The Problem With “Double Elim”

Congratulations to the Blue alliance for winning the SEMA district event. There was just a few questions that I have in regards to the way the double elimination bracket works. The Red Alliance was coming from the winners side and lost the best of 3 in grand finals to the blue alliance 2-1. Every other double elimination bracket has a “reset” if the losers side ends up winning the first best of 3. Is there any inherent advantage to being the team on the winning side?

Having less matches played does not seem to be a good enough reward as the alliances have less time to build team synergy and get their strategy locked down. The reward for not losing a single playoff game until the finals is that you get less matches to strengthen your team communication.

It just feels bad to call it a double elimination bracket and have the red alliance only lose one series and not have another chance for a comeback. Every team was double eliminated while red alliance only lost one overall.


The lack of a bracket reset in the current format is being discussed in this thread already:

1 Like

Please use the thread in the post above. Closing this topic.