Like why are some teams losing dropping to opposite sides of the brackets like cloud9 already was in the leviatan bracket lower middle bracket and now they drop down again to the leviatan side of bracket like its completely random not following any rules while 100 thieves dropped to a different bracket and then a different bracket again?
0
How does the bracket work?
posted in
Valorant Discussion
Comments:
Threaded
Linear
The side of the lower bracket switches for every win you get in the upper bracket.
The idea is that:
if A beats B -> A loses to C in the upper and B beats D in the lower bracket -> A wont have to play B right away
To continually apply that you have to switch every round (else the above scenario youre trying to avoid could occur for C and A)
So c9 has a potential rematch with lev since they won an extra game after beating lev before dropping down
The re-match logic doesn't hold in this case and judging by how the matches we're re seeded it doesn't follow any logic its like its optimized for brands i.e undoubtely sentinels have the most favorable seeding while c9 got absolutely fckd. If rematch avoidance were the main rule, C9 should have been protected, not thrown back into Leviatan. 100T had no structural reason to be placed there especially since they just randomly switched bracket sides. The re seeding was done assymetrical. Riot is manipulating the brackets
Its not and I would assume youre just really REALLY overthinking how it works
As said every round (so lev vs c9 is round 1, envy vs c9 is round 2, g2 vs c9 is round 3) it inverts
C9 played 2 more rounds before falling to the lowers
If you invert something twice you end up with the original, non inverted, value (or side of the bracket here)
-> had c9 lost to envy they would have ended up on the top half of the lower bracket
Just approach double (or tripple in this case, but the part youre looking at is just double) elim as the most basic format imaginable. Thats sorta its whole reason for existing.
Before a single team even plays you can clearly define where in the bracket the winner and the loser will go to (as opposed to something like swiss for example)
The format is assymetric from the start so it gives safety nets to some teams.
Some future slots are guaranteed to receive multiple strong teams.
Others are guaranteed to stay clean.
Late upper-bracket losses are safer than early ones.
Rematches are not consistently avoided.
My ultimate point is in a fair double-elimination bracket, all early upper-bracket losers face equivalent danger, and all late losers face equivalent danger.
This format violates that rule, some lanes are harder by design, not by chance.
Easy example is C9 and SEN routing
C9:Loses early in upper bracket drops into a lower lane that already contains Leviatan (already played).
Later receives another strong drop. Which results in immediate high-tier opponent, fast rematch, no recovery room.
Meanwhile SEN: Loses later in upper bracket drops into a lane with fewer converging strong teams.
No overloaded junctions. Which results in more recovery time, no immediate rematch.
Youre just confused at this point
Just looking at the format without names might help you https://www.vlr.gg/591523/triple-elimination-kicks-off-vct-2026
Not sure how to explain it to you otherwise
The bracket itself is 100% unbiased (see the above link) and very clearly defined before the tourney even started or teams were seeded
And the pool system they used to seed teams is fine too (using last years results from the teams)
If wins “flipped sides” Teams would alternate top/bottom lanes after each win. You’d see consistent left-right oscillation while in reality some teams stay on the same side across multiple wins, others never flip at all. C9 is a perfect counterexample they stay in the same danger lane. Also my point is even if the structure was there before matches played the format+ initial seeding still gives a safety net so some teams are protected by the format itself.
It's a format that values logistics and optics over competitive integrity. It is not competetively fair. Which is disgusting to be honest what's the point of franchising if u're protecting bigger brands.
Discord