03-25-2002, 12:50 AM
What is your opinion on true double elimination finals,Where the losing side player has to defeat the winners side player twice to win the tournament??? mike

03-25-2002, 01:34 AM
I think true double elimination is the only really fair way to go. The person coming from the losers side is getting a second chance, but the finalist on the winners side is not, without a true double elimination. I think the tournement operators are often considering time constraints more than fairness to the players when they don't allow for another match, or if they schedule a shortened match or a one game playoff if the winners side finalist loses.

03-25-2002, 02:33 AM
The person that comes from the one loss side has earned his right to play in the finals. I have always liked one race in the finals, but make it a longer race.

03-25-2002, 10:55 AM
I like the idea of playing to a re-draw point then switching to single elimination with a longer race (at the re-draw the winners side is seeded against those coming from the losers side).
Sorry, if that's confusing.

03-25-2002, 11:49 AM
I believe that a true double elimination event is the right way to go. Having a one-set final is unfair to the player on the winner's side. Everyone else in the event had a second bullet, why shouldn't the player on the winner's side deserve a second one.

If you have to have a one-set final due to time contrainst, then the race should definitely be long. But this is still unfair to the player on the winner's side.

03-25-2002, 11:53 AM
I agree with Rod. Coming through the one loss side can be brutal. But, make it a longer race.

Ralph S.
03-25-2002, 03:33 PM
I personally like true double elimination because of the fact that the player who has the winners bracket has obviously earned it and does not deserve to be knocked out of a first place finish by someone unless they are beaten twice. Ralph S.

03-25-2002, 03:53 PM
ya gotta beat the winner twice. it's only fair.


03-25-2002, 06:41 PM
It depends how you look at it. If you consider both players to be winners. On of the winners bracket and one of the losers bracket. Both players are guaranteed an amount equal to the second place money and the final is for the difference along with the title. It should be something other then what has been played throughout the tournament though. Maybe a longer set or win by two or something. By the way, the player on the loser side has won more matches then the one on the winner side. He by no means is getting a special deal. He may in fact have the more impressive record for the tournament as far as who he beat to get there. He has earned the right to start off even in the final. In my opinion.