Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Why would they ever make it Top 4 at Cities?

Status
Not open for further replies.
JandPDS: Do not take what I say about reasons as the actual reason behind the change by PUI. I am simply putting out counters/possible reasons to consider. POP/PUI has to consider ALL these things (and more) to try an make this process fair to as many folks as possible. *Notice....I didnt say fair to ALL.....there is no such system when we are picking players from varying regions and putting them all into the same grouping (NA).

IF PUI wants to "explain" things further, they can. All I can tell you is the structure (topcut) is the same all over and I will be following the dictates passed down. I want my players to receive everything they ought to from POP, plus the extra goodies I provide onsite as door prizes. Any TO/PTO that wants to try things their own way will pay the consequences, along with their playerbase.

Keith
 
Scizor said:
I completely agree with the decision to lower top cuts. For those of you whining about missing your T4 at Cities and T8 at States: at least you get to go to a ton of them. Yeah, it would suck to miss at States with 5-2, but it is a million times better than 7-2 miss at Nationals. And on the topic of those getting punished for not running the right cut, I hope that happens, especially after what happened last year (and the mysterious 3+ BRs I heard about running 7 rounds).
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think I would rather miss at States with 5-2 than miss at Nats. For States, there's another chance.

I came ninth in NY States, but came fourth in DE States.
 
Its about going for the win, not for getting extra rounds to gain points. You have to be perfect to be safe, and that is ridiculous. There will be a 60 person tournament in NY/NJ (I'm sure there will be other places too, just speaking from experience) and only ~6% of the players can make the playoffs? How is that fair? Look at the playoff systems for pro sports, the baseball playoffs are 26%, NBA/NHL are over 50%, and the NFL is 37%. And no, I'm not comparing CCs to professional sports, they are a LOT different. You only get to play 4-7 games in the CC, meaning the impact of each loss is a lot greater than when playing a large schedule like pro sports. Losing 1 game in a 5 rd tournament is losing 20%.

Round-Players
1- 60, 50, 40, 30
2- 30, 25, 20, 15
3- 15, 13, 10, 8
4- 8, 7, 5, 4
5- 4, 4, 3, 2
6- 2, 2, 2, 1
7- 1, 1, 1, N/A

It would take 7 rounds to make it to 1 undefeated with 40-60 people. It's not about the rounds, 7 is more than enough to gain points. Actually, 7 rounds is TOO many! It's about making the cut and playing for a shot to win. If you don't do 7 rounds and do 6, then you have 2 6-0s and a handful of 5-1s not making the cut. The cutoff is at 30 people. At that point, you play 6 rounds which is a lot more manageable than 7. With 30 people and 6 rounds, you will have 1 undefeated. With 40+ people and 6, you will have 2 undefeateds. Either way, that leaves ONLY 3 or 2 spots respectively. Obviously not enough, not to mention there will be a good amount, if not the majority, of CCs with over 30 people.
 
Last edited:
bugsbite said:
tbh I don't think any of these tournaments give us the best player of the day because of the randomness of the game itself, which includes luck, who you play, what deck you go against and that players skill.
Click to expand...
eriknance said:
All players have a stroke of bad luck here or there, but I don't think it should prevent a person from winning the tournament for that day. If a T8 cut means that the "best player" of the day is better represented, then I'm all for it. If this game were just a random shot in the dark, I wouldn't be posting this at all, because I wouldn't play.
Click to expand...

I agree T8 cut would better represent the best player but not necessarily the best player of the day. I don't think it is a random shot in the dark either, you do need skill. I wouldn't play either.




bugsbite said:
The only true way to see who the best player is have everyone play the same deck and that defeats the purpose of playing.
Click to expand...
eriknance said:
That's hardly the only way to determine skill. I mean, you kind of skipped over such things as deckbuilding, creativity, ingenuity, the whole "secret deck" phenomenon... these are all things that are indicative of skill. Doing what you proposed would actually lend itself to luck being an even more important factor than it already is.
Click to expand...

I think we are confusing skill with the best player of the day. I don't have as much skill in the game as most of the players here but I can beat anyone any day with the knowledge I have and/or with a excellent deck that can beat another excellent deck that has a weakness to it.

In chess for example everyone has the same exact board, rules, and pieces that do their individual moves, the main determining factor of the best player is skill itself, luck and randomness doesn't have anything to do with it.


bugsbite said:
Bottom line people if you are so worried about winning all the time you are setting yourself up for disappointment because it is the nature of this game, so everyone take your unrealistic ambitions and sour grapes out of your butts and have fun and bond with people. Isn't that what is all about??
Click to expand...
eriknance said:
I really feel that you're responding more at this point to the recent discussions that have come up concerning "elites" as compared to players in general. I'm not after a win with my response, I simply want to see the best player win when it comes to playing in a tournament. I think this is something everyone wants; otherwise, we wouldn't even do top cuts -- we'd just play a few rounds and call it quits. I'm not saying what I've said because I want to win, win, WIN. I just want things to be fair for everyone. Furthermore, for me a great deal of the "fun" part is competing. It's not something that makes me a bad person, I just like to see the results of my intellectual effort when it comes to playing this game. I stopped playing way back in 1999 because there wasn't any competitive environment for the game (at least not that I was aware of). But since I've found fun in the competitive aspect to this game I've stuck like glue to the scene. I've made plenty of friends by playing this game as well, so don't think of me as a sour person only wanting to win a tournament. I just have fun in competing with other brilliant minds. .
Click to expand...

Correct I am responding about "elites", I know you are not in that category and just want to win. I also love the competitive atmosphere and get a thrill of beating someone that has been playing for many years and I don't mind losing because it helps sharpen my skills. You are not a bad or sour person. When I played my first tournament ( Mysterious Treasures prerelease) you helped build my deck and I learned a lot and did pretty good thanks to you. I actually have more fun socializing with you guys!
 
Last edited:
Less matches = more luck
More (completed) matches = more skill

I'm a strong advocate of promoting skill in Pokemon. But, that is probably just a "pipe dream." So many aspects of OP are now geared towards reducing the time it takes to complete a tournament. PTOs love it, players don't.

Nevertheless, I do like using the rating system to select Worlds participants. It measures how well a player does over a vast amount of time, plus if players understand how it works, they can use it to their advantage to maximum their points.

If the City prize was something enormous, like scholarship bucks or a travel stipend to Nats, then maybe I'd strongly petition PUI to do a true Top 25%. But, there are plenty of Cities around the country for top players to attend, affording them multiple oppurtunites to get "lucky" and win a trophy card.
 
PojosamaWannabe said:
Its about going for the win, not for getting extra rounds to gain points. You have to be perfect to be safe, and that is ridiculous. There will be a 60 person tournament in NY/NJ (I'm sure there will be other places too, just speaking from experience) and only ~6% of the players can make the playoffs? How is that fair? Look at the playoff systems for pro sports, the baseball playoffs are 26%, NBA/NHL are over 50%, and the NFL is 37%. And no, I'm not comparing CCs to professional sports, they are a LOT different. You only get to play 4-7 games in the CC, meaning the impact of each loss is a lot greater than when playing a large schedule like pro sports. Losing 1 game in a 5 rd tournament is losing 20%.


I agree completely. When I enter a Tournament, my thought is not ... boy I hope I can go 3-0 and drop so that I can gain Points!!! What is the use in playing if yo are going to do that. I play for the chance to win the event. I do not want to go 5-1 and finish 5th out of 30 players and miss out on the top cut. And nor do I want that to happen to anyone else.

What is the goal here? Is it that events are taking to long to complete and they want them done sooner?
If that is the case break them into POD's whenever you get more then 16 players break it into two or three, or 4 groups if necessary. Play your 3 rounds of swiss, take the top player who is 3-0 and move them to the finals) Tournaments will only take 4 hours to finish and no one will even need a lunch break



Is the goal to make it ranking scores more fair to the areas where Pokmeon is less popular? If the goal is to make it so players in the large areas do not play more rounds then the smaller areas, then again Poding solves that problem
All City Championships will be fair as no one City Championship with 30 players in a single age group will get or 5 rounds of swiss while the areas that only get 18 players in all three age groups get only 3 rounds
Everyone will get the same amount of rounds and everyone will be happy.


Do I want POD's... not I do not I think they hurt rather then help an event. But if you are going to have a small top Cut anyways, why not use them so everyone knows that you have to be perfect to move on to the finals.
Click to expand...
 
PojosamaWannabe said:
Exactly the point. Why make the game even MORE luck based? I'm still hoping for someone from POP to come on and say T8 is optional if the numbers allow for it. Or at least some response...
Click to expand...

Do not hold your breath. Top 4 for citys is set in stone. As is the Top 8 for states. The best we can hope for is an improvement for next year. Look at Worlds 2008. It will be a definite improvement over Worlds 2007 (as far as participation numbers is concerned only, The actual execution of the Worlds 2007 tournament event itself was fantastic)
 
Scizor said:
I completely agree with the decision to lower top cuts. For those of you whining about missing your T4 at Cities and T8 at States: at least you get to go to a ton of them.
Click to expand...

We're all limited to a max of 2 states now anyway.
 
I like this move by POP. It helps alleviate some of the disparity between areas. I really noticed last year when I was trying to do well in rankings how big of an advantage large areas have. Some areas have only enough players to do 4 rounds and a top 4 cut. If another area is running 6 rounds and a top 8, that's a difference of up to 3 rounds in your rating. The smaller areas can't compete. With this move there is less difference in the number of matches each player can play.
 
I won a city with almost fifty (50) masters last year, going into the top cut at second seed.

Should a tournament of State Championship-caliber on all levels (attendance, player skill, deck quality) be limited to a top four? I certainly don't think so, but it's gonna happen this year. Good attendance should be rewarded in a system like this, and not hindered.
 
In a atempt to balance the playing feild for all players NE had the number of cities cut and for that every one gets a top cut cut. just be happy with more rounds over time you will put a bigger gap in points VRs those in the NE. sry but you guys gadda be fair somewhere....
 
if there were still top 8 (and we had enough people to do so) i would have made it.
came in 6th place.

i find it really unfair how "small cities" get to ruin me having a top 8 all the time just because they have "few people". its redicoulous, most the places that have small towns are in the east coast, and those states are small enough that they could just have everyone do go to all the cities to raise attendance.
thats what we always do in utah, and its bigger than any of those states.
 
master of puppets said:
if there were still top 8 (and we had enough people to do so) i would have made it.
came in 6th place.

i find it really unfair how "small cities" get to ruin me having a top 8 all the time just because they have "few people". its redicoulous, most the places that have small towns are in the east coast, and those states are small enough that they could just have everyone do go to all the cities to raise attendance.
thats what we always do in utah, and its bigger than any of those states.
Click to expand...

Of course, you are assuming T4 max cut was due to "small CC attendence" area. POP hasnt said why the max cut is T4, just that it is for CCs. My guess is that it is tied to the K value of 16. K value tourneys of 16 or less (BRs and CCs) are geared to be less competive, free, open to all, which means some of the newer and younger players arent used to a looooooong day just yet. When the points ratchet up in States and Regionals....you get bigger top cuts. Sure, as a PTO and a very rare player, I'd like to see more rds for my players. But, there are other considerations. CCs are usually in smaller venues too.....not many rentals, so the Card shops, etc may not have the time to let a tourney run all day and night.

Just a few thoughts.

Keith
 
The problem though is it's NOT less competitive now. With their only being a t4 cut, the more competitive players are out to get one of those spots and it ends up even worse than least year was as far as the change we saw in cities. This is going to drive the newer players away because the competitive spirit some of the seasoned players bring now to a City Championship will turn them off. Intsead of seeing how much fun everyone has just to be there, they are instead going to be hearing people complain about judging or the 1 bad hand they had all day which made them lose out on a top cut.
 
Lawman said:
Of course, you are assuming T4 max cut was due to "small CC attendence" area. POP hasnt said why the max cut is T4, just that it is for CCs. My guess is that it is tied to the K value of 16. K value tourneys of 16 or less (BRs and CCs) are geared to be less competive, free, open to all, which means some of the newer and younger players arent used to a looooooong day just yet. When the points ratchet up in States and Regionals....you get bigger top cuts. Sure, as a PTO and a very rare player, I'd like to see more rds for my players. But, there are other considerations. CCs are usually in smaller venues too.....not many rentals, so the Card shops, etc may not have the time to let a tourney run all day and night.

Just a few thoughts.

Keith
Click to expand...

but that (the part i bolded) is what lame battle roads were for! we dont need 3 sets of chump tounaments (spring br's, fall br's, and now cities) i used to love cities, it was my favorite time o' the year, now i disaprove. i personaly wish they would get rid of rankings. but thats me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top