A Lesson on Tournament Format and Rules

The PGL Bucharest Open closed qualification then turned out to be a bit of a controversy. After a long time not used in Dota 2, they use time-rating as a determinant tie-breaker group round robin they.

Despite drawing public protests, in the end this regulation could not be contested because the qualification had already been implemented. However, the format used by PGL is a lesson in how important but difficult it is to determine the right tournament format, and why you as an organizer should not choose it arbitrarily.

In the PGL Open Bucharest qualifying group phase, if there are teams that have the same points, the final ranking will be determined based on the time-rating, aka who on average can win the game faster.

Because of these regulations, in the Southeast Asian qualifiers, Fnatic had to be willing to just drop out of the Minor tournament qualifiers Dota 2 this. Even though in the group they had the same final result as two other teams, namely Happy Feet and Mineski (2-1).

Participating team already know this rule since the beginning. But not for ordinary viewers. Besides, almost everyone disagrees with the enactment of the system time rating this, especially when combined with the group format round robin.

in full transparency, PGL did tell us about the timerating beforehand. doesnt change the fact that it is a bad way to settle a tie

— Eric Khor (ReiNNNN) (@ReiNNNN) September 11, 2021

This is not the first time the tournament organizers Dota or Dota 2 use time-rating as a determinant tie-breaker. Tournaments like ESWC have used this since 2010. However, because it started to generate controversy, one of which was in the 2021 EMS One RaidCall tournament, the regulations time rating this is starting to get out of hand.

After being known by the public, many people wonder why organizers like PGL still use time-rating in 2021 instead of using other options.

Holding a tournament means finding out who is the best player or team in the tournament. This means that the format and rules of the tournament that you create must meet these goals as much as possible.

At the same time, the format and regulations must also minimize external influences or factors that cannot be controlled but can change the outcome of the match. Then lastly, tournament format and rules must completely ignore irrelevant factors in determining who is the better team/player, or who cannot be compared to equals.

If these three basic things can’t be done, the better team or player doesn’t always win or become champions. Then at the same time the teams or players who are participating can also look for reasons why he or his team lost.

Indeed, players may play badly or not be in top shape. But it is the fault of the players or the team itself, not something they can blame on someone else when they lose.

So, let’s take a look back at PGL Open Bucharest, and why time-rating is a system that is not suitable in tournaments for games as Dota 2.

In a match Dota 2, the winner is determined from who manages to destroy ancient opponent. All other aspects like kill, net worth, tower kill, items, the duration of the game, and other things have absolutely no effect.

A team can lose everything tower that he had but managed to win the match just by thumping mid directly to ancient. A team can win even if they are down 1-20 in kill score. You just need to destroy ancient, and the better team is the one that can destroy ancient fight first.

With that argument, the duration of the match is something that has no relevance in a tournament Dota 2. Maybe a team really prefers to play with a strategy or composition that focuses on late game so their matches tend to last a long time. Is the slower playing team worse off than the other team? Absolutely not. After all, they can destroy each other ancient opponent.

Lastly, imposing irrelevant things as tie-breaker will force a match that is not interesting to watch. In context time-rating for Dota 2 for example, a team that wants to qualify from the group and avoid tie-breaker inevitably have to use a strategy that allows them to win as quickly as possible. Then on the other hand, the opposing team may intentionally use a super defensive strategy so that the opposing team can’t do that for whatever reason.

In the end, the match became a contest of chasing time, not destroying ancient like a match Dota 2 normal. At worst, the match will look very boring, not entertaining, or even promote the game Dota 2 unhealthy. In the end, both the audience and the organizers will be at a disadvantage.

Indeed, all teams usually will not think about that because they are always focused on winning regardless of time. But know it or not, the conditions are still bad and put the team in a confusing position.

Case time-rating This also doesn’t just happen in Dota 2. IEM Global Challenge for branches League of Legends also used time-rating to determine tie-breaker, at least in the early years.

The same goes for esports games another, but for a different aspect. In the Epicenter CS:GO 2021 tournament, for example, controversy arose because the tournament organizers used round score or round difference. In the tournament, four teams who joined in one group turned out to have the same points. But because getting round difference minimum, NiP must be eliminated from the tournament.

Same as match duration in Dota 2 and League of Legends, the final score of the match is also irrelevant in CS:GO. The final goal of the match is first to 16, and as soon as a team gets a score of 16 first, the game is stopped. Even if the score is 16-0, the losing team will not get a chance to snatch a bit of score in the remaining rounds that have not been played.

The system is certainly unfair, because each match does not have the same number of rounds. One match could end 16-2 (18 rounds), while another match could end 16-14 (30 full rounds). Not to mention every match competes folder different, and each folder have different dynamics which of course affect the final score of the match as described by Thorin in the video above.

Of course, tie-breaker the most ideal for group format round robin is to once again pit teams that have the same score or points. That way who is the better team will be clearly proven.

But tournament organizers may have limitations. Especially in the case of PGL Open Bucharest above, there are three teams that have the same score. That means they have to once again do round robin for the three teams. Likewise with Epicenter CS:GO 2021, where all teams in one group have the same score.

Tournament organizers may not have time to match tie-breaker, especially if it involves more than two teams. Not to mention that the two tournaments also use the format round robin for their group, which is clearly a waste of time.

Would they have avoided the problem if they had used a different group format? Possible. I myself also feel that the group format is the best in a tournament esports team based like Dota 2, League of Legends, and CS:GO is GSL. This format avoids situations tie-breaker completely and avoid unnecessary matches. Moreover, PGL Open Bucharest and Epicenter 2021 also brought together four teams in one group, the right number for the GSL format.

Apart from that, this issue is a reminder that making the right format for a project is not an easy thing. Then the more or longer the phases of the tournament you hold, the more difficult the challenge in making the format and the rules.

Tie-breaker what we discuss here is only one part of a series of tournament formats and rules. If you’re using a group system, you’ll need to determine the proper format. Do you use the format round robin, double round robin, GSL, or other formats? If using bracket, do you want to use the format single elimination or double elimination?

Then which match format is the most fair and really shows which team/player is better? Best of one, best of three, best of five, first to X (X is a number), or something else?

If you want to attract some of the best teams from the group stage to playoff bracket, you have to determine how seeding for bracket the. In other words, how to determine who will meet who in bracket. Is that fair enough for all teams or not? Then from there you might have to look back at the group format you created? Is this format able to create seeding the most precise and objective?

All these calculations must then be calculated with the resources and time you have. If it turns out that you don’t have much time or resources, push double elimination bracket may be a difficult thing. But you still have to find a way so that the tournament you are holding brings out a truly credible champion. After all, you don’t want to give your hard-earned prize money to a team that turns out to be just lucky.

Not only that, every games have different dynamics and considerations. The right format in one games can’t always be used in tournaments games other. Therefore, if you want to hold a tournament games, make sure you really know games that you are competing against, especially from a competitive point of view.

If you can’t create a format that’s fair and objective for everyone, you’ll have a hard time convincing the big teams to want to play in your tournament.

Share :