| |
Okay guys, so in the past two months, I have come up with a new system in my mind. I thought the criticism of the current monthly TOP 10 were justified in that they were too opinion-based and I have seen living proof of teams not bothering too much in their choices. Therefore, I have come up with a new TOP 10 that will even become a TOP 20 to incorporate a broader view of how the competitive scene of the European community has been.
First of all. I'll make it very clear, from the start, that the focal point of this renewed TEK9 TOP 20 is very different from the old one. In my personal opinion, I have always found that top teams need to lead by example and have therefore put heavy emphasis on the activity levels of each team. This is immediately the key word of these rankings: ACTIVITY.
How did I incorporate that into the new TOP 20, you ask? Well, I decided to base the point-giving on several criteria, three to be exact, with two of these criteria having some specific trigger parameters you need to hit in order to get more points. So in total you have a combination of how you placed in a specific tournament, compared to how important the tournament was (in terms of competition and in terms of how much prize purse was awarded to that specific tournament.
Let me visualize this for you:
|
Single Elimination:
1) 25 pts
2) 15 pts
3) 10 pts
4) 8 pts
5) 6 pts
6) 6 pts
7) 6 pts
8) 6 pts
9) 2 pts
10) 2 pts
11) 2 pts
12) 2 pts
13) 2 pts
14) 2 pts
15) 2 pts
16) 2 pts
|
Double Elimination:
1) 25 pts
2) 15 pts
3) 10 pts
4) 8 pts
5) 7 pts
6) 7 pts
7) 5 pts
8) 5 pts
9) 2 pts
10) 2 pts
11) 2 pts
12) 2 pts
13) 1 pt
14) 1 pt
15) 1 pt
16) 1 pt
|
As an added criterium for the placement results, I have incorporated one extra detail that
can distinguish performances. If you get dropped from the tournament by the eventual winner,
you get an extra 2 points to those who finish equal to you (f.e. 5-8th place) and if you get
dropped by the team who finishes second, you get an extra 1 point to those who finish equal to you.
This is based on the assumption that sometimes brackets are not entirely fair and will separate
those who have had a harder run (arguably facing the best team in the team earlier than others
who finish in the same field as you...hence the two or one point(s) extra to your total tally).
PS: in Double Elimination, this only counts for those teams who get dropped by the eventual winner
from the Lower Bracket, being dropped from UB to LB by those teams does not get you an extra
point, as you are still in the tournament. |
On another note, you can see that in Double Elimination tournaments you are given one point for placing TOP 16 and in the Single Elimination you get 2 points for the same final standing. This was done because you can have bad luck and face the best team immediately and be out of the tournament. Whereas, in the Lower Bracket you'd still have an extra shot to place further and thus gain more points. It's a marginal difference to depict the perhaps crudeness of the Single Elimination over the Double Elimination system.
Then we have the other two criteria (the prizes awarded to the tournament and how important it was in terms of competition):
|
Event character
1) EU event with 8 of TOP 10 teams present + 16 teams minimum: 25 pts
2) EU event with 4 of TOP 10 teams present + 10 teams minimum: 15 pts
3) EU event with 1 of TOP 10 teams present + 10 teams minimum: 10 pts
4) Local LAN with at least 10 teams present: 8 pts
5) Online cup with a cash prize: 4 pts
6) Online cup with hardware prize: 2 pts
|
Prize Purse
1) >= €10,000: 25 pts
2) >= €5,000: 15 pts
3) >= €2,000: 10 pts
4) >= €1,000: 8 pts
5) >= €500: 6 pts
6) >= €100: 4 pts
|
So okay. You have all the figures to your disposal now. Let's try it out with some hypothetical examples to see what it means in the end to participate and how much you'd get. (following examples are hypothetical or examples of future events that are already known):
- AEF would have €15,000 next year and you'd get all the best teams in Europe attending to get as much as possible. For example, Anexis eSports would win this. That meant they'd get 25 + 25 + 25 points (the pure maximum for one event in this system), because they won, the event had 8 of the TOP 10 present and more than 16 teams in total and the prize purse was >€10,000.
Online-Kingdom enters the same tournament, but loses in the first 16-team bracket round to Anexis eSports. This meant they'd get 2 points (plus 2 for having lost to the eventual winner) + 25 + 25 for the same event criteria. This would give them 52 to Anexis' 75 points.
As you can clearly see from this, the emphasis of how well you place is not THAT important (the difference of 23 points (or 21 if you lose to the winner) between the first and last placed team is nearly an entire criterion) any more as in the older system. Teams that go to all the big EU events get rewarded for simply having invested and showing up (esp in the lower regions of the TOP 20 this could be a crucial factor to decide if some online team gets higher, as they'd have to basically win all online events of those three months).
Another example about the upcoming CyberGamer League CGinvite:
-LowLandLions end up having more points than Online-Kingdom after 9 weeks and they end up with the following points: LowLandLions would get 25 + 4 + 8 = 37 points and Online-Kingdom would get 27 points.
So 37 points for having won a relatively big online cash cup, compared to the 75 you could theoretically win at a major European LAN. A huge difference that should see teams want to go to more LANs, if they want to place better in these TOP 20 rankings. Also, you could have two LANs that give out the same prize purse (or nearly, bar some few hundred euros) and yet, you could get different classifications based on who simply shows up. Let's examine the Dublin Esports Event compared to the one week later held SAGE.
- Dublin Esports Event had €2,200 as well as some hardware prizes with a difference to SAGE's €3,500 of less than €1,000. Since both of them were in the category of between €2,000 and €5,000, they get the same points awarded, namely 10 points for going.
Then we look at which teams attended that event. Dublin Esports Event had Anexis, Infused.Tt & Team WinFakt!, giving them three teams of the TOP 10. Whereas SAGE had Anexis, Team WinFakt!, Herr & Online-Kingdom, giving them at least four teams from the TOP 10. This gives a distinction of 10 points for Dublin and 15 points for SAGE. Making it a more noteworthy event (which most of you will agree with me, that Dublin Esports Event did not have the same grandior as the SAGE event).
Including which tournaments?
Well, with a more extensive TOP 20 as well as looking at the past three months instead of just one month. I thought it'd be wise to not just look at the LAN events. As you can see from the "event character" category, I separated big European events (SAGE / Adroits / AEF / CIC / TeX / etc...) from the local ones ( FoM / Benelux Gaming LAN / ICL / maXlan / etc...) and made a clear distinction between going to events offline compared to competing online.
The biggest online cash cup imaginable, for example giving €10,000 or more would earn you 14 points. Whereas going to a local event of just €1,000 already gives you 16 points. I know this might seem a tad unfair, but I felt that the effort of having to arrange a LAN as well as invest in it, is valued more than just sitting behind your pc at home and participate in cups online. This also makes it more difficult for teams who only do online cups and never go to events to ever get ranked as the number one in this TOP 20 (unless there'd be like five online cups and they'd win all of them, with no offline events happening in that three month period, which is possible, but then again, you can never rule out everything).
Online cups with just hardware also get a lower ranking in this event character category due to teams usually not showing up, unless the prizes are really outstanding (like the ROCCAT Isku Challenge or the EuroCups PowerCup which offer hardware prizes of over €1,500, comparable to some local events). For brevity's sake and sparing myself a lot of work, all online cups (one-day or multiple-week ones alike) that do not offer any prizes did not get counted, as I had to draw the line someplace (this of course means that the CEVO European ShowDown is not included in this first TOP 20, for it was prizeless).
Conclusion
With this new system, there will be a lot of getting used to and to be completely fair, the first quarterly TOP 20 will have a lot of shaken up standings as most of the usual top teams were not active over the months. For example, Online-Kingdom were practically absent due to holidays and their organisation problems except for attending SAGE and LowLandLions had a few week period where they did not play at all and they missed out on both Dublin Esports Event and the SAGE event. However, in general, I think that this system will allow for a more structured approach and will take the guesswork out of it.
All of these top teams that will have lower than expected rankings could have "easily" (again, I see easily, but with the holiday season being what it is, it's not always possible) been more "standard" had they participated in more online cups or were more visible towards the general public, rather than just attend events (although attending events gets you near the highest rankings, as the Team WinFakt! example clearly demonstrates) offline and never play in between.
So I hope you will enjoy the new system and I am sure it will spark a lively debate, which I will admit is of course to be expected from any system. A slight note, the system will start "fresh" every three months, contrary to the old system where you'd have Fnatic remain in the TOP 10 for like 5 straight months even though they never played a game, and will compare their final standing to the three month period before that.
|
|
edited 2011-09-07 16:20:38
gl gl
being in the top 20 will give some top preinvite teams some recognition
go go excel :D
Maybe rank only those teams who attented atleast one lan in those 3 months and judge by their skill?
Combine old list with this list as future suggested in the other thread and I think we would have a pretty accurate list
vato made some good points indeed but how im not sure if you deserve to be in the list if you are just not active enough.
Atleast it's not based on personal opinions anymore but on the results
edited 2011-09-07 17:48:04
Nice fucking good read and good work u have done there. Forever supporting bob!
edited 2011-09-08 14:24:52
We are getting active now and look forward to playing with everyone :D