Good players and 4p games?

[ArchDevious]

Sorry, I didn't mean to reopen that can of worms and hijack this post. There was long discussion on this in the "kingmaking" thread. Read that if you want others thoughts on that idea. While I always go after whoever I think is going to win the game, others are free to play differently, but I still cant help myself from getting a little frustrated when I get seemingly randomly targeted

[NieNiewodnik]

I'd like to offer some of my ideas in the topic.

The mentioned Leszno tournament was set up such as it was entirely possible to win the whole thing by winning only one 4p game out of six. First of all there were two phases

1st day - 46 participants, 16 best advance, 3 4p matches - simple math says that placing second three times guarantees spot in the grand finals (although the players were still awarded better slots next day if they scored higher)
2nd day - top 16 playing 3 round semi ladder style 4p games. First round 1st and 2nd place from each table advance to 1-8, 3rd and 4th go down the ladder and play for 9-16. Same logic applies to 2nd round - 1st and 2nd players from higher ladder go to 1-4 table, 3rd and 4th places will play for 5-8, losers bracket works same. All in all you only need to win final table to be crowned a winner.

This means several things:
- no punishment for small slip ups
- even if you get ganked up for being better player you can still play for second which is way easier than being forced to win
- other players realise that playing for second is a very feasible option and actually leave best player alone more often, to have better chance of advancement

All in all i myself noticed that the games were more fair and actually tougher for all included since the good ol' "lets hit the leader" strategy wasnt optimal.