MYM - DotA News: SMM: Do not be late!

All Games

SC2

DotA

HON

8 comments today
8 news in 24 hours

Esport News

DotA

18th November 2009, 11:55

SMM: Do not be late!

format, schedule, smm

SMM has released the full schedule of the tournament and most international teams will be debut on the second day.

To ensure that all the contestants arrive early on the day of the tournament, SMM has released the full schedule of the tournament over the period of three days. Judging from the schedule, it appears that the international teams including MYM will debut in Malaysia on the second day. However, it is mandatory that all teams attend the opening ceremony.

Day two seems to be extremely packed with games and this is due to the tournament format that ensures utmost fairness for all participating teams.

Below are the full schedule for SMM Grand Finals. Please click on the pictures to enlarge.

Day 1 schedule

Day 2 schedule

Day 3 schedule

This might also interest you

Misery: Of course I'm MVP

SMM - FTD crowned king in SMM

MYM vs. nfinity shoutcast cam

Who or what is he?

DotA Retirees, where are they?

Bookmark this article at ...

Comments (34)

Page :

(9 months ago) #1 [Aut]m3w

SGT?

(9 months ago) #2 [FF]ReiNNNN

what? lol

(9 months ago) #21 4KFmatthe

Sergeant? Mozart is NO MOAR! Welcome short hair!!

(9 months ago) #3 k\|NoTfirfi

local time?

(9 months ago) #7 Danny89

yes.. & Malaysian time is +8 GMT.. HATERs make me STRONGER :D

(9 months ago) #4 mR.Jerry-

Imagine the amount of planning that has gone into this compe. lol

(9 months ago) #5 IShotTheSheriff

One thing I fail to understand - why the team coming from WB have +1 advantage over the team coming from LB, since the process of going through the LB itself serves as penalty for the latter?

It has always been this way, but it doesn't seem fair.

Last edited by IShotTheSheriff at 18.11.2009, 14:00

(9 months ago) #6 DonEHolyMaster

The team coming from WB did already beat EVERYONE (not directly of course, but they are number one) and so they deserve an advantage against a team that lost a match before

(9 months ago) #8 Danny89

let's jz say it tis way: if without disadvantage, every1 would want to play at the Loser Bracket & will purposely lose to go thr, as the easier teams are thr so it's easier to go to the Finals.. Last edited by Danny89 at 18.11.2009, 14:16 HATERs make me STRONGER :D

(9 months ago) #10 Trencha

The point of double elimination is that every team must lose twice in order to get knocked out. In tournaments where all the rounds are bo1 except the bo3 finals, the team coming from the winnerbracket (i.e. unbeaten) therefore starts with the 1-0 advantage, then whichever team loses gets knocked out as a result of having been beaten twice throughout the tourney. I don't know if SMM is doing bo3 final or bo5 final with some bo3 round or whatever (judging by the schedule it's bo3 final with all rounds bo1), but even in bo5 the philosophy that in an elimination tournament the losing team shouldn't be able to win the tournament and yet lose the same number of games as the second-placed team is carried over.

Wiki it. :D

(9 months ago) #12 [FF]ReiNNNN

http://www.mymym.com/en/news/16974.html thats the tournament format if you missed it. its qualifiers -> groupstage -> double elim. more than fair tbh

(9 months ago) #13 YoSnail

I entirely agree with you and always thought this way since my first contact with gaming tournaments. It seems to be an old tradition in DotA, WC3 and other games, but it's one that needs changing.

It does make sense that the team who won the WB should receive some kind of an advantage over the LB. For this, home-field advantage, selection of the preferred side, picking position, or something like this is fitting. Unfortunately, of course, such advantages are often not possible in esports.

However, to give one team a full WIN over the other team to start out with is an advantage far out of proportion. They are already in the upper bracket and have the momentum of not having lost. Perhaps in a best of five, I could see giving a team one win being fair, but in a best of three the WB team needs only one quick win and the final 'series' is over. I don't know why so few people notice something weak abot this.

The traditional system leads typically to the LB feeling (correctly) like the odds to win are weighed heavily against them before the finals even starts. It leads to fans and players being deprived of a full and epc finals series, since usually the momentum of the winning side (who did not have fight all the way through the LB and show their key picks / strats) is able to carry them through game one -- the final game of the 'series'.

Last edited by YoSnail at 18.11.2009, 15:54

(9 months ago) #14 FaPBeast_Pete

You are correct in a way, and I'm considering your suggestion. It doesn't, really doesn't feel right to make it so much more difficult to the LB winner to get the final win. Though it happened in the past many times that they could take the win (like VP vs MYM or RuSh3D vs Ks.Int/WG in EEDC). Visit www.wdc-online.com for the hottest DotA tournaments!

(9 months ago) #15 shostakovich

As long as the double elimination system continues (and I think it should continue), giving one full win is a viable way to make justice to the team that manage to get into the finals from winner bracket. But it's trure, there might be a flaw in the logic that transforms the 'right to lose one match' into a 'full win'.

Finals are fairer in best of 5, IMO.

I disagree with you that the traditional system doesn't eliver epic final series. Just look at the series Pete mentioned.

(9 months ago) #17 IShotTheSheriff

I do belive one of the above made suggestions should be adopted by the SMM admins - either the final gets bo5 with 1 win advantage or (better imo, since bo5 is quite tiresome) some other sort of advantage is given to the WB finalist in bo3 - picking preferred side, picking 1st/2nd pick (as proposed). This is just to sum it up. Indeed, 1 full win is too much for bo3. Best of luck, sry for crippled english.

Last edited by IShotTheSheriff at 18.11.2009, 18:56

(9 months ago) #22 Danny89

another simpler example would be: Team A beats Team B 2:0 from Winner Bracket the playoffs.. Team B get back to the Finals from Loser Bracket.. So if Team A beats team B one more time to win it, Team A actually scores 3:0 against Team B.. But let's say if Team B beats team A 2:1.. Isnt it unfair for Team A? in total Team A 3:2 Team B.. but Team B wins it.. i do agree though that a BO3 wit 1:0 advantage will cost the team from LB the whole tourney if they did some stupid mistakes or was suprised.. but based on the above, it'll be unfair for Team A if they do not get the advantage.. BO5 will be too long i guess? HATERs make me STRONGER :D

(9 months ago) #24 Danny89

add on:
if it's BO1 prior to the Final, the same theory applies..
Team A beats Team B 1:0 from Winner Bracket the playoffs..
Team B get back to the Finals from Loser Bracket..

So if Team A needs to beat team B 2 more time to win it, Team A actually scores 3:0 against Team B to win it (or 3:1 if Team B gets a game) ..

But let's say if Team B beats team A 2:1 & crowned Champion..
Isnt it unfair for Team A?
in total Team A 2:2 Team B, a DRAW..
but Team B wins it..

without the advantage Team A would actually need 3 wins to be crowned champion, but Team B from Loser Bracket just need 2 games? :S

HATERs make me STRONGER :D

(9 months ago) #25 YoSnail

Where, in my opinion, your examples go off mark is in the step of adding all the individual games in the WB final and then the GF together and asking if that number is fair with respect to who won. This seems arbitrary. Why should we treat them as an aggregate when the WB and GF are different rounds? Normally in deciding who wins fairly in a tournament, we simply look at the result per match and never add up all the games that were wins / losses between the two from previous rounds.

If we really wanted to be consistent in using that method of counting aggregate wins to determine the winner, we could say that the LB winner had to win a lot more games to get to the finals and therefore should not be penalized by being one game down.

The WB winner already has the structural advantage that by winning he does not have to face again all these teams in the LB and show strats / picks. The LB winner has been fighting through many games and playing all the cards in his deck. This situation should be enough of an advantage for the WB. The +1 full win is too much.

Last edited by YoSnail at 18.11.2009, 23:59

(9 months ago) #30 Danny89

err, i'll give a full bracket example later on when i get back after work.. haha.. ^^ HATERs make me STRONGER :D

(9 months ago) #18 YoSnail

That's a fair point.

I didn't really mean NO finals were epic, but that too many of them flew by in a one game final series because the WB had quite an advantage in several ways, as discussed above.

(9 months ago) #27 shostakovich

Understand.

The center of the discussion is the double elimination system. As long as this is the principle of the game structure, winner bracket winner MUST have one win advantage at the Grand Finals. The 'double elimination system' demands this.

But we can think on alternatives. For example, the Soccer World Cup format, a single elimination cup. We have two brackets, the winner of both brackets compete at the Grand Final. I think it would be good to have a cup like this. But, in a cup like this, teams can't fail, as the name says: single elimination.

Maybe the 'two brackets' could be played in a double elimination system in order to discover the two teams who'll play at the Grand Finals. We have something like that in NBA and the World Cup...

(9 months ago) #31 YoSnail

Right, I would challenge the claim that there is *necessity* between the double elimination system and the one-win-advantage rule. On the contrary, a tournament using double elimination rules can with full consistency keep or scrap this rule as they see fit. I’ll explain why.

The central argument defending the one-win-advantage rule is that in a double elimination system the winning team should have to lose twice and not be knocked out by one loss to another team. This part certainly makes sense. Further, this is thought to justify giving the WB team a one-win-advantage, since the LB team has to beat them two times while the WB team only once. But that logic doesn't really add up to closer inspection. One would have to interpret, ad hoc, each game in the final as a match, counting them individually rather than viewing the final confrontation as a match made up of several games. The latter is the standard way we calculate wins in a Bo3; e.g. no team gets points in our system for winning one out of two games.

So, there is a flaw (an ad hoc assumption) in the reasoning for the one-win-advantage rule in this case. One game is not equal to a match, as those of us who have ever come back from one game down well know. The WB team cannot really suffer two defeats now (say, by two different opponents as it has always been for all others throughout the tournament), because the tournament is at an end. Obviously, no team has to be eliminated by THREE different matches, i.e. confrontations with other teams, if the one-win-advantage rule is ignored; the LB team is still losing only two matches to two opponents. A tournament can decide to scrap the one-win-advantage rule at no cost to the double elimination system. In fact, giving one team a free win is a very poor remedy to a non-problem that merely tilts the last match in one side’s way.

Last edited by YoSnail at 19.11.2009, 05:47

(9 months ago) #34 shostakovich

Makes sense. I still think that the Double Elimination system works to discover who'll be the two grand finalists. So, the Grand Final would be something else, which means teams will not bring anything from the other games. It's like a final between different conferecences.

(9 months ago) #28 Trencha

As they guy above me said, you (and others) are missing the point of a double elimination bracket, which is that you must lose twice in order to be eliminated. The one-win-advantage for the team in the upper bracket in the final match is necessary to ensure that it doesn't take THREE losses to knock out the team coming from the loser bracket. In other words, do you think it would be fair if the team that get into the final via the losers bracket get one "extra chance" (so to speak) over every other team in the tournament (including the team that get to the final via the winner bracket)?

(9 months ago) #9 Pressi

what a pity; the grand finals is at the same time as DH ends, so us going to DreamHack won't be able to watch it live :(

(9 months ago) #11 SHcRfisheer

This is just huge.

(9 months ago) #16 IShotTheSheriff

wrong post Last edited by IShotTheSheriff at 18.11.2009, 18:51

(9 months ago) #19 zorro87

all the games played using local time that is GMT+8
is there any stream on the garena tv?

(9 months ago) #23 Danny89

yes.. based on the changelog for Nov 9th Update, they mentioned stream for SMM jz like wat they did for WCG, + thr's ppl from Garena going :) HATERs make me STRONGER :D

(9 months ago) #20 UTDCJustin

Really good tournament structure as always.

(9 months ago) #26 5tarScre4m

Where will this event be held at? Berjaya Times Square?

Money is like the force, binding the universe together

(9 months ago) #29 Danny89

A'Famosa in Malacca (Melaka), Malaysia.. official site of SMM: www.smm.net.my HATERs make me STRONGER :D

(9 months ago) #32 zorro87

can i know the adrees of the location of the tounament?
i wanno go the if got free time..

(9 months ago) #33 Danny89

A'Famosa in Malacca (Melaka), Malaysia.. official site of SMM: www.smm.net.my Location: http://map.google.com :) HATERs make me STRONGER :D

Page :

In order to post comments you must be logged in. You will be forwarded automatically to the feature you were trying to access.

If you do not have an account yet, you can register to the MYM Community in less than one minute.
Registering won't only allow you to read the latest coverage on current events, but also give you the oportunity to take part in an uprising gaming community and meet new people, aswell as new friends.Register now and be a part of the MeetYourMakers community.

Backlinkers

google.com.pe

fragster.de

google.be

prodota.ru

news.replays.net

esportspress.com

wdc-online.com

esport-news.net

google.co.id

bing.com

baidu.com

translate.googleusercontent.com

search.yahoo.com

netvibes.com

garena.com

bloglines.com

gamingessence.net

link to this news

News
Click on an icon to get a preview of the corresponding news.

E-Sport news is now 'Team MYM News' and 'E-Sport News' combined.

Popular : Shows the most popular E-Sport news from the last month.

News

Socke wins Go4SC2 #36 (0)

The German Protoss player Socke won ESL's Go4SC2 cup. In the final he beat the Russian giant BRAT_OK and secured himself 75 points....

KaoS and NP! with changes (0)

eSport Danmark clears all rumour... (0)

French IEM: SarenS champion ! (7)

k1ck without mUttt - ehz steps i... (0)

Ret returns to Korea with the he... (0)

wCrea loses its team (0)

*Iron Will with F_1N - USSR clos... (0)

ESL announce IEM Last Chance cup (0)

wNv release CS squad (0)

Swedish Housemafia become RAGE (1)

EPS playday 3: ClouD wins (0)

eXelon sign Infernal Gaming (1)

ESC Gaming pickup luosrevo (0)

WCG Finals groups are drawn (2)

show more news

Articles
Click on an icon to get a preview of the corresponding article.

Articles

2trace: "I guess we just sucked&q...

We were able to take some time together with Martin 'trace' Heldt after mTw lost the final of this year's Samsung European Championship against the Swedish powerhouse ...

1Introducing - Team Ladies