joachimt on Oct 2 2017, 02:16:34 PM wrote: Lonewolf2003 on Oct 2 2017, 01:58:59 PM wrote:
joachimt on Oct 2 2017, 01:55:43 PM wrote:I just did some calculations on the idea of 12 group winners + 4 best #2's. If we let matches of four countries run for 3 weeks with 1 week overlap, just like we did last year with 3 movies in each match, than we win a few weeks. It will be exactly done within one year. It would mean the pace in round 1 is higher with a factor 1.33. The rest of the pace could be the same as last time.
That sounds good.
I'm not sure though if I like the best #2's idea. What exactly is the best #2? I would like it to be the country that was closest to the #1 of its group. If we have three countries with scores very close, will that #2 proceed? Or will it be the #2 from a group with one terrible movie so #2 gets a lot of points there.
Mario probably has some answers to this.
Second-bests might be films that came second, but they were closest of winning the group (narrowest margin of their loss against group winner). However I don't think that's fair, and as I posted above, brokenface suggested best system IMO, and it's a fresh one as well. Why?
1) Larger number of countries would have a chance + display themselves
2) Second batch is much tougher to win; had Egypt competed last year with not brilliant film such as Al-boustaguy
in a group of 3, I doubt it will reach 4th place later. The depth in quality decides.
3) Almost no difference would be in general pace, I think the whole thing would last even shorter.