ESL explains why eFuture advanced

2-10-2011 17:59

The ESL explains why eFuture advanced from Group A in the IEM6 Global Challenge Guangzhou and why Anexis did not.

Following the conclusion of Group A, some uncertainty about who would advance surfaced. As the group finalized, three teams found themselves in a three-way-tie. The two teams advancing from the group were fnatic in first spot and eFuture in second. It seemed unclear to some why eFuture advance and not Anexis.

The ESL has now pinpointed why the Chinese team advanced and why the Danes were sent packing.

STEP ONE: COUNT WINS, NOTICE THE THREE-WAY-TIE
STEP TWO: IGNORE IMMUNITY, COUNT WINS
STEP THREE: IGNORE IMMUNITY, COUNT WINS, COUNT ROUNDS
STEP FOUR: IGNORE IMMUNITY AND FNATIC, RUN A NEW TIE-BREAKER

Based on the fourth tie-breaker, which went in favor of eFuture, with their 16-12 win against Anexis, the Chinese team was set to advance in second place.

The entire rulebook of the Intel Extreme Masters is available here, and the specific rule is on page 18.

The IEM6 Global Challenge Guangzhou will continue Monday at 04:00 with the first match in Group B, seeing WinFakt take on mousesports. You will be able to follow all of the action as it unfolds right here on HLTV.org

eFuture won against Anexis, so there's no doubt, they deserved to be qualified. It's not a common rules, but not a bad one.

2011-10-02 18:01

36 replies

2011-10-02 18:04

agreed.

2011-10-02 18:05

But Anexis won fnatic, they should be advance in semi finals

2011-10-02 18:06

17 replies

But fnatic won eFuture, and had a better RD.

2011-10-02 18:10

2 replies

a wild paradox appears!

2011-10-02 22:03

we all know what would happen to Anexis if they had played best of 3

2011-10-03 06:48

read : STEP FOUR: IGNORE IMMUNITY AND FNATIC, RUN A NEW TIE-BREAKER If i'm not mistaken, fnatic has the best RD, so they are considered in the first place after the 3 first steps were apply. Then, the results against immunity & fnatic weren't count, and they only counted the Anexis vs eFuture match to set the 2nd team.

2011-10-02 18:11

12 replies

your right, Immunity is totally ignored from the tournament so

2011-10-02 18:29

If fnatic deserves to get first place because of best round difference, surely Anexis deserves 2nd place for the (arguably) second best round difference. Even though it was -2 like eFuture, they did win more rounds, which a lot of people would agree should put them through.

2011-10-02 18:51

10 replies

It's an old rule, they didn't invente it to give the place for eFuture The RD is only here to consider the first place, the 2nd place is based on the match between the 2nd & 3rd team. This rule is here since a couple of year now. But you've got to know, the RD gives the first place only in the third steps, if the two first steps doesn't work. First step : we count wins, the three teams got 2-0-1. Second step : We count wins but not in the immunity matches, three teams got 1-0-1. Third step : We give the first place to the team with the best RD, fnatic. Fourth step : We count wins but not in the fnatic nor immunity matches, eFuture is 2nd because they have 1-0-0 & Anexis 0-0-1.

2011-10-02 18:57

9 replies

I am talking about what I think Anexis deserve, not what is correct according to the rules. I don't think it is fair ignoring the fact that Anexis had the better roundscore, but ESL should obviously follow their rules (until they are potentially changed).

2011-10-02 19:02

3 replies

Then, it's fair because the rules are made for increasing the fairplay. eFuture beated Anexis in the last match, they proved to be better. You'll told me that Anexis beated fnatic. Ok, you're right, but the matter isn't to win the matches, it's to win the most important ones.

2011-10-02 19:07

2 replies

I find it rather weird that you think rules are perfect for fairplay. I personally don't find it fair that Anexis' greater round-score gets ignored just because the round-difference is the same. You are obviously free to feel otherwise, we can't all agree :)

2011-10-02 19:14

1 reply

Agree with you.

2011-10-02 19:20

it sounds like when you read this STEP THREE: IGNORE IMMUNITY, COUNT WINS, COUNT ROUNDS it only tells that it will count rounds of all teams(thats what i get it when i read it) it doesn't read that only 1st place, so it's abit confusing. and when you get to the rule number 4 then you can understand it.

2011-10-02 19:12

1 reply

Look Step four, ignore immunity & fnatic. The step three is here for step four, they give the first place with the third step, then, they don't count their matches for the step four. The step three only exist for the fourth step, esl wanted the match against the 2nd & the 3rd team to be more important than Round Difference. This is not a bad rule when you think about it.

2011-10-02 19:20

Well, there are two reasons why people could think that Anexis deserved to qualify. If you count this right, Anexis has scored 28 rounds and lost 30 while eF has won less rounds (26) but lost less also (28). So, despite having the same round difference (-2), in most sports in the world (football being the prime example), Anexis would be qualified and not eF because when two teams are tied in round difference, the number of rounds won is the next step in the rulebook (and it's pretty logical after all, both teams DIDN'T have the exact same round average in the 3-way tie, only the same round difference) so in this case, Anexis would be the one to qualify because they've scored more rounds than eF. Also, if you don't rule out Immunity (as the majority of sports/games do), Anexis has the best round difference and average compared to eF, so ESL has chosen the only (and most peculiar) rule to make eF pass the group while most organizers would have qualified Anexis, logically. I understand why they did that and they sticked to their rule perfectly. But still, sometimes, the rule is shitty and you have to change it for it to be rational and that's what ESL should do from their next tournament on.

2011-10-02 19:16

2 replies

Please read the rules first. Notice this rule: If at any point, the number of tied participants is reduced or divided into several groups of tied participants, the still tied participants will in each case be compared again starting with the first point. 1. Fnatic, eFuture, Anexis both have 6 points, according to 1st point of the rules "Points amassed between the participants themselves ('Mini-League')", each team got 3 points, so they are still tied. 2. Now, according to 2st point of the rules "Score difference between the participants ('Mini-League')", fnatic is +4, eFuture & Anexis are both -2, so fnatic is the first. 3. Right now, the number of tied participants is reduced, so the still tied participants(Anexis & eFuture) will be compared again starting with the first point. 4. According to 1st point of the rules "Points amassed between the participants themselves ('Mini-League')", eFuture got 3 points, Anexis got 0 point. so eFuture is second.

2011-10-02 19:21

1 reply

"I understand why they did that and they sticked to their rule perfectly. But still, sometimes, the rule is shitty and you have to change it for it to be rational" Did you miss that part :D?

2011-10-02 19:49

u englishmen are a fucking disgrace to the english language. its anexis BEAT fnatic, not won...

2011-10-02 19:50

2011-10-02 18:06

Word.

2011-10-02 18:17

2 replies

It's the rule... Read it.

2011-10-02 18:18

1 reply

Wait, what?

2011-10-02 18:36

more than obvious, dunno why so much noise for this

2011-10-02 18:34

1 reply

2011-10-02 19:20

How stupid are you? Anexsis beated fnatic who won the group, thats a pretty good reason why anexsis should advance. And they had a better RD ratio, just to point out.

2011-10-02 19:14

9 replies

Wo cao ni ma go learn this in chinese

2011-10-02 20:09

1 reply

hehe

2011-10-03 03:33

omg what a lack of IQ!

2011-10-02 20:25

6 replies

Go eat some rice and log out.

2011-10-02 21:33

5 replies

Anexsis beated fnatic who won the group, thats a pretty good reason why anexsis should advance. Rethink that please

2011-10-02 21:37

4 replies

They finished 2nd, after fnatic. anexsis > fnatic fnatic > efuture efuture > anexsis And Anexsis RD ratio is better, thats why anexsis should advance.

2011-10-02 21:55

3 replies

that's not what you said in your first post And Anexis RD is the same as Efuture

2011-10-02 22:04

2 replies

No the ratio is not better, go check your facts.

2011-10-02 22:17

1 reply

what does round difference ratio mean? because round difference is -2 for both of them

2011-10-03 01:39

YEA, they're right :\

2011-10-02 18:01

bad luck

2011-10-02 18:01

This happened to OK, M5 and mTw in the last Xperia PLAY in Copehagen

2011-10-02 18:06

unfair

2011-10-02 18:04

This should stop the tears.

2011-10-02 18:04

STEP FIVE: TOURNAMENT HELD IN CHINA, SO WE PICKED CHINESE TEAM :P

2011-10-02 18:04

10 replies

almost funny :)

2011-10-02 18:05

2011-10-02 18:06

Did you even read the rules-.- Stupid!

2011-10-02 18:08

4 replies

he wasn't serious :) it was a joke

2011-10-02 18:14

3 replies

he is serious i think :P

2011-10-02 18:28

Okay then he failed, I didnt laugh. And then i send my content to everyone else that is serious.

2011-10-02 18:31

1 reply

Well, I have read the rules, but still can't agree the rule. Really unfair. Immunity is totally ignored and they didn't do some damage at all, looks like defeated by 0:16 every teams in the group. I'd say really nice steps to eliminate the Danish team. But it's the rule we all know. Thanks for you smart content

2011-10-02 19:28

lol =D n1 :D

2011-10-02 18:12

haha nice one xD

2011-10-02 18:19

true....

2011-10-03 00:10

i think its the round difference that counts, not the results against the team that's tied. Anexis just won 12 rounds more than efuture... + they won against fnatic... that should be more of a reason to let them qualifie.

2011-10-02 18:06

1 reply

The RD is only counting for the 1st team, the 2nd team is based between the 2 other ties.

2011-10-02 18:14

Sounds good to me.. stop the whine its bad luck for any of the 3 teams to not qualify

2011-10-02 18:10

Just let them all qualify and get it over with.

2011-10-02 18:17

"STEP FOUR: IGNORE IMMUNITY AND FNATIC, RUN A NEW TIE-BREAKER" Hahaha...guys really need to learn how 3-way-tie is calculated. It's not that hard...maybe check football rules? If it says that way in their rules then it's ok, but that's not a proper way to calculate a 3-way-tie, in any sport... EDIT: d) greatest number of points obtained in the group matches between the tied teams; e) round difference resulting from the group matches between the tied teams; f) greater number of rounds won in all group matches between the tied teams; There are more ways, but none says that "new tie breaker" is created. I feel sorry for the Danes.

2011-10-02 18:21

3 replies

you are a wise young man, my apprentice

2011-10-02 18:42

Agree about its not the way to handle 3way tie. But about "f)": Anexis played 6 more total rounds than eF played, which wouldn't make it fair either. I think they should have a rematch in that case.

2011-10-02 20:22

1 reply

It's their mistake not to have all rounds played as well.

2011-10-03 19:39

not all three-ways have happy endings, then

2011-10-02 18:18

1 reply

haha

2011-10-02 18:26

Why they cant just make simply rules! PTS, then RD

2011-10-02 18:20

6 replies

you now when you start lying and u cover a lie with another lie, to the point where u cant remember the first ones. ESL made rules that didnt cover much, then they just kept adding rules rather than rethinking the stupid rules they had already set so now we have this... anyway thats what i think, they should hire a lawyer and pay him some money to make proper rules

2011-10-03 00:13

5 replies

they had the rules right from the start and they cover all scenarios!

2011-10-04 00:06

4 replies

never seems that way, the rules seem doggy and poorly designed knowing how the game works and how groups should work. All this ignore immunity nonsence seems like a loophole for esl to get whichever team they want to pass... coulda been without ignore imunity ya know....

2011-10-05 17:21

3 replies

its pretty common to ignore the team that isn't drawn with the others, not only in cs.. I still find this rule fair and simple

2011-10-05 18:27

2 replies

you are right rules are rules but agree with me on this, everytime there is a 3way tie everyone argues about how its supposed to go down, even though the rules are there so either cs community is full of trolls (im not saying that aint true) or the rules need to be refined

2011-10-05 19:27

1 reply

i actually think the rules are fine and the community if full of trolls :p

2011-10-05 19:30

oh, the drama!

2011-10-02 18:22

ESL is realy good in ignoring community ;)

2011-10-02 18:23

It has always been like this but the description is a bit unclear but it's like this: In case of a three-way-tie, all the matches against other teams will be ignored (all matches against immunity will be ignored and only the results between the 3 teams count). the rules have always been like this. The new ranking based on the amount of points and rounds difference: 1. fnatic 3 pts +4 r/d 2/3. eFuture 3 pts -2 r/d 2/3. Anexis 3 pts -2 r/d Because eFuture and Anexis are still tied when it comes to points and rounds difference we will have a look at the head-to-head result between both teams: eFuture 16-12 Anexis eFuture won so eFuture advances. it's even written in the rule book so stop complaining, rules are rules.

2011-10-02 18:23

10 replies

But eFuture and Anexis weren't totally tied, Anexis had won more rounds. I doubt that factor has been ignored always - although you might have ment in ESL cups, hard to tell. Also, the fact that something is written down as a rule doesn't mean you can't think it is wrong or complain about it. ESL needs to know that their online quals are shit and that a lot of people don't agree with this rule.

2011-10-02 19:00

9 replies

why is it sooooo hard to understand. no one cares about how many rounds were won, this is not football and this has never been a factor when it comes to deciding who will advance. people either look at points, rounds difference or head-to-head results. after ignoring the results against immunity (which has always been the case in a three-way-tie) then fnatic has +4, eFuture & Anexis both have -2. this is the part where it gets tricky because from this stage some leagues have had different rules in the past. sometimes the head-to-head results between the two teams who are still tied after the earlier stages will be the deciding factor but in the past teams also had to play a final match to decide who qualifies but this is not very common (but probably more fair).

2011-10-02 19:26

6 replies

No one cares about how many rounds were won? Oh I am sorry, I didn't read that survey.

2011-10-02 19:38

5 replies

Its true. I always see head-to-head, RD and points. Never seen a team advance in cs because of how many rounds won.

2011-10-02 20:28

3 replies

Is is true that people don't care because you haven't seen a team advance due to more roundwins? I don't think that conclusion makes much sense to be honest.

2011-10-02 20:31

2 replies

No you can care all you want, its not that. Its just that it has always been like this so why do people start complaining just now? I dont know how many times I have seen a team advance because of a head-to-head result..

2011-10-02 20:39

1 reply

I don't have this superior memory like some people on this site, so I don't know if it has always been like this. I generally have a hard time believing random people on the internet - a lot of statements are clearly not based on facts. A case like this is pretty rare, so when it happens people obviously feel like it is a good time to share their opinion.

2011-10-02 20:54

stop troll

2011-10-03 02:04

I understand your point but the tiebreaker decider is ROUND DIFFERENCE not ROUND WON, which Anexis and EF both were -2. Anexis did play more rounds, but also lost more rounds, so you cannot say they are better than EF just because they won two more rounds because they lost two more rounds also.

2011-10-02 19:33

1 reply

I don't think ESL did anything wrong. I don't think Anexis did anything to prove that they are better than eFuture. I am not saying that my suggestion would make for a perfect ruleset, judging teams by rounds are pretty pointless in relation to skill.

2011-10-02 19:43

if anexis would pick just one more round in match against eFuture, they could be in semi final :)

2011-10-02 18:27

These are my explains: Notice this rule: If at any point, the number of tied participants is reduced or divided into several groups of tied participants, the still tied participants will in each case be compared again starting with the first point. 1. Fnatic, eFuture, Anexis both have 6 points, according to 1st point of the rules "Points amassed between the participants themselves ('Mini-League')", each team got 3 points, so they are both tied. 2. Now, according to 2st point of the rules "Score difference between the participants ('Mini-League')", fnatic is +4, eFuture & Anexis are both -2, so fnatic is the first. 3. Right now, the number of tied participants is reduced, so the still tied participants(Anexis & eFuture) will be compared again starting with the first point. 4. According to 1st point of the rules "Points amassed between the participants themselves ('Mini-League')", eFuture got 3 points, Anexis got 0 point. so eFuture is second.

2011-10-02 18:27

Anexis drop because of their train ct

2011-10-02 18:31

1 reply

Yeah buddy! :D

2011-10-02 19:14

Where is the logic in ignoring fnatic? Why would you ignore one team in a THREE WAY TIE? This rule makes no sense. It leads into an endless loop.

2011-10-02 18:38

9 replies

Because they won more rounds, so they are qualified 1st.

2011-10-02 18:48

8 replies

yes but anexis beat them, so they should go to the semi finals. But wait efuture beat anexis so they should also go? but fnatic beat efuture... You see where I'm going with this? That's why a 3way is a 3way, not a 3way which turns into a 2way for no reason.

2011-10-02 18:51

7 replies

Yes i understand that.. and you clearly got a point. But in ESL rules says that the first spot should be awarded to the team with most won rounds (they have to have the same points) and then the 2nd place awarded by the result 1on1.. Its sad for anexis.. but rules are rules.. and besides im a fnatic fan i also like anexis, since friis was there..

2011-10-02 18:57

3 replies

well those are the rules, I'm just saying that that particular rule doesn't have any logic to it.

2011-10-02 19:24

2 replies

it has all the logic other rules have, i can't really understand why people have a problem with it!

2011-10-02 20:27

1 reply

Not really.

2011-10-03 22:44

Notice this rule: If at any point, the number of tied participants is reduced or divided into several groups of tied participants, the still tied participants will in each case be compared again starting with the first point. 1. Fnatic, eFuture, Anexis both have 6 points, according to 1st point of the rules "Points amassed between the participants themselves ('Mini-League')", each team got 3 points, so they are both tied. 2. Now, according to 2st point of the rules "Score difference between the participants ('Mini-League')", fnatic is +4, eFuture & Anexis are both -2, so fnatic is the first. 3. Right now, the number of tied participants is reduced, so the still tied participants(Anexis & eFuture) will be compared again starting with the first point. 4. According to 1st point of the rules "Points amassed between the participants themselves ('Mini-League')", eFuture got 3 points, Anexis got 0 point. so eFuture is second.

2011-10-02 19:06

2 replies

why are you pasting a rule I just said makes no sense as a response to my post?

2011-10-02 19:23

1 reply

Oh, sorry, I clicked on the wrong.

2011-10-02 19:29

i like the part with ignore immunity and fnatic xD

2011-10-02 18:42

i think its wrong, they have fnatic at the top of the group because of round diffrence. so why not apply the same rules for ther whole group. the 3 teams beat eachother so its only fair to go by the round diffrence between the 3 teams. thats just fucked up. Anexis would do more damage than eFuture anyway.

2011-10-02 18:48

2 replies

2011-10-02 19:09

1 reply

alright mr rulez

2011-10-03 11:35

you know it still makes no sense yeah? why use like 5 steps to sort out a 3 way tie when you can use one, by ROUNDS. and the decision to ignore immunity rounds makes even LESS sense, its a good indication of who struggles against bad teams in which case eFuture definitely does, anexis doesnt drop rounds to random teams because they are more composed and experienced. FAIL you definitely wont see eFuture beating fnatic. a team should be penalised for dropping so much rounds to the bottom team in the group and it needs to be in these tie situations that bad play against lesser teams ALSO should dictate who goes through. The fact that this loophole exists has saved the badder team (eFuture) and allowed them though and most likely was put in place by favouritism from admins of the host city team

2011-10-02 19:03

3 replies

you dont know shit, you wont see Anexis beating fnatic ever again but at the end eFuture outplayed Anexis so be quiet.

2011-10-02 19:14

After two matches Immunity was already out so you think they will try their best in the third match against fnatic?

2011-10-02 19:35

The problem with counting the rounds of immunity, is like sammy31 said, that they were already out. Even if they played the best they could, the rule is there to ensure that it doesn't happen. It has happend before that the team that were out has left WO(16-0). You think that would be fair to the other teams in the group?

2011-10-02 20:33

Fu China!

2011-10-02 19:09

i think it is unfair... they should count RD for the 2nd place to not only for the 1st place :) and no i am not an Anexis fan.. :) i am a fan of fnatic :)

2011-10-02 19:12

Why no Anexis? because Friis is in fnatic -_-

2011-10-02 19:16

Anexis should be happy to even see China loltrollol

2011-10-02 19:19

anexis wont beat fnatic ever again yet they just beat them a few hours ago? brainiac more like braindead

2011-10-02 19:20

2 replies

u brainless shithead do you know to read? THEY WONT BEAT THEM EVER **AGAIN** idiot

2011-10-02 20:27

We danes could travel to china each month on our study check... If they are lucky they wont carry any deceases back home to our lovely country hihihi ...

2011-10-02 23:46

No one read my explains?

2011-10-02 19:24

This is completely logical. Going from 3way tie to 2way tie (eliminating the team who clearly was the best, fnatic) is probably the simplest (and most logical) thing one can do to solve a 3way problem. If one team is obviously better than the other, you can simply put it out and reduce a problem to a 2way tie. Stop saying this rule is bad just because youre used to different rules

2011-10-02 19:24

3 replies

no phyro its illogical if youre not consistant with your methods if your method of deciding who the 'best' team is in a 3 way tie is going to be by rounds then your method of deciding of who the 'best' in a 2 way tie should also be by rounds, not some other method (okay lets do head to head now) otherwise thats just being contradictory

2011-10-02 19:37

2 replies

Why do you think the methods are different? Ok you judge a 3way tie by round difference, between the matches that were played by only these teams, ok. Youre observing which team should be where. Ok you see that fnatics are on top but the other two are tied, so you have a subproblem with anexis and efuture which is a 2way tie. Comparing a 2way tie should only compare matches of teams which are involved and judge by round difference. (If you see or not, this too is a comparison of round difference but in a 2way tie in this case is just 1 match, so head to head in this case is exactly the same method that was used in a 3way tie which was judging by round difference)

2011-10-02 19:59

They state their methods clearly in the rules and they followed them perfectly. Anexis, by playing in the tournament agreed to play with that method so they must agree with the result.

2011-10-02 20:29

I just wonder why were they using an old rule set to stablish this 3-way-tie (from IEM5) and didn't make a new one for this season. Did they use IEM4 ruleset for IEM5? Just curious :P

2011-10-02 19:27

That is like WCG 2009, when fnatic and wNv advanced, fnatic won wNv, wNv won FireGamers and Firegamers won fnatic

2011-10-02 19:29

F*ck rule they should play in this situation an extra match.

2011-10-02 19:41

1 reply

hmm right they did the same in iem5 sc2 groupstage

2011-10-02 20:31

why would "some" even doubt it??

2011-10-02 19:47

Ignoring a team's results (fnatic) in a 3-way tie has got to be the thickest thing you can do, oh well the decisions been made

2011-10-02 19:47

their other two matches should be indicator of who is the better team anexis beat immunity by 14 rounds, efuture beat immunity by 9 rounds anexis beat fnatic, efuture lose to fnatic but because of some random elimination process they are only judging them on 2/3 maps instead of 3/3 maps in a 3 way tie (LOL the 2 that favour eFuture) so much for these asian admin's mathematical skills

2011-10-02 20:00

You have got to be kidding me, how stupid are you guys, really? 1. Fnatic had best round difference 2. eFuture and Anexis had THE SAME ROUND DIFFERENCE. It doesnt matter if Anexis won more rounds because they also LOST more rounds. 3. Since the round difference between the teams are the same, the only way to determine a winner is to go by the head to head match, or simply play a new deciding match. Whats best: -2 or -2? Of course -2 is the best = Anexis should go through, right? Wow the amazing logic you present is breathtaking.

2011-10-02 20:01

3 replies

There is no logic in ranking teams by roundscore, but because the tournament needs to go on there has to be rules on how to rank the teams, even though it tells absolutely nothing about skill. As far as I know the biggest sporting event on the planet (Fifa World Cup) even uses number of goals to rank teams that end up with the same number of points and goal difference. That doesn't mean it is the best way of doing things, but I think it is more a matter of opinion than people being stupid :)

2011-10-02 21:01

2 replies

but there is no number of goals that a football team have to reach to "auto-win" the match. But in CS, the wining team must always have 16 rounds and that is a big difference. CS is limited by "goals", footbal is limited in time.

2011-10-03 14:58

1 reply

That is true, but my point is that ranking teams by stuff like that doesn't make sense in the first place. Therefore I don't think we should be calling people stupid for having another opinion with regards to these types of rules.

2011-10-03 15:13

Sad story for Aneaxis, but rules are rules.

2011-10-02 20:07

does it sound like a leftover from all 30 rounds played? I though they changed the rule so that rounds would count more. Guess not. Rule is a rule and was a bit surprised that they had one like that in their archive of rules - its just that weird one for me. And not the fairest one.

2011-10-02 20:59

well it is totally OK cause better team advanced...

2011-10-02 21:07

If its in the rules, I'm glad there's a tournament that follow them

2011-10-02 21:16

the same thing what happened between M5 and OK a while back, this rule doesn't make sense... why should the third match be completely ignored in a 3-way-tie? In my opinion the best way for teams to qualify would be to look at points > TOTAL round difference > rematch between the 2nd&3rd teams if equal, just like in every other sport... would result in less whining and crying as it's a lot clearer way to pick the advancing teams from the ones that won't

2011-10-02 21:51

gl eF & goodrifle

2011-10-02 22:08

Strange rule imo, with a 3 way tie they should only look at round difference. fnatic beat eFuture eFuture beat Anexis Anexis beat fnatic Can only be judged by round difference...

2011-10-02 23:11

Wonder what would have happened if you switched the statistics etc between Anexis & eFuture... But still rules are rules and it was the right decision accordning to the rules :)

2011-10-02 23:19

1 reply

anexis would have gone through and chinese people would be pissed for no reason!

2011-10-05 18:30

it's like in football .

2011-10-03 02:57

rule is rule fair is fair there is actually no absolute fair or equality in this world

2011-10-03 03:10

I like the e-stars better than thise rules. But they aint great eaither with all the randomness in bo1.

2011-10-03 07:14

smilence

2011-10-03 07:47

blablabla.. maybe try to beat the chinese team next time if you want to advance..

2011-10-03 12:20

the whole thing doesnt make sense, if you chose to check round difference, fnatic/anexis advance if you chose for head to head results, there had to be 3 rematches now its first round difference, and after deciding the first place, they took head to head result (?) all the "if anexis just had beaten efuture"-comments dont make sense either.. "if efuture just had beaten fnatic" "if fnatic just had beaten anexis" in my opinion this politics ruin esports..

2011-10-03 23:47