcraft community hates it, and no one seems to know why MLG is so dedicated to it. For reference:

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=173244
http://ww.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/rcv9k/dear_mlg_please_stop_the_extended_series_system/
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/1213111391

 

[Tim Static]

It's a big hype killer IMO

Grand Finals were hella lame because of this absurd rule. period.

 

[garik16]

The logic is that if you e.g. go 5-3 in overall games (3-0, 2-3) against someone, they shouldn't advance over you.

However, today's matches are pretty clear examples of how it breaks down in actual tournaments.

This is not a case of Starcraft rules being misapplied to fighting games, either. The Starcraft community hates it, and no one seems to know why MLG is so dedicated to it. For reference:

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=173244
http://ww.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/rcv9k/dear_mlg_please_stop_the_extended_series_system/
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/1213111391

The difference is that MLG is looking at it wrong. If you lose 3-0 to someone in winners, you haven't lost to them 3 games, you've lost 1 set against them. If you run it back in losers, well you wind up going 1-1 in sets against that player. And that second player has no lost 2 sets. Hence he should be out, not get another chance just because he winds up against a player he faced in winners before.

 

[T3rror]

If they won't change the rule for StarCraft then there is no way they're going to change it for the fighters. Sometimes it makes for good matches as we have just seen not too long ago, but most of the time its putting one player at a big disadvantage with a needle in a hay stack chance of coming back. I think it should be gone and I rather have MLG go with Static's idea.

 

[garik16]

Mehhh was still hype. I think the rule is good with this much money on the line. Denzell out-performed PL. I kinda like that his 3-0 counted for something later. Makes sure the best player takes home what they deserve...even if some of the hype is lost
Edit: and of course PLs runback was the definition of hype...only possible with continuation lol

You know what also would've been hype? CD Jr running it back against PL instead of being in a 3-0 hole. Or PL running it back totally on Denzell.

Denzell's 3-0 did count for something later in a normal double elim bracket - it KEPT HIM OUT OF LOSERS at the time. Put it this way, Denzell got to GFs largely due to the continuation rule giving him an edge over PL to start. If PL had lost to CD Jr, Denzell wouldn't have gotten that edge over CD Jr. In other words, Denzell was rewarded with an extra benefit due to the play of others. which makes no sense.

 

[Relaxedstate]

It is just dfferen't. Not absurd. It is the most fair to the players. It also created some of the best hype I have seen to date. Could go either way and that is okay. If detroit 3-0 Denzell that would have been just as unhype

 

[Saint]

Grand Finals were hella lame because of this absurd rule. period.

I'm sure it was the rule and not the fact that Detroit 3-0d him lol

 

[Tim Static]

I'm sure it was the rule and not the fact that Detroit 3-0d him lol

Sure but it doesnt give you that impending doom feeling like this rule gives you. It doesnt every give you that "anything could happen" mentality :/

 

[Relaxedstate]

You know what also would've been hype? CD Jr running it back against PL instead of being in a 3-0 hole. Or PL running it back totally on Denzell.

Denzell's 3-0 did count for something later in a normal double elim bracket - it KEPT HIM OUT OF LOSERS at the time. Put it this way, Denzell got to GFs largely due to the continuation rule giving him an edge over PL to start. If PL had lost to CD Jr, Denzell wouldn't have gotten that edge over CD Jr. In other words, Denzell was rewarded with an extra benefit due to the play of others. which makes no sense.

Denzell was rewarded an extra benefit because of himself! lol He 3-0 PL earlier!! what are you talking about. The Denzell PL match was 10x more hype because of the rule. Yeah PL might have run it back in a first to 3 or 5 w/e...but watching that potential come back was way better. Way better brah

 

[BillStickers]

Grand Finals were hella lame because of this absurd rule. period.

Wait, what? Even with the reset rules in place, the same outcome would have happened. Detroit won 6-2, which would have translated to the same 3-2 in the reset scenario. The only difference that the continuation rule makes is that the winning player is given some extra time to dick around, as we saw in the Denzel vs. PL match.

What people don't seem to realize is that Detroit went all rounds without losing a set. That's a huge deal in a double elimination setting (keeping in mind that he didn't get the same "second chance 'advantage'" that Denzel, PL, CDjr, et. al. were afforded), and because of that, I think it's perfectly fair that Detroit should be allowed the extra win buffer.

I don't even see how continuation rules make sponsors happy since it usually makes sets shorter anyway.

 

[garik16]

Denzell was rewarded an extra benefit because of himself! lol He 3-0 PL earlier!! what are you talking about. The Denzell PL match was 10x more hype because of the rule. Yeah PL might have run it back in a first to 3 or 5 w/e...but watching that potential come back was way better. Way better brah

You're missing the point. To get into Grand finals, you need to win losers finals. Normally to do that you need to win 3 games before your opponent. That would've been the case had CD Jr beaten PL.

Instead, because CD JR lost to PL, Denzell got to win 3 games before PL could win 6. So Denzell got an edge because CD Jr couldn't run it back against PL.

Remember, winning in winners bracket is its OWN REWARD - you stay in winners bracket. Loser in winners bracket is its own punishment - you have to play additional matches to get to grand finals (double as many actually) with little margin for error. There's no need to pile on an extra punishment to the loser.

 

[WayoftheFist]

Grand Finals were hella lame because of this absurd rule. period.

Ok but for arguments sake what about the Columbus Grand Finals when REO almost ran it back? They were actually more hype because of the continuation rule.

 

[exyle]

It's not the greatest idea, but it's not that bad. Example: you use all your tricks/setups to beat your opponent 3-0. Your opponent will learn and counter everything next time you meet.
You should be compensated for giving up all your tactics.

But, yea, it does kill hype sometimes.