Should tournaments be best of 5?

[ChaosTheory]

The larger the sample size, the more accurate the results.

 

[Chaosphere]

3/5. I thought ECT took forever because of 3/5. Turns out it was too few setups. 3/5 4 lyfe

 

[DevilMaySpy]

TBH, I like @Vandy 's method the most, which is 3/5 in Top 8. In pools, unless they're stacked, there are often times when we see quick 2-0's and we know the other guy has no chance of winning. However, in Top 8, a lot of the matches come down to the wire. I'd be ok with either option, because the random factor definitely exists, but I feel 3/5 Top 8 is the most effective.

 

[SonicFox5000]

This game should 100% BE 3/5.

 

[Vandy]

Yes.

 

[Zoidberg747]

Depends on the tournament, number of setups, etc.

At the very least top 16 should always be 3/5

 

[BillStickers]

Of course the majority of the players competing will want 3/5, except for those that lost in the scenarios that you mentioned, because if they're confident in their play, the better player will usually win the longer the set goes, but I feel this spoils a level of the competition.

A big aspect of competitions is playing to the best of your ability on that day, in other words being able to preform without being given more than ample time to adjust, and having 3/5 too early in a tournament destroys that aspect of the competition because it gives people too much time to adapt to strategies made for that tournament.

MKX is a round based game which means in a 2/3 set, you have at least 3 rounds to understand and counter your opponent's strategy, and in a 3/5 you have at least 5. Most people would agree that 3 rounds should be enough time to get a feel for a strategy or download the other player if you are skillful enough, unless they just don't know the match up entirely in which case they shouldn't be given more time to make up for their lack of preparation.

MLG did it well by transitioning from 2/3 to 3/5 when you made it into the championship bracket, making it out of pools, but their pools ended at top 32 instead of top 16/8.

Top 32 is a good point to go into 3/5 because it rewards the players who put in the most preparation to advance far in the tournament, while ensuring that only the best make it to the end of the tournament.

MLG was 3/5 in pools.

 

[Lumpymoomilk]

Really comes down to the time you have at the event I suppose, but it is a very fast game plus best 2 out of 3 really gives you only 1 match to get a feel for your opponent and a second match to make a comeback or win the set. 3 wins solidifies who the better player was.

 

[Jynks]

the events would go faster if people just buttoned check by pressing 8 buttons instead of screwing around doing combos and stuff.

I think 3/5 is much better form a viewer perspective and I assume every player would prefer it.

 

[itz My Call]

Yeah 3/5 would be better for sure

I think the button checks and controller desynch process takes longer than a 2/3

 

[Compbros]

With 3/5 I totally would've beaten Pig at Combo Breaker.....TOTALLY!


That said I don't think MK is like Injustice where it's obvious 3/5 is warranted nor slow enough to where 2/3 is required. Of course competitors and viewers want as many games as feasibly possible but it's hard to get that when it's not a necessity.

 

[just_2swift]

Only if foxy play's tempest

 

[Death]

Ummm I have had sets where I was up 2-1 or 2-0 but than lost 3-2. Would I be a scumbag If I said keep it FT2 ?

 

[EMPEROR PRYCE]

Normally 3/5 is for games that strive to separate the better from the lesser player. Games like marvel do this due to the "one player" factor, but a game like that is also based on neutral. The player who plays a better neutral wins.

Do I feel the same about this game? Yes, I do, but I also feel it doesn't need it to be successful. I don't see any random factors going on, especially when top 16s and 8s normally consist of the same players.

I voted yes, because as a viewer and player I'd want more for my time/money. If it happens to not go that way though, I wouldn't be disappointed.

 

[SEV]

MLG was 3/5 in pools.

Oh was it for MK9? Didn't turn 3/5 until champ bracket for FPS's, but time probably wasn't as big of a factor for fighters since games in shooters can take a while.

 

[Mr_Swizzer]

FT5 should be the standard for everything.

Don't care how long it takes.

 

[Braindead]

I do see your reasoning. But it still adds up. I'd rather not have you kick JoeShmoe's ass five times in a row, only twice, to move on to actual opponents.

In pools, unless they're stacked, there are often times when we see quick 2-0's and we know the other guy has no chance of winning.

That is some elitist attitude.

A regular guy who is going there for the first time to try out his luck, pays all the money, and goes home 0-2 very quickly wouldn't want to come back again. It's not like the large numbers of entrants we're always looking for are all pros.

 

[MsMiharo]

Not really needed but I will take any chance I get to see more of F0xy's Lao

 

[GLoRToR]

That is some elitist attitude.

A regular guy who is going there for the first time to try out his luck, pays all the money, and goes home 0-2 very quickly wouldn't want to come back again. It's not like the large numbers of entrants we're always looking for are all pros.

No elitism here. I'm being practical. Being beaten 5-0 or 2-0 really doesn't make a difference as to whether a player will be confident or not, to come again. And it's really no fun to watch either. If he actually wants to compete, he will. If he's disheartened by being wrecked, good riddance.

 

[Braindead]

No elitism here. I'm being practical. Being beaten 5-0 or 2-0 really doesn't make a difference as to whether a player will be confident or not, to come again. And it's really no fun to watch either. If he actually wants to compete, he will. If he's disheartened by being wrecked, good riddance.

The point is not being wrecked. The point is spending hundreds of dollars to play only 4 matches.

 

[GLoRToR]

The point is not being wrecked. The point is spending hundreds of dollars to play only 4 matches.

Yes, well prepare better if it costs so much money. I still think that watching subpar players for 5 matches is not good for the revenue. Purely practical, no foul. Could extend bo5 to top16 or even top 32 if it's a bigger tournament but seriously, nobody wants to see rekt tier for ten rounds.

 

[Cossner]

If there are enough setups and there's enough time yeah.

 

[Alright RyRy]

CEO is going to be 2/3. Just a heads up.

 

[Groove Heaven]

Yes, well prepare better if it costs so much money. I still think that watching subpar players for 5 matches is not good for the revenue. Purely practical, no foul. Could extend bo5 to top16 or even top 32 if it's a bigger tournament but seriously, nobody wants to see rekt tier for ten rounds.

If someone is getting that rekt it's only gonna take 3 matches...

Anytime inexperienced players are playing everyone at the venue has like 5 other sets they can and usually do choose to watch, and those players don't get put on stream.

First to 3 lets the higher level players adapt and win sets when they get their download, even in pools. This game can be hard to collect information in, 1 match isn't enough.

 

[SneakyTortoise]

CEO is going to be 2/3. Just a heads up.

Will we have challonge brackets? Please say there will be challonge brackets.