Best ever limited overs batsman, 32 man tournament...... nominations thread

[marc71178]

No it won't.. if you seed you will have close matchups in every round.. #16 vs #17 in the first round for example.

If you seed you end up with the majority of matches being one sided because the whole nature of seeding means you bias the draw. As it happens the relative lack of seeding (ie only 4) has meant some better match ups but even now it's a lot of pointless votes.

 

[viriya]

If you seed you end up with the majority of matches being one sided because the whole nature of seeding means you bias the draw. As it happens the relative lack of seeding (ie only 4) has meant some better match ups but even now it's a lot of pointless votes.

The point of seeding is to increase competitive matchups and allow the top performers to get to the final rounds. Both positive outcomes. But I don't think I will convince you

 

[marc71178]

Who cares if Joe Bloggs is knocked out in round 1 or the semi finals? The whole idea of a knock out is solely to find a winner.

I find it ironic that you think that seeding increases the competitive match ups when by definition you are actually reducing the competitivity by fixing the draw in round 1, rendering it pretty pointless.

 

[NUFAN]

I think an enjoyable and fair way to these drafts is say 'who are the 4 (8) worst players' and they get eliminated. You then do it again until we are left with 8 or 16 and we revert back to 4 groups of 2 or 4. This way we are left with the best and should ensure the 'right' people are in at the business end. I would also scrap pre-determined paths (on who plays who next). Part of the fun is hoping x player gets a nice draw.