Dec 12, 2003 22:19
Kax wrote:Mad Scout wrote:
I do agree with sticks about the initial seeding though. A participants' poll to decide the rankings would be more fair, and more accurate (although no ranking would be perfect, this would come the closest)
Maybe, but that's not obvious. I think people are only capable of giving reasonable rankings to players who are in the ballpark of their own skill. The top players probably have no idea how to rank any given five newbies, and the newbies have little idea who's really better than whom among the top players.
Kax
That may be true, but at least we would have a more accurate seeding than just a random one. If the top two players are ranked #1 and #2, but the best player is ranked #2 while the 2nd best is #1, that may not be perfect but it's close enough so that they'll meet each other in the finals (assuming their on opposite sides of the bracket, like they should be).
Having SLIGHTLY inaccurate rankings is way better than GROSSLY inaccurate rankings. We had grossly inaccurate rankings which caused really good players to meet early in the tournament, rather than late in it.