Simply put, the team that finally enters the top four in the playoffs, once defeated, can also fall into the loser group and play another game. The winner will be able to stay in the playoffs and compete with the two teams in the winner's group to decide the final champion. In other words, these teams have one more BO fault tolerance rate than other teams that entered the playoffs but ranked lower. Don't underestimate this extra BO5. In the spring competition, the RNG team won the spring championship for three consecutive games in the case of falling into the loser group, while the FPX team that had defeated the RNG team before could only regret losing.
After this double-loss elimination system was officially announced, LPL water friends immediately "noisy". Many water friends may think this competition system is unfair. In fact, in my opinion, LPL has implemented this competition system for two reasons. First, it is to make the final champion's output more fair and reduce the possibility that extreme teams exert their strength and influence themselves; Secondly, after joining the BO5s of two loser groups, the top team equivalent to LPL played two more BO5s. This is very useful for attracting the audience and increasing the influence of LPL in watching the game.
So, will this new elimination system benefit some teams? The answer is different, which is why many water friends argue with each other. The famous commentator Guan also said that the implementation of this competition system may not be beneficial, because the experience of playing resurrection matches is very sufficient. Of course, this is not necessarily the case. This sentence of Guan is more of a joke, because fans like to joke that they can play resurrection games, which is quite right.
The author thinks that the current elimination system is fair, but the only thing that makes people feel unfair is that the finals usually start on Sunday, which makes one of the teams entering the finals not have enough rest time. The winner of the loser group has been defeated by the winner group before, so we should give the winner of the loser group less time to prepare, and the winner group should be fully prepared. In this way, the lose-lose system will be fairer. As Sika of Deyun said, as long as the strength is really strong, the competition system is an objective factor, so how to evaluate this lose-lose competition system?