There are many things that could be argued over what is holding esports back in the mainstream. You could point to a plethora of idea’s that don’t work, gimmick’s that seem wrong, hip hop leagues that draw critics, rule changes that don’t seem right or a reduction of prize money. There is plenty out there and whilst all of these things could be changed; there is still plenty of argument that they do actually help, even if some people don’t yet understand how or why.

There is one thing however that could easily be changed, should those who run major tournaments look at real sports. It is hard to find another sport that uses the double elimination system and whilst it has grown popular in esports, it could be just one more little thing that is holding it back in becoming more popular with the mainstream.

You might say, hang on, I understand how double elimination works just fine and it’s a good system and I’d be right there with you, but lets get a perspective from some people who are not involved in gaming or high level competition, either from a spectator or a gamers point of view.

I have many friends (away from gaming) who have absolutely no idea what I do in gaming, even less that would understand esports as a whole or otherwise. We recently had two friends, a couple, round for dinner and somehow we got onto the subject of PC’s and a little about gaming. The lady concerned had no idea about games or gaming and has only ever used a PC to write up her university studies. The man had played a few games, some FPS and some dungeons and dragons but knew little if anything about high level esports, although he did admit that whilst playing CS he had thought about joining a clan and knew that there were leagues and cups you could enter.

These people are not stupid; they are well educated and work in highly skilled areas of the Council and with children. So imagine if you can for a second what they told me when I asked them; “What do you understand by the term Double-Elimination in a gaming context?”

“No idea” replied the lady, “no idea whatsoever” and if this was not a surprise, the next answer was.

“Is it where like, two players tackle each other at the same time and they both have to go off injured”, said the male. Now, you can laugh, because actually that was my first thought, but let’s have a look at the response here in a sensible way. Firstly, it is clear he has never seen or heard of anything like this in his life in any form of sport or otherwise. Secondly, it shows that the double elimination system is not the easiest to grasp and that I would suggest includes people in and out of professional gaming. I did spend some time explaining it to him (for purpose of research you understand) and he left that evening almost as perplexed as he was when I asked him the question.

Hell, I have even had to explain the system to some people at tournaments in the past who where PLAYING in it! Lots of people are not completely sure of how it works and whilst I don’t wish to spend time here explaining it again (for that is not really the purpose of this column) it is staggering how few people truly understand it. I am not blaming anyone by the way, it just seems absurd that gaming in general tends to use a system so few people honestly understand and who the hell decided gaming was to use this seemingly complicated system anyway. It may well have been the CPL, although I wouldn’t attach all the blame to them too quickly, for double elimination has it roots in college baseball (the College World Series) and that may well be where the idea came from to use it in gaming, but its open to debate. The NAIA Softball Championships also uses a form of double elimination, however no other major sport that I researched used this system, so it does seem to be a “gaming thing” (bar a few American kids throwing balls at each other).

How then, are we going to get people from the mainstream interested in gaming if A) They need to understand and learn the game and B) They have no idea who goes through and how the tournament system works and its confusing to them? Well point A is up for discussion, but not in this column, so let’s take a look at point B.

“So that guy just lost, so he’s going home right?”, “well, technically speaking, yes he lost, but he can still win the tournament”. “errrrr, ok”.

Would it not be better to remove just one more layer of confusion to the casual viewer to make it easier to “get into it”? Surely it’s easier to follow a tournament if it’s simpler to follow? Would it not be easier if it was at least modelled on other sports?

I would not argue however, that double elimination seems to work for the players, most of the time. It allows for the odd slip up with a second chance and how many times have we seen players come back from the lower bracket to win a big tournament, fatal1ty has done it, Vo0 has done it, fooki has done it and the list goes on. I am not saying its not exciting or that it doesn’t work, just that it doesn’t appeal to the mainstream as something that is easy to identify with and immediately easy to follow.

The challenge therefore is to find a system which remains as fair (if not fairer) than double elimination, but that also appeals and is understandable to the masses. Remove one layer of complexity and you move the people one step closer to understanding and being interested in esports as a whole.

There are many mainstream sports, but I have limited my research for the purpose of this article and yes I am aware that there are many other ways of doing this, but these seem by far the easiest to understand AND they still remain fair, in some cases, possibly even fairer on the players. (I really don’t wish to bore you with intricate workings of the McIntyre Page playoff system for Curling).