Moderator: Tournament Directors
TaCktiX wrote:I agree with sillyfungus. We're ending up with nearly a full game's worth of people who have won in 6 rounds. And when you think about it, the people who successfully won that quick will be ganged up on and eliminated by the people who more than likely lost in one sweeping stroke (I eliminated all 7 other people in round 6). That's not fair to the people who were able to pull off a really quick victory, the essence of this tournament. I also think that nate wasn't expecting a tie of such magnitude, and the larger size should justify a playoff instead of a re-play.
smellyfungus wrote:yeah as long as there are an even amount of winners then we can just make 2 games of 5 or whatever. cause we might just end up with another set of 6 round wins and so on.
TaCktiX wrote:If anything we've proven by large sample size that with competent people who want to win no game of Escalating Classic can be won in fewer than 6 rounds.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users