Hi there, finally got the chance to write this up. I wanted to spark discussion on our current playoff formats for two of our premier team tournaments and how we could further improve these. It's my belief our playoff structure if a bit flawed, and the way we determine the advancement of teams via BD makes little sense. I'm going to first talk about BD, and then dive into my proposal for SSD and my suggestion for SPL.
It should be said that our current playoff format is "fine". In SSD and SPL, the top 4 teams make playoffs and over the next two weeks, a winner is decided. Simple enough. But it's bland. There could be more excitement, there could be more opportunity, and there could be more motivation. People often give up, become cancerous, refuse to play, or stop trying once they are out of contention. With a restructured format, we could give our players more opportunity for success. The best teams will still receive benefits from their above-average performance and my proposal will further benefit teams that go on hot streaks near the end of the season, instead of hot streaks at the beginning of the season.
Also, my suggestions for SPL and SSD will both be different playoff formats. I believe SSD is trying to become a SPL clone with its current format and don't know if it's exactly healthy for the tournament to do so. It needs its own identity and niche. I believe my proposal will simply improve it. But first.....
Let's talk BD
BD are points. When player A beats player B, they get a point for their team. When Lebron James scored a basket, he gets point for his team. When Patrick Mahomes scores a touchdown, he gets point for his team. When Lionel Messi scores a goal, well -- that's a point for his team. However, in very few circumstances are points a determining factor in playoff seeding. I believe this to be because points are sometimes luck based.
Example 1: Player ABR fishes for a freeze against Player B, and he gets it leading to him winning the game. Ok, he lucked a point and his team now wins the week. However, the team who got lucked isn't the only team that suffers. His team gets a +1 meaning 8 other teams suffer from the fact that they get a positive point based off a luck based occurrence. Now, the law of averages could be taken into play here - but why reward another instance of luck at all? Why not just take BD out altogether and base the seeding off head-to-head matchups? Well - we also have ties which allows BD to flourish in a sense.
Winning a week via luck is one thing. Getting a positive differential due to luck is another entirely. Now, teams are also the beneficiaries of earned wins. But in the long run, I think have three tournaments (WCoP, Snake, and SPL) where BD is a major contributing factor in a teams success is overall unhealthy.
BD rewards teams that narrowly slide in to playoffs and it negatively impacts teams who take a bit longer to get a streak together.
Example 2: Team A narrowly wins most of their weeks via a tie or a 7-5 win. They squeak into the 4 seed after being slightly on the decline. Team B however, completely shit the bed the first two weeks tanking their BD. However, they learn to play as a team and in turn flip their season around. They miss the playoffs however due to their poor performance 8 weeks ago when they weren't quite gelling as a team.
How many times in professional sports have we seen a team start slow, and then figure it out? Usually those teams can make playoffs. However, it can be incredibly hard to do so via our format if BD is a determining factor.
The Proposal - SPL
I think a standard NFL style playoff format would work great for SPL. It's our premier tournament, it will add excitement and more teams get rewarded. I see very little logical reason not to reward as many as players and teams as possible - within reason. These build narratives and build underdog stories. It allows teams who pick up steam near the end of the season an opportunity and it at the same time, with my proposal, the top teams are not punished.
My proposal: 6 playoff teams. 1 and 2 seed get a bye. 3 seed plays 6 seed. 4 seed plays 5 seed.
By allowing two extra teams, it keeps players motivated and focused through the long season and you're only adding 1 more week of play. In the grand scheme of a 3 month long tournament, one extra week is no big deal. The top 2 teams don't have to play more games as they get rewarded for their successful season. And furthermore, it gives more teams Opportunity.
The Proposal - SSD
Snakes playoff format now mirrors SPL's format and I don't think it has to. I think getting unique and giving each tournament its own niche can only help the tournament itself. Each sport has a different system for playoffs. In soccer, the Premier League is won by total points won. In Football, it's a standard bracket with wildcard slots and the top two teams from each league getting a bye. With Baseball -- it's a bit more exciting. Baseball believes in playing games in series because Baseball can have quite a lot of luck. By doing series they try to mitigate the luck and let the best team be the winner. Funny though - before this year, the best team in baseball in 2017, 2018, and 2019 did not win the world series. In fact, in 2019 - the team who won the wildcard ended up being the victor.
And for this season, I think a wildcard could be fun for the community, and it again -- gives more people opportunity.
My proposal: 5 playoff teams. 4th and 5th seed play a wildcard game and the winner goes on to play the 1 seed in the semi's. 2nd seed plays 3rd seed.
What does this accomplish? It rewards another team, gives more players an opportunity to make it deep into playoffs, and it gives SSD it's own unique structure. It's also a proven format that's shown to work.
Determining the wildcard series is another factor though. It could be a 1v1 best player vs best player. This promotes high pressure and is early smogonesque in a way. The 1v1 was used in early wcop iterations and is overall exciting.
If you want to mitigate luck? 3v3 standard tiebreak format.
If you want to drag the tournament an additional week? standard team vs team format. Whatever the TD's decide really.
Conclusion
These tournaments are the highlight of our community. There should be no reason not to want to give as many chances for success as possible (in my opinion). People wait an entire year for these tournaments, and sometimes the season just doesn't go your way. But with these expanded playoff formats, it allows teams who catch on at the right time an avenue for further success without the unfortune of coming up short.
Food for thought. Enjoy.
tl'dr. bdsucks. 6 team spl playoff format. 5 team ssd playoff format. boom.
It should be said that our current playoff format is "fine". In SSD and SPL, the top 4 teams make playoffs and over the next two weeks, a winner is decided. Simple enough. But it's bland. There could be more excitement, there could be more opportunity, and there could be more motivation. People often give up, become cancerous, refuse to play, or stop trying once they are out of contention. With a restructured format, we could give our players more opportunity for success. The best teams will still receive benefits from their above-average performance and my proposal will further benefit teams that go on hot streaks near the end of the season, instead of hot streaks at the beginning of the season.
Also, my suggestions for SPL and SSD will both be different playoff formats. I believe SSD is trying to become a SPL clone with its current format and don't know if it's exactly healthy for the tournament to do so. It needs its own identity and niche. I believe my proposal will simply improve it. But first.....
BD are points. When player A beats player B, they get a point for their team. When Lebron James scored a basket, he gets point for his team. When Patrick Mahomes scores a touchdown, he gets point for his team. When Lionel Messi scores a goal, well -- that's a point for his team. However, in very few circumstances are points a determining factor in playoff seeding. I believe this to be because points are sometimes luck based.
Example 1: Player ABR fishes for a freeze against Player B, and he gets it leading to him winning the game. Ok, he lucked a point and his team now wins the week. However, the team who got lucked isn't the only team that suffers. His team gets a +1 meaning 8 other teams suffer from the fact that they get a positive point based off a luck based occurrence. Now, the law of averages could be taken into play here - but why reward another instance of luck at all? Why not just take BD out altogether and base the seeding off head-to-head matchups? Well - we also have ties which allows BD to flourish in a sense.
Winning a week via luck is one thing. Getting a positive differential due to luck is another entirely. Now, teams are also the beneficiaries of earned wins. But in the long run, I think have three tournaments (WCoP, Snake, and SPL) where BD is a major contributing factor in a teams success is overall unhealthy.
BD rewards teams that narrowly slide in to playoffs and it negatively impacts teams who take a bit longer to get a streak together.
Example 2: Team A narrowly wins most of their weeks via a tie or a 7-5 win. They squeak into the 4 seed after being slightly on the decline. Team B however, completely shit the bed the first two weeks tanking their BD. However, they learn to play as a team and in turn flip their season around. They miss the playoffs however due to their poor performance 8 weeks ago when they weren't quite gelling as a team.
How many times in professional sports have we seen a team start slow, and then figure it out? Usually those teams can make playoffs. However, it can be incredibly hard to do so via our format if BD is a determining factor.
The Proposal - SPL
I think a standard NFL style playoff format would work great for SPL. It's our premier tournament, it will add excitement and more teams get rewarded. I see very little logical reason not to reward as many as players and teams as possible - within reason. These build narratives and build underdog stories. It allows teams who pick up steam near the end of the season an opportunity and it at the same time, with my proposal, the top teams are not punished.
My proposal: 6 playoff teams. 1 and 2 seed get a bye. 3 seed plays 6 seed. 4 seed plays 5 seed.
By allowing two extra teams, it keeps players motivated and focused through the long season and you're only adding 1 more week of play. In the grand scheme of a 3 month long tournament, one extra week is no big deal. The top 2 teams don't have to play more games as they get rewarded for their successful season. And furthermore, it gives more teams Opportunity.
The Proposal - SSD
Snakes playoff format now mirrors SPL's format and I don't think it has to. I think getting unique and giving each tournament its own niche can only help the tournament itself. Each sport has a different system for playoffs. In soccer, the Premier League is won by total points won. In Football, it's a standard bracket with wildcard slots and the top two teams from each league getting a bye. With Baseball -- it's a bit more exciting. Baseball believes in playing games in series because Baseball can have quite a lot of luck. By doing series they try to mitigate the luck and let the best team be the winner. Funny though - before this year, the best team in baseball in 2017, 2018, and 2019 did not win the world series. In fact, in 2019 - the team who won the wildcard ended up being the victor.
And for this season, I think a wildcard could be fun for the community, and it again -- gives more people opportunity.
My proposal: 5 playoff teams. 4th and 5th seed play a wildcard game and the winner goes on to play the 1 seed in the semi's. 2nd seed plays 3rd seed.
What does this accomplish? It rewards another team, gives more players an opportunity to make it deep into playoffs, and it gives SSD it's own unique structure. It's also a proven format that's shown to work.
Determining the wildcard series is another factor though. It could be a 1v1 best player vs best player. This promotes high pressure and is early smogonesque in a way. The 1v1 was used in early wcop iterations and is overall exciting.
If you want to mitigate luck? 3v3 standard tiebreak format.
If you want to drag the tournament an additional week? standard team vs team format. Whatever the TD's decide really.
Conclusion
These tournaments are the highlight of our community. There should be no reason not to want to give as many chances for success as possible (in my opinion). People wait an entire year for these tournaments, and sometimes the season just doesn't go your way. But with these expanded playoff formats, it allows teams who catch on at the right time an avenue for further success without the unfortune of coming up short.
Food for thought. Enjoy.
tl'dr. bdsucks. 6 team spl playoff format. 5 team ssd playoff format. boom.
Last edited:
