DISCUSSION TIME ABOUT 1-1 matches

WildCard · Joined: 06 Sep 2004 Posts: 735 Location: Japan

THIS IS FOR DISCUSSION. prime objective: which of the 4 options is the best for determining a winner? secondary: limiting the use of intentional stalling

Heres the thing: No matter which way this situation is handeled there are always upsides and downsides, each being slightly different, but can all be argued FOR and AGAINST equally.

DCI only reports games played, if a game was played (even with an illegal deck) it is considered played
If this ever changes from our current method an announcement should be made on the frount page, because everyone is use to it

Winner of Game 1 gets Match win (Current)
Pre-Sideboard, this is the way the league has always done it. people are use to it
I have never seen game 1 last 45 minutes
Winner of game one can stall.. if game 3 is never played he wins

Winner of game 2 gets Match win
Post-Sideboard, the reasoning behind this: Game 3 would have also been Post-Sideboard
If game 3 is never played winner of game 1 will try not to finish game 2 (assuming the worst, stalling ect..)
Dosen't mean anything because we do not judge on what could have happened

First Blood Gets Match Win (DCI)
This is the way DCI handels it
Favors certain deck types

Flip for it and mark it as such
Will remove all the complaints that spawned this topic
It's flipped so the loser will not be as mad
Losers will be mad they cannot continue a mini/trial due to a random flip
Winner will be mad because it is not worth any points

If there is a change or even if there is not a change there will always be complaints. I personally do not like the explanation of "Thats the way it is, we have not found better"
If you have an additional option to add hold your vote! Post it and I will add it to the list, or add it yourself.

Shyft- · Joined: 06 Nov 2004 Posts: 100 Location: Your Mom

I greatly prefer that the winner of game two wins the match. This will make it harder to stall out a win after winning game one, and also is more equitable because the winner of game two has already shown that he/she is more likely to win a post-sideboarded game and therefore is more likely to win another post-sideboarded game. There's no perfect option, but that's definitely the best one.

niknight · Joined: 14 Oct 2004 Posts: 145

I think that we don't need to decide this... let's put it up as an open poll for the players to decide.

Since all of the options are equally as good (or as bad), letting the players pick their poison gives us the best possible answer to their future complaints: "This is the method you chose".

Haro · Joined: 01 Sep 2004 Posts: 241

Buffalo_Wing · Joined: 01 Dec 2005 Posts: 138

I honestly think that flips is by far the fairest here. Though the game 2 solution helps the stalling issue, as game 1 winners won't be able to stall out game 2 and expect to have 5 minutes left to sb/mull/before someone damages another like right now, but it still feels random and leaves the loser with an extreme bad taste in their mouth. Compare that to flips, which is fairer because 1-1 games are even and the winner doesn't really deserve points. In flips the loser feels infinitely better, as they can just join another mini without feeling screwed out of rating. It's the correct utilitarian decision and if we change it to flips I feel like there will be a sharp decrease in topics complaining about this.

Also, first blood is utterly ridiculous.

eaglewolf · Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 55

i think out of those options first blood is by FAR the worst, and flips is probably the best option.

also, this would allow us to poll the players:
ie, "would you prefer it if we changed g3 rule to flip for the match, or keep as is"

WildCard · Joined: 06 Sep 2004 Posts: 735 Location: Japan

i can completly move this to a different fourm?

PV · Joined: 17 Sep 2004 Posts: 75

I honestly think it should be a flip regardless of the life totals. Time ended? flip. Even if I'm at 1 and you are at 250.

If the third game hasn't started, the flip looks SURELY the best option to me.

Strovil · Joined: 11 Mar 2005 Posts: 567

I have already posted my opinion concerning all the options in at least two threads.

Flips are the way to go in the narrow case of 1-1 with even life.

NightFlare · Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 234

if mi opinion maters, points won/lost should remaine static regardless of wich of the above sistems are used.

now, wich system, ill have 2 choose the "Winner of game 2 gets Match win" one since it makes it harder 2 stall and, as mentioned, that winner showed that he is more suitable for a post-sb game, wich is what the game 3 would have been played (you could argue that winner-of-g1 dint get to sb against winner-of-g2's deck though)

WildCard · Joined: 06 Sep 2004 Posts: 735 Location: Japan

games that are not played are not played and can end up in anyones favor. so saying game 2 was post SB and game 3 will also dosent matter. patriots won 2 superbowls in a row..... but we didnt just hand over the next one.

NightFlare · Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 234

no, but we have to choose the fairest, and that would mean giving the win to whoever had the most chances of winning (thats like saying life doesnt matter when deciding winners)

Strovil · Joined: 11 Mar 2005 Posts: 567