It’s not the first time and probably won’t be the last that the first two stages of the Major is a swiss system composed by B01 matches.

It’s not the first time most fans criticize Valve for keeping this format, but why?

Firstly, let’s understand the meaning of the swiss format composed by best of one games: All teams, usually 16 teams, trying to achieve 3 victories and avoiding 3 loses, so basically, if you win 3 matches before losing 3, you will advance, really straightforward.

And this is the problem, why?

The B01 are very prone to upsets and having a stage composed fully by this format in one of the biggest events of the year is certainly not the right thing.

Let’s take an example: In the last major, we had FaZe, a really strong team quitting the major with 0 wins – 3 loses record and with matches against teams a tier below them at the most.

And of course, fans and analysts have been criticizing this seeing that the format is applied to the Regional Qualifiers, Offline Qualifier (now called New Challengers Stage) and the New Legends Stage which means that capable teams are always susceptible to upsets.

And there is no example better than the Ninjas in Pyjamas downfall – the Swedish team:

First failed to keep their Legend spot in ESL One Cologne 2016 after an upset by Flipsid3

The offline qualifier for Atlanta 2017, they got eliminated by VEGA Squadron

Krakow and Boston Europe Qualifiers they got eliminated by Space Soldiers and PRIDE respectively

A team that couldn’t advance in the tournament when it came to best of three matches.

We’re not trying to discredit teams that climbed the ladder under this format, but it’s clear that we need to make changes .

Why upsets are so common?

Defining Upset

Basically, when a weaker team wins the match from a much stronger opponent. In CS:GO this still happens very often thanks to the format that we talked about above.

Why does it happens?

We must understand the map factor that is present in the game. We have seven maps which teams go under a system of ban and pick to select which map they will play.

In a B03, the teams pick their best maps after the first two bans, then ban the ones who remain until we have one or three left – in the last case, a random picker will be used to select the decider map.

But in B01, teams must eliminate every map until one, two or three maps are left depending on the event rule book. Valve events have teams banning maps until one is left and the random picker will select a map between the ones that were left if more than one map remains.

Other Considerations

After this we have the initial side factor, not every CS:GO map is completely balanced and often we see CT-sided maps in LANs, so we have to consider this. The weaker team is able to force a map that their opponent doesn’t have so much knowledge plus a good starting side and this is everything they need to do some damage.

In majors, the team who didn’t pick the last map will be able to pick a side. This was supposed to avoid upsets but ended bringing more overcomes than we could predict.

A good example right here, FlipSid3 eliminated FaZe at the PGL Major Krakow with a 16-10 scoreline on Mirage as the CIS team carried out one of the most shocking upsets in Major history.

A map that they weren’t expecting resulting in a surprising loss that at time was using a bug in the map Inferno that later was removed.

Another recent case where at the BLAST Pro Series Copenhagen that demonstrated exactly why this format is so flawed. FaZe, North, G2 and NiP barely could take a win and Astralis with a stand-in made to the semifinals thanks to the BO1s format.

To conclude, yes, there’s teams who can exploit formats and where teams that don’t have a complete control under the map pool are prone to fail here and this applies to the top 10 teams.

What are the possible solutions then?

Majors are prestigious events – while the solutions here take more time, the players jobs, as in stands is to put on a show and probably give viewers a much more pleasant event.

Let’s explore some options:

The famous ‘ GSL’ format (B03 in the group stage and playoffs and a B05 in the finals) – this format was used by EPICENTER and this would put teams like FaZe to really show their strength going against teams like VEGA and Flipsid3 and avoiding upsets in those cases .

avoiding upsets in those cases Another option, less preferred as the upset factor is still there is the Round Robin format that is used IEM tournaments – teams are divided in two groups and they play each other once in a B01 then we have the playoffs stage with the three top teams from each group.

is the once in a B01 then we have the playoffs stage G roup stage with B02 format used mostly in LoL – In a B02, winning both maps gives three points and a draw would give each team one point. The top teams in the group advance to the playoffs that is usually the standard B03 format and single elimination.

Lastly, we also can keep the Swiss system that we have now and just exchange the matches for B03 .

It’s time to take Majors to A New International Level

DOTA 2’s The International – The biggest events in the year followed by insane amounts of hype throughout year.

So, why not take Majors to the next level – the Internationals Level, as Valve can and should be doing this as now?

The difference between Internationals and Major are easy to comprehend – Valve takes care of everything, they host the event themselves in their own venue instead of paying some organizer to do it. TheCS:GO Major prize pool’s stand at $1,000,000 having two per year compared to the last TI where a total prize of more than $20 million was on offer.

Valve have tried to bring Counter-Strike to this level but stopped halfway for some reason from releasing cases to support the events prize pool.

Could the reasons behind this be the constant players criticism about the format?

Will Valve ever change how Majors work?

Quick likely – YES!

Valve surely takes its time to make changes but as reported by several professional players, their developers and producers go to majors and indeed take on feedback. It’s clear that they will be looking to change things and while it may take time to step up to the likes of our Internationals, good changes may be on the way.

We are not saying that underdogs shouldn’t be winning, certainly this is not the case. Having a weaker team making a top team reveal every strategy and fighting with everything is amazing, but surprise wins that happen because of a bad format is sad and can frustrate fans.

For now, we can only wait for Valve but in the meanwhile we should be applauding ESL and EPICENTER for bringing new formats to the scene, including the new IEM format that we will be seeing this year.