Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday
It's very interesting that this has been a debate before. I didn't know the tournament rules for 2003 (I was in 3rd grade!) so I looked them up:
Similar to 2010 it looks like it rewarded high scoring losses more than a low scoring win - discouraging defense. But 2003 was a game with winning and losing.
I think there's a key difference to this year's game. There is no winning and losing until the very last match. It's not fixing a match if there's no match to be played. The goal for each alliance is to pure and simple get the most points in the match.
|
It sounds like the same seeding rules as 2010. What's interesting is that I don't think there was quite as much negative controversy over the 2010 6v0 compared to the 2003 one.
what is it exactly that makes people like Dave Lavery more admirable than the video store clerk down the street?
- Madison [more] 
04-01-2015, 19:37
Threaded Mode