WTC KNOCK OUT STAGE - AFTER ROUND 3

[Triarii]

The Knock-out Stage.

After the completion of Round 3 there will be 16 Qualifying Teams.

These teams will be as set out in the rules

• The first and second placed teams in each Group – 12 qualifiers.
  The four third placed teams which have the best score – 4 qualifiers.

The positions of the teams can be seen here viewtopic.php?f=660&t=106989 and are updated every 24 to 48 hours.
The individual results for each round can be seen in the fixtures topics for each Group.

When the Knock-Out stages begin the 16 qualifying teams will have

• a) All points reset to zero.
  b) Be placed in the knock-out table according to their qualifying position in the Group Stage (see below).
  c) Start the knock-out stage according to the calendar set out in the WTC rules.

In the knock-out stage a match has the usual 4 games and the scoring rules remain the same and are as set out in the published rules.

The team scoring best according to the WTC rules will progress.

Please note that the table is set up so no teams that have qualified directly from the same group can meet again until the final.
*It is possible (but unlikely) that a third placed team could meet an opponent from the same group at the semi-final stage.

THE KNOCK-OUT GAMES

KNOCK OUT STAGE.JPG (100.95 KiB) Viewed 12355 times

[kronenblatt]

In my view, it should be more advantageous to win a group than to come second.

Thus in the lower left part, #1 of Group C should meet #3 of Group A/B/F. And the two #2's there meet each other instead.

And in the upper right part, #1 of Group E should meet #3 of Group F/D/A. And the two #2's there meet each other instead.

[random27]

I agree with kronenblatt

[SpeedyCM]

If you do it that way you will still have two winner teams playing second place teams, you need to wait till after round 3 to finalize draw to have the two lowest ranked winning teams on either side of the draw to play the second placed teams.

[kronenblatt]

If you do it that way you will still have two winner teams playing second place teams...

Yes, can't be avoided with four #3 and six #1 teams qualifying, but still better than the original setup.

... you need to wait till after round 3 to finalize draw to have the two lowest ranked winning teams on either side of the draw to play the second placed teams.

Agree, that's a good additional idea.

[Triarii]

SpeedyCM wrote: ↑24 Oct 2021 01:24
If you do it that way you will still have two winner teams playing second place teams...
Yes, can't be avoided with four #3 and six #1 teams qualifying, but still better than the original setup.
SpeedyCM wrote: ↑24 Oct 2021 01:24
... you need to wait till after round 3 to finalize draw to have the two lowest ranked winning teams on either side of the draw to play the second placed teams.
Agree, that's a good additional idea.

Both Kronenblatt and Speedy's suggestions were considered as an option but to do that you then allow for the same Group to be in the same half of the draw.
The core principle is that qualifying teams from the same group will not meet again until the final.

The current system meets the core principle.

Also your suggestion assumes that playing the 3rd place team is an easier draw.
That is not necessarily the case - there are a couple of very strong groups.
The original Groups were a random draw not a strength based ranking.

We did consider a coin toss to decide which slot the winner and 2d place would occupy but ruled that out as an additional complication.

Anyhow this is what it is for this competition but please do feel free to make suggestions for a 'next time'.

[kronenblatt]

In my view, it should be more advantageous to win a group than to come second.

Thus in the lower left part, #1 of Group C should meet #3 of Group A/B/F. And the two #2's there meet each other instead.

And in the upper right part, #1 of Group E should meet #3 of Group F/D/A. And the two #2's there meet each other instead.

... Kronenblatt's suggestion was considered as an option but to do that you then allow for the same Group to be in the same half of the draw.

In which way does the simple swapping that I outlined earlier (and expressed graphically in the picture below) allow for that? The teams would meet in the quarterfinals in any event. And my suggestion meets the core principle as well.

Also your suggestion assumes that playing the 3rd place team is an easier draw.

Yes, in my view it's a reasonable assumption that, all else equal, meeting a team coming third in a group is easier than meeting a team coming second.

And again, it should be more advantageous to win a group than to come second.

[Triarii]

Apologies Kronenblatt your specific suggestion does not change the core principle. However the alternative did.

I disagree that playing the third place team from another group is necessarily easier for the reasons stated - on this we will obviously not agree.

Also the system is what it is for this series. It will not change now.