This.
What Yoshi is describing here is exactly what happened in Norway when we tried best of 3 in Swiss rounds last season. Someone would win a legit game in 25 minutes, then someone would donk with Machamp or Sableye in the second game, then time would be called, and then the third and deciding game would always be a game called "the deck that is able to draw a prize early game wins".
So you think that is unfair? What if the machamp deck had gotten the first win? Wouldn't it seem unfair to that deck to the same token? Or is it that you're saying sudden death is an unfair way to solve matches? Plenty of games are decided by sudden death and it's a simple, quick and fair way of solving a tied game, through matches, or through one game going to time because of prizes. It makes no difference that it happens because of each person winning a match identical situations are already happening and are conducted with just fine.
No I usualy get more better starts with that deck (sable,call,very few nrg ect) but the fact that shuppet and other decks like it are built to donk alot of the time, so if I start lone sable (which is good) I still surcumb to what a shuppet player whould call, below avrage. Shuppet, nrg, belt and one of like 10 other cards to kill my chances of makeing top cut. How "fair" is it that their bad start can still beat my good one?
The reason I posted my way of fixing donks is beacuse that is what this thread seemed like it was trying to do.
Im saying that this topic all boils down to stoping donks and bad starts. Just an other reason I would love to be a fly on the wall at PCL.
So you say that in this situation the gyarados deck does have a better chance of not being donked? If that is the case where you say more games invites more chance to become donked, there is even more chance if not the same of you not being donked. If you roll a ten sided die twice or three times, as apposed to once, you will still more often than not roll 1-7 than 8-10.
No, fixing donks is not the aim of the thread, the aim of the thread is to discuss how playing games best of 3 would or would not benefit the game. Decreasing you from losing to a single donk is one of the various things it does.
This topic does not boil down to just how to stop donks and bad starts. I've said many times that playing games best of 3 will also represent a truer display of the mathc-ups between the two decks and players. For example if Player A plays Player B using Deck A, and Player B is using Deck B. They play a game and Player B wins the game. However the match-ups are in favor of Player A using Deck A, if they play another game then Player A could win, and then win the game after that, which would then represent the truer display of who wins more.
Frankly, I think that one of the major factors of a Pokemon game is luck. I LIKE how a noob who netdecked the world champion's list and misplays all over the place can beat an extremely skilled, worlds-tier player who does everything right, and that, through the points system, that kind of loss is more likely to cost you your invite.
Winning without skill, and only with luck is totally fair. Pokemon ENCOURAGES this through the points system. It's how the game was designed.
Many people who put in their hard effort, and play competitively don't like to lose without being able to do anything about it.
Also I think that even people who are disagreeing with me on other subjects, would agree with me that winning without skill and only luck in a competitive environment, isn't fair at all. The game was not designed for you to lose randomly without being able to do anything about it, look at the beginning of Pokemon, there weren't any donks happening, nobody was knocking you out on the first turn, even less so because of all the ridiculous trainer draw. Also look at today how the developers have made things like call for family and call energy, they're obviously trying to stop donks from happening.