Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

75-minute top cut from T16 onward?

Raen

New Member
Recently there have been a lot of people interesting in doing 75 minute Top Cut matches. Simply put, 60 minutes is rarely enough time for a full 3 games, and often times the person winning is whoever has the fastest deck in sudden death, which really isn't representing the best players all of the time. You can read more arguments for (and against) 75 minutes in Ness' thread here: http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?t=158702

Now, obviously, we can't do the entire T128 with 75-minute time limits given the current schedule at Nationals. It would add a fair bit of time. However, as Ness points out, it would only add about an hour MAX to add an extra 15 minutes to each match from Top 16 and onwards. Why not do this for Nationals? It would allow skill to rule the day, which for a tournament as big and prestigious as Nationals would be fantastic.

Anyone else feel similarly?
 
I think this is an excellent idea. If I ever Top 16 Nationals again, I'd love for there to be a 75-minute top cut. Since Top 16 (for American Nationals) is played on Sunday anyway, people would be well-rested to play, and the event would easily end in the afternoon.

The only problem? This thread isn't in the "TCG News & Gossip Discussion" forum and will probably never be seen by enough people. :frown:
 
Wouldn't an extended top cut for just some players be unfair to those who lost in the round of 32, but might have won with more time? I understand the idea of wanting more time, but it should be for all top cut or none, not giving preference to those who can win in the shorter time the day before. IMHO.
 
So just because it doesn't benefit the players who lost in top 32, they shouldn't do it for anyone?

Surely it's better to do it for some rounds rather than none at all? After all, not doing it isn't going to help any of those players who lost on time in the previous round.

As long as everyone knows in advance what they need to do to get to the 75 min rounds, I don't see a problem.
 
My response to your statement, Fincastle, is exactly what baby mario said.

Exactly. Good job, baby mario!
 
75 minutes is an excellent idea and there is strong unity in the community to have it at large-scale events. Where I disagree with the OP is in his assessment that there isn't enough time to do every T128 match at U.S. Nationals as 75 minutes. Why not? U.S. Nationals is a 3-day event. You're talking about adding a maximum of 1 hr, 45 mins to a prestigious, three-day event.

Wouldn't an extended top cut for just some players be unfair to those who lost in the round of 32, but might have won with more time? I understand the idea of wanting more time, but it should be for all top cut or none, not giving preference to those who can win in the shorter time the day before. IMHO.

He's exactly right. Another reason I advocate 75 mins for all rounds and not just some is that it really doesn't make much sense logically to have only some of the matches be 75 mins and others 60 mins. The main ideas of 75 minutes is to produce legitimate winners of a legitimate 2/3 match. With your suggestion, we would have some arbitrary point (say Top 8) where matches were only then were allowed 75 mins. But why there? Sure, the Top 8 seems more important than the Top 128, but the players playing in the Top 8 might not even be the same players if the previous rounds had 75 minutes. (This is why in sports the Best of Series are typically the same amount of games from the first round to the last round.) When you shift from 60 to 75 minutes, you might very well send home in 60-minute Top 128 a player that would have otherwise won the entire tournament with 75 minutes. You want 75 minutes for each round of the Top Cut so that every player of every match had an opportunity to play a legitimate series.

I strongly encourage everyone who wants to see 75 minutes at Nationals (and hopefully Worlds) to let their voices be heard. Feel free to post here and in the original thread: http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?t=158702

Like I pointed out in my first post, I shared the disappointment of the players to see Worlds end like so many other 60 minute 2/3 series: on a Sudden Death coin flip.

Respect the players, respect the game. 75 minutes for Nats & Worlds!
 
Why shift to 75 minutes for just Top 128 for National and Worlds? Sure, it seems more important than States and Regionals and Battle Roads and Cities, but the players playing at Nationals might not even be the same players if the previous tournaments had 75 minutes. When you shift from 60 to 75 minutes, you might very well keep from Nats in 60-minute Regionals T32 a player who would have otherwise won the entire Nationals Tournament with 75 minutes. You want 75 minutes for each round of Top Cut in each tournament so that every player of every match of every tournament had an opportunity to play a legitimate series.

No. Keep the season as consistent as you can. You should be playing the same game at Nationals that you were at Cities. Yes, the format changes, but the rules should not (with the exception of last year, which you can cite if you want, but we all know that was an extreme exception that needed to happen.)

My two cents, feel free to disagree. But if you earned your spot at Worlds with 60m rounds, you should understand very well what they entail. Deck choice matters in more than just "X beats Y".
 
No. Keep the season as consistent as you can. You should be playing the same game at Nationals that you were at Cities.

Well, tell that to the Japanese. Not only are there multiple tournament structures in Japan, the Japanese players have to test for Worlds played in a completely different format.

If they can handle it, we can handle a longer top cut for our Nationals. 75 minutes is clearly superior to 60 minutes, so why not do it? (Why do smaller tournaments like Battle Roads and Cities need to have shorter top cuts? Well, these events are held at local comic shops and small businesses, whose owners and employees have families that they just might want to go home to on a Saturday or Sunday night. For the hosts of these tournaments, seeing their spouses and kids is probably more important than waiting for come Pokemon players to finish their little tournament... Nationals and Worlds does not have this constraint.)

I actually think would actually be fun if we "keep the season as consistent" as we can, but from the Japanese perspective. It would be a cool challenge to play worlds on alternate years using the Japanese tournament structure, where the first 16 players to win 5 games in a row get into top cut.
 
Well, tell that to the Japanese. Not only are there multiple tournament structures in Japan, the Japanese players have to test for Worlds played in a completely different format.

If they can handle it, we can handle a longer top cut for our Nationals. 75 minutes is clearly superior to 60 minutes, so why not do it? (Why do smaller tournaments like Battle Roads and Cities need to have shorter top cuts? Well, these events are held at local comic shops and small businesses, whose owners and employees have families that they just might want to go home to on a Saturday or Sunday night. For the hosts of these tournaments, seeing their spouses and kids is probably more important than waiting for come Pokemon players to finish their little tournament... Nationals and Worlds does not have this constraint.)

I actually think would actually be fun if we "keep the season as consistent" as we can, but from the Japanese perspective. It would be a cool challenge to play worlds on alternate years using the Japanese tournament structure, where the first 16 players to win 5 games in a row get into top cut.

I understand exactly why smaller venues have different time constraints, I was just plugging in a more extreme proposal into the same format Ness left me.

That being said, the Japanese do have different tournament structures. But the rules in those different structures don't change as the season progresses. I'm not talking about Limited vs Modified, I'm not talking about RS-On vs HP-On, I'm talking about changing policy inside a tournament structure mid season.
 
That being said, the Japanese do have different tournament structures. But the rules in those different structures don't change as the season progresses. I'm not talking about Limited vs Modified, I'm not talking about RS-On vs HP-On, I'm talking about changing policy inside a tournament structure mid season.

Yes, the Japanese do change tournament structure mid-season.

The Japanese play in tournaments where the first X people to win 5 games in a row make cut. When they play worlds, they play swiss rounds to determine who makes cut. The tournament structure changes drastically.

Also, don't forget that tournament rules allow the organizer/head judge to decide how long top cut rounds are, as long as they are greater than 45 minutes. Proposing that all tournaments have 75 minute top cuts is impossible throughout the season for reasons I mentioned in my last post, whereas 75 minute top cuts at Nationals/Worlds is a real possibility that's within the current tournament rules.
 
I'm not saying they don't. Please read my post.

---------- Post added 05/07/2012 at 01:30 AM ----------

Oh, you edited your post after I made mine. How charming.

The rules allow for as long a Top Cut as the organizer wants, but, as far back as my experience goes, it has never been more than 60m at Nats and Worlds, and most local organizers stick to that as well. We all know the norm is 60, and you make it clear by basing your argument around the perceived deficiencies of 60m top cuts.
 
You assume the point of 2/3 is to play a full on, proper best of 3. I don't know that that's necessarily the case - when they first implemented best of 3, wasn't that just to give both players a chance at a full, not-donk game? If one assumes that's the point of best of 3, then 60 minutes is loads of time.

(I'm not saying I'm against the purpose being a proper best of 3 series, I'm just saying I'm not sure that's what the point is right now.)
 
75 minutes would be great for best 2/3 matches, plain and simple. Too often I've seen the Finals of events come down to time getting called, and the game is decided by some arbitrary point where one player wins for taking a prize or two. In fact, it happened in the Finals of both States and Regionals for me. With 75 minutes, those matches complete easily, and we determine a real winner.

The only reason against having 75 minutes for only a few matches (for example, from Top 16 on) is that the time constraints can influence deck choice. If I know that the event is going to have 60 minute time limits, playing a slower deck becomes risky. Still, even if only the Finals was 75 minutes and nothing else, it would be an improvement. It's not "unfair" to the players before that point. Pretty much all sports or games adopted this mindset at some point; the earlier series are shorter, and the big ones get more time. For example, Major League Baseball uses a best-of-five series for the Divisional Round, but then the rest is best-of-seven. In Starcraft, another competitive game, generally the early rounds are best-of-three matches that lead into best-of-five or best-of-seven near the later rounds. It's a pretty common idea; you give the high profile matches more time because there is more on the line.
 
The only reason against having 75 minutes for only a few matches (for example, from Top 16 on) is that the time constraints can influence deck choice.

If every player knows that the first 3 rounds of top cut are 60 minutes (T128 through T32) and the last 4 rounds of top cut are 75 minutes (T16 through T2), then everyone would be faced with the same risk in deck choice. In an ideal world, I would much rather play 75 minute top cut rounds starting from T128.

However, if I had to choose between 75 minutes from T16 onward or 60 minutes for all top cut matches, I would easily choose to have 75 minutes from T16 onward.

To take this one step further, I'd be even happier if Top 4 at Nationals didn't have time limits, and players would still need to maintain the pace of play or face a penalty. Having the Top 4 at Nationals decided by 3 full games would be really cool, not only for the players themselves, but for all the spectators.

I think the most important thing is that the timing rules of the top cut rounds at Nationals (and Worlds) should be announced well in advance of the event. That gives all players ample time to prepare their decks.
 
Last edited:
I firmly support this idea.

RE Shuckle LVX: there have been 75 minute top cuts at Worlds before, and the players were very happy for it.
 
@ Pooka: I agree that the Top Cut should be 75 minutes. But your analogy does not work. In competitive gaming/sports changing from a Bo5 to Bo7 (or any change in series length) does not fundamentally change the game being played. In MLB, all five early round games are still 9 innings and require 27 outs, etc. In SC2, the games are the same.

Here, you are fundamentally changing the game. The difference between 60 and 75 minutes drastically alters gameplay. I think the time limit needs to be consistent throughout the entire course of the Top Cut.
 
^
i agree w/ this statement and i'll be honest at this point i'm deciding between 3 decks and if we have 75 min top cut for all rounds i can assure you i'll be playing a different deck than if 60 mins...
 
Back
Top