From: metroid composite | #001
I just don't think this is a good format anymore. Ever noticed how the whining along the lines of "Link always wins" or whatever always gets much worse towards the end of a contest? Well...that's because Link has 3 matches in 7 days towards the end of every contest. Single elimination means there is always a "groaner" week like this.
Why not use a different format? I'm not talking about double elimination, which would have much of the same problems. I'm talking...what if we forget about crowning a champion, and just give every character, say, 3 matches. And sure, match people with equivalent records, so 0-2 characters face other 0-2 characters.
Depends on your contest principle. You're approach is an attempt to make as many interesting matchups as possible and avoid boring inevitable grind of predictable results. This doesn't lend itself well to finding a "Best something" as is the goal set out by Allen. You're sort of suggesting the creation of some kind of league system I think, where characters of similiar strength face off which I'd certainly get behind but don't think Allen would be game for it. He likes contests with a simple objective.
My feeling about this is the same as last year: the chain bonus is too high compared to banking.
Definitely. Chain bonuses are fine when it carries a large risk which this contest just simply didn't present. Although I'd prefer increasing the risk than reducing the chain bonus. A betting system like we've got for the final would be nice throughout a contest. It would give more viability to banking since you could bank and then look to triple a small amount with a risky 1% bet to catch up with curve chaining straight picks. If it works you're there, if not you've still got a pool banked and you're ready to aim for a triple shot again. Theres plenty of strategy in there.
--
Smurf , The Cream of Sonic Fanboyism