Dear TPCi: Scrap the disaster that is 50+3!

Discussion in 'TCG News & Gossip Discussion' started by Ness, Mar 17, 2014.

8 league13 468 60
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ness

    Ness Member

    This season, Play! Pokémon followed the lead of other successful TCGs, finally introducing Best 2-of-3 into the Swiss rounds of large tournaments. While players enjoy that Best-of-3 gives an opportunity to come back from one unlucky loss and still win a match, the official time limit of just 50 minutes +3 turns prevents players from having enough time to consistently finish a third game, and instead often dooms players who lost one game to a best-case scenario of a tie.

    Dear The Pokémon Company International and its Organized Play team,
    Without enough time to play three games, Best-of-3 defeats its own purpose. It also creates long, exhausting events, where players are both rushed and stalled out of games. Additionally, 50+3 encourages concession agreements between players that border on collusion and conflict with the Spirit of the Game. Please abandon 50+3 and replace it with a system and time limit that rewards skill, encourages fair play, and is not stressful and exhausting on players and staff.
  2. Pooka

    Pooka Master Trainer

    When the 50+3 structure was announced for this season, I expressed my concerns with how the insufficient time limit and ties for incomplete games would negatively impact tournament play; this has been the case so far. At the four tournaments I've attended this season that used 50+3, the general feeling from players has been frustration and contempt for the way matches are played now. In my experience, most matches that go to a third game end in a tie, which is upsetting for both players since a tie is almost the same thing as a loss. Basically you have to 2-0 your opponent (or hope that one of the games ends within the first few turns). Matches have become more about the clock than the game itself, and that is a problem.

    I'm glad that TPCi was willing to try out something different this season. However, clearly the system is not working, and it needs to change.
  3. Bolt

    Bolt New Member

    Over the weekend, I found myself more and more frustrated after each round because I couldn't shake that "me against the clock" feeling. I dropped from the event after an 0-2-2 start. It felt like I would NEVER complete a match, and that I probably even conceded a winnable game 1.

    I get that time limits are necessary to keep the event moving, but at times, it didn't even feel like I was playing Pokemon.
  4. Diaz

    Diaz New Member

    Idk what the best tournament structure is, but I know it's not this. The structure this year feels worse than past years.
  5. Golfer570

    Golfer570 New Member

    This format encourages stalling.

    This format prevents properly timed game making decisions to take place due to time restraint.

    This format discludes people who score 5-1-1 from top cut, even though 5 people got the exact same score.

    This format makes tournaments go all the way to midnight.

    This format is very upsetting, and needs to be changed from 50+3. -Caleb Broeker
  6. Pikajew1213

    Pikajew1213 New Member

    As a player for 6 years now I can say very confidently that ties. Solve. Absolutely. Nothing.

    Throughout states so far, I have noticed in later rounds players opting to choose a loss rather than the tie, they give almost no advantage and with this 50 minutes are far to common.

    Please address and do something about this as it's beginning to become a real issue

    Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
  7. Johndoe

    Johndoe New Member

    Agreed that 50 Bo3 is one of the worst things to ever happen to this game. Matches used to be fun and exciting race to see who came out on top. Now....not so much. My opponent and I can play two incredible games ending in either's player fashion, but if both games do not finish with one person declaring both victories, the games will ALWAYS end in a tie with no true winner decided. It's like watching a tv episode that is "to be continued" with no concluding episode ever shown! It is honestly horrifying. Just this past weekend, I dropped at a 0-0-3 record at States. All three of my games were incredibly well played, well executed games. The problem? There was simply not enough time to play a game three! I actually witnessed someone end the tournament with a 0-0-7 record UNINTENTIONALLY. The tournament structure is honestly the worst I have ever seen it, and if it doesn't change, I can guarantee that I will not be attending these events anymore.
  8. Thedrone1man

    Thedrone1man New Member

    I personally never had a problem with 30 minute Bo1 Swiss, but I was willing to try Bo3 due to the positives it brings. However, this tournament structure is just a nightmare. I understand the desire for smaller cuts, but I feel that something like Bo1 with more rounds might also be sufficient. The system that calculates ties is just ridiculous and is beyond logic (I'm up 5-1, how is that a tie?). These tournaments feel like a test of endurance that is void of any real fun, and last far longer than they need to. This is supposed to be a hobby I enjoy, and the 50 minute Bo3 only makes me dread actually playing. I can't tell you how many games I could have won if I had even 5 more minutes. I personally think that it should be switched to 60+3 Bo3.
  9. I agree after 2 rounds I was 1-0-1 and so exhausted that I wanted to collapse. My brain got worn out. I miss the 1 game where u don't get pushed to the limit every round. Plus I hate the tie system. I wasn't what is said here. A 3rd game that ends on a win or loss. If u win do it by prizes or by winning out. I want to see no more draw outs and legit wins losses. Id rather be awake at the end of swiss rather then wanting to fall over
  10. Brandonf6

    Brandonf6 New Member

    This format makes this possible.
    And it's pretty ridiculous.
  11. cljoh001

    cljoh001 New Member

    When Bo3 first was anounced I was a little excited I must admit. But then when I started actually playing with the time litmit it was a HUGE disaster! This past week at states my friend came up to me after the event and said "pokemon is really fun but this time limit and the Bo3 makes it really suck!" It was his first tournament and he would never be able to win a game because his opponents would try and stall after winning their first game. If your going to change it make it fair and good for the game! NOT Bo3 50 minutes!
  12. Yoshi-

    Yoshi- New Member

    In the last 2 Regionals I played I went 2-1-2 and 2-0-3 whiffing cut. I really want my Invite but I almost feels like this format is forcing me to do shady stuff. When I played a friend in round 3 and we were both at 1-0-1 it wouldve been better to roll a dice to determine the winner, the draw isnt much better then a double loss. No fun, not working, do something about this BEFORE NATS!
  13. LOLZ

    LOLZ Member

    I think more Swiss rounds at all tournaments with 9 or more players is better then Best 2 out of 3. Best 2 out of 3 as donk protection is moot now considering the new first turn rules.

    More Swiss Rounds + A smaller Top Cut (T4 at Cities and T8 at States and Higher) is a great combination IMO.

    - - - Updated - - -

    You failed to win 50% of your matches... any tournament system that allows someone to make cut with a record like this is flawed. It is a good thing you missed cut.
  14. jbaka1188

    jbaka1188 New Member

    Best of three is great and I applaud TPCI for changing it up and trying something new, but 50+3 is just not enough time. Too many ties are occurring. 50+3 also creates awful situations where if you ever lose a game you probably cannot win the match and will end up tying which is essentially another match loss. The current time limit is not working and needs to change.
  15. pokemaster1970

    pokemaster1970 New Member

    to quote the great Frank Jimenez, "Seems like the Top Cut should match the line for Championship Points at large events. If they are handing down CPs to 16, cut at 16. If they are handing down CPs to 32, cut to 32."
  16. homeofmew

    homeofmew Active Member

    I agree get rid of ties, ties are terrible. You hardly ever finish game 3.
  17. Yoshi-

    Yoshi- New Member

    I failed to win 50% of my matches because I couldnt finish 50% of my matches. Thats the problem, Ill never know how many matches I could have won.
  18. PokeMontoya

    PokeMontoya New Member

    It can work but I think would require massive amounts of active judging. Most events can't staff this many people.
  19. Charranitar

    Charranitar Member

    I was fine with it with my decks at the first two Regional Championships, I often had enough time to finish a three game series, which made the best of 3, 50 minutes enough time. However, as we've seen more complex decks enter the scene and the Catcher errata, 50 minutes is proving not to be enough time at all.

    My states has seen few series that could get anywhere close to three games. The last states in particular showed the problem badly.

    I've seen a lot more slow play result from the change in recent states, with players milking the clock to their advantage if they win game one, which is against spirit of the game obviously. The format rewards playing less skilled opponents or one sided matchups, as any even matchups between equally skilled players seemingly results in a 1-1 tie.

    It's not fun to go into a tournament that if you have to play other good players, you probably won't make cut because you'll end up with a lot of ties because of how even matched. The previous tournament structure allowed for one of these players to come out slightly on top of the other for the win. It shouldn't be a surprise that evenly skilled players with evenly matched decks will result in a tie.

    This, in addition to the smaller top cut sizes, and the entry fees are all combining to suck a lot of the fun out of the game.
  20. Pidgeotto Trainer

    Pidgeotto Trainer New Member

    I and several others like Pooka were vocal about 50+3 not making sense when it was announced last Fall. I said 50 minutes would not be enough time to finish 3 games. I said there would be lots of ties and ties being 1/3 of a win was going to make that painful. I said there would be many, almost every match, situations where a player had an incentive to stall to get a win/tie. While this hasn't been intentionally abused too much, it is still just a bad situation. A 10 minute game is nearly impossible when one player can prevent a loss by just playing at a normal pace. Finishing 3 full games is just so hard. We've tried, Pokemon just doesn't get played that quickly. The no incomplete games counting is the other half of the new rules that has really messed things up.

    Some problems I didn't appreciate at first: You must go 2-0 so often to get your wins since ties are closer to losses. While ideally 2/3 forgives a random loss more often, this was the opposite. Now you need to go 2-0 to get a win and anything less is a bad round. So now 1 random loss out of 2 hurts you even more than best of 1, where a 1-1 record at least gives you 50% of the points possible. Also, since ties are so common, nearly every tournament you have players who have to make awkward 'on your word' deals with their opponents to not take a tie in a last round which would eliminate both of them.

    The 50+3 was so obviously bad for all the reasons we could foresee and more back in Fall Regionals. I was personally shocked they didn't change it before Winter regionals. Once that came and went without a whisper of change, I pretty much gave up that there would be any progressive action this year. Props to Jason for being willing to deal with this again. There are many good alternative formats. This one just doesn't make sense. Too many matches don't complete and I don't see any reason why this is good. It hasn't worked, no one is happy. We need 75 2/3 or 30 best of 1. Best of 2 just doesn't make sense, and 50 minutes is the perfect amount of time for that.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page