OurGloriousLeader said:
You're right, I've changed the rules from being based on match results to being based on Fietta's garbage opinions. Thanks for the help.
So a player of your tournament makes a critic on how the system works as he noticed an unbalanced match up and one of the main admins answers with disrespect, interesting.
Now into topic, Maybe you dislike Fietta's opinion, but he's got a point. You may have developed a way to make the match ups based on match results, but that doesn't mean that its a balanced method, correct or better than any other. Your aim was to avoid teams getting to play easier match ups like Agincourt had in the past. You achieved that, yet I don't really think that the current system is being really fair.
As a team leader, I don't see fair at all that GWB has to play so many hard match ups in a row while we had (with respect to all the teams we played), easier match ups on paper, not to mention the case of GP. If GWB win us in week 4, they're still gonna get potentially another hard opponent in week 5, same with the following weeks.
So yeah it's clear that with the system you fixed that teams dont get to pick who they play, but avoiding one problem you generated another balance-wise one. You allowed 6 teams to qualify now, but if you didnt open 2 more slots and kept 4, some teams would've probably get affected by the system and potentially dropped because of it, and lot of drama would've come up because other teams had literally 1 to 4 weeks of way easier matches.
You can't change this mid-competition and the system is gonna be respected even if its not the best one, but instead of disrespecting and ditching criticism over a player of your tournament perhaps it would be more nice to admit that it's not efficient, learn from the system and develop an improved one for a possible next edition. Would appreciate if any other admin can deliver an answer about this issue, so that we don't get to read answers that could come up from a salty 14 year old kid.