How they should have done Championship points:

[jeffrey123]

So I feel like discussing this as I feel that it is an issue that is quite important regarding the new "championship" points system. This points system is no champion, and it certainly does not meet my wishes/expectations.

Now personally, today I attended a battle road and recieved a round 1 loss for being late. This happens to everyone once in awhile, but I figured that I could still have a very slight chance at making top cut. I played the 2nd round and lost the game on some bad luck to a newer player (keep in mind i've been playing 2 years). I lost, dropped, and waited for my friends to finish to go home. So why am I telling you this, you ask? Well, the goal of championship points was to encourage playing the game, right? What encourages me to play the Pokemon trading card game if I can not earn anything even if I win all the rest of my games? What purpose does it serve to play 3 more rounds?

I was thinking about this and realized how flawed the system actually is. It encourages dropping more than anything, in my opinion. I would be motivated to play the rest of my games out since I would (at the very minimum) be earning a few rating points towards my worlds invite. But instead, I would rather drop since I earn nothing and am essentially wasting my time.

For those that are optimistic and like to play the game even when they can not top cut, bless your souls. I can't stand to play when I know that I gain literally nothing from the game. Not even 1 point.

Now in my opinion, if I was to do championship points for the world's sake, they would look something like this:

Battle Roads: 1 point per win
City Championships: 4 points per win
States: 8 points per win
Regionals: 8 points per win
Nationals: 8 points per win
Worlds: 25 points per win

Now when i say win, I mean just 1 game. So in top cut, if you were to win best of 3, you would gain as much points as you would normally with a win in the corresponding event. For example; If you were to win a Battle roads going 8-0, you would gain 8 points. Regarding every loss. losing 0 points per loss encourages game play. This also makes sure that dropping would be negative because there is no negative for losing a game besides not gaining any points, albeit you do not lose any.

This encourages deck building as well, since you don't lose any points. The main issue with this system is that the players that play the most games will have the best shot at attending worlds, but this can be easily fixed by limiting the amount of points you can earn per series. For example, in Iowa you may only have 2 or 3 city championships per 500 miles, whereas Florida has 8 within 200 miles. This would make the game much better in my opinion, and would also prevent players that go 5-1 in swiss and do not cut to not feel cheated that they missed out due to resistance.

Just a little rant, let me know what you think.

 

[Pokeplayer101]

What I think is why would you do 8 for nats cause there are about 500 masters now and 8 would be VERY low for that attendance in just 1 age division.

 

[King Piplup]

So I feel like discussing this as I feel that it is an issue that is quite important regarding the new "championship" points system. This points system is no champion, and it certainly does not meet my wishes/expectations.

Now personally, today I attended a battle road and recieved a round 1 loss for being late. This happens to everyone once in awhile, but I figured that I could still have a very slight chance at making top cut. I played the 2nd round and lost the game on some bad luck to a newer player (keep in mind i've been playing 2 years). I lost, dropped, and waited for my friends to finish to go home. So why am I telling you this, you ask? Well, the goal of championship points was to encourage playing the game, right? What encourages me to play the Pokemon trading card game if I can not earn anything even if I win all the rest of my games? What purpose does it serve to play 3 more rounds?

I was thinking about this and realized how flawed the system actually is. It encourages dropping more than anything, in my opinion. I would be motivated to play the rest of my games out since I would (at the very minimum) be earning a few rating points towards my worlds invite. But instead, I would rather drop since I earn nothing and am essentially wasting my time.

For those that are optimistic and like to play the game even when they can not top cut, bless your souls. I can't stand to play when I know that I gain literally nothing from the game. Not even 1 point.

Now in my opinion, if I was to do championship points for the world's sake, they would look something like this:

Battle Roads: 1 point per win
City Championships: 4 points per win
States: 8 points per win
Regionals: 8 points per win
Nationals: 8 points per win
Worlds: 25 points per win

Now when i say win, I mean just 1 game. So in top cut, if you were to win best of 3, you would gain as much points as you would normally with a win in the corresponding event. For example; If you were to win a Battle roads going 8-0, you would gain 8 points. Regarding every loss. losing 0 points per loss encourages game play. This also makes sure that dropping would be negative because there is no negative for losing a game besides not gaining any points, albeit you do not lose any.

This encourages deck building as well, since you don't lose any points. The main issue with this system is that the players that play the most games will have the best shot at attending worlds, but this can be easily fixed by limiting the amount of points you can earn per series. For example, in Iowa you may only have 2 or 3 city championships per 500 miles, whereas Florida has 8 within 200 miles. This would make the game much better in my opinion, and would also prevent players that go 5-1 in swiss and do not cut to not feel cheated that they missed out due to resistance.

Just a little rant, let me know what you think.

I've noticed the issue with x-2 drops in Masters, because there is nothing for you to gain. I do agree that there is nothing good for the game in that. I do think X points for win is good, but 8 points at the later events is a little crazy in my opinion. Some value should be given to swiss though, other than top cut seeding.

---------- Post added 10/02/2011 at 07:29 PM ----------

What I think is why would you do 8 for nats cause there are about 500 masters now and 8 would be VERY low for that attendance in just 1 age division.

500 masters? What? There were over 1,000 last year, not sure where you get 500.

 

[PkB_]

Why are you giving out championship points for wolrds?

 

[KazamBolt]

The Pokemon Website has Championship Points up for Worlds right now, we don't know why yet.

 

[SMP88]

All this encourages is players going to multiple events right away and then stopping once they hit their cap. The purpose of Championship points don't really shine until you get to bigger events. Players were dropping all the time after going X-0 to preserve their rating. Championship points encourage these players to continue playing. If you're at a State/Regionals/Nats and you lose 2 or 3 rounds, what's the point in dropping anymore? Sure, you can't make top cut, but what else exactly are you going to do? It's better to just keep playing to get some more practice in than to drop and do nothing, especially if you're traveled a while to go to the tournament.

 

[Qwachansey]

I agree with your idea, but the point system you suggested does not seem very good. I would do:

BR: 1 per win
Cities: 3 per win
States: 5 per win
Regionals: 7 per win
Nationals: 9 per win
Worlds: 0 per win unless they stack for next year.

 

[sdrawkcab]

You forget, ELO points are still used as a tie breaker.

So playing the rest of your games might have ended up making a difference should you end up tieing for the last ranking invite (assuming they're still around)

 

[jeffrey123]

All this encourages is players going to multiple events right away and then stopping once they hit their cap. The purpose of Championship points don't really shine until you get to bigger events. Players were dropping all the time after going X-0 to preserve their rating. Championship points encourage these players to continue playing. If you're at a State/Regionals/Nats and you lose 2 or 3 rounds, what's the point in dropping anymore? Sure, you can't make top cut, but what else exactly are you going to do? It's better to just keep playing to get some more practice in than to drop and do nothing, especially if you're traveled a while to go to the tournament.

Have fun playing 3 more rounds and getting nothing! Even if you win 3rounds in a row!

You forget, ELO points are still used as a tie breaker.

So playing the rest of your games might have ended up making a difference should you end up tieing for the last ranking invite (assuming they're still around)

Like I said, you're playing for nothing. The difference that makes is so slim that it's virtually irrelevant.

 

[desert eagle]

A much better way to distribute Championship Points

Since Pokemon does look at this website for feedback and ideas, I'd like to give my 2 cents on the CP system. While it is a huge improvement over a flawed rating system that we've been used to in past years (encouraging participation at all events), there is a huge flaw that can easily be eliminated that I'm surprised nobody has brought up.

As is, almost all battle roads are coming down to resistance, which means a huge part of how CP is given out is something beyond any kind of control with regards to skill. Personally, while I have gotten 4 CP, I could easily have 8 if I hadn't whiffed top cut at X-1 twice, and I know this problem is even worse at BRs in the US where there are more people, causing people who go 5-1 to very unfairly miss cut and a chance at CP.

Right now, 1 point is pretty negligible but once cities rolls around, there can be 4-5 point swings for missing top cut on resistance and this will have an enormous impact on who gets to make it into worlds and not.

I think a MUCH more fair way to do CP than kickers is to have it so everyone who has a certain record at events get at least some kind of CP proportional to their records. I understand time restraints and such makes it hard to hold an extra round to cut down X-1s but it doesn't cost anything to make the system so that someone who goes X-1 (a good day by any means) will at least have something to show for it worth their performance rather than nothing but a few ELO points.

If this is confusing to anyone, I mean if say there are 7 5-1's and 3 make cut. the cut would be played out normally with the winner getting say 3 CP, 2nd getting 2 CP and 3rd and 4th plus all the remaining 5-1's getting 1 CP. For a bigger tournament like cities, winner gets 6, 2nd gets 5, 3rd/4th and all the remaining X-1's get 4, X-2's get 3, X-3's get 2. Something like that.

I can't think of a single reason why this would be a bad system, I'm sure anyone who wants the best possible players at worlds would love to have a system like this.

Comments on why not from a POP official?

 

[Cyrus]

I like desert eagle's suggestion about giving out Championship Points to people who at least make a top cut-worthy record. However, since this solution has its own issues with it (namely, the risk that it awards anyone a championship point no matter how strong or weak their schedule was), the more practical solution is to just make top cuts more inclusive. The purpose behind a top cut isn't just to give the top swiss performers a chance to play against each other; it's supposed to lessen the impact of luck, and increase the influence of skill by giving players a solid best-of-three chance. Bigger top cuts will lead to more influence of skill, and thus, the greater likelihood that Championship Points are handed out in a deserving way.

However, eagle's suggestion and OP's suggestion are both interesting alternatives to take.

 

[thisguy]

Ok so let me get this straight, you're complaining because a player that performs poorly is "encouraged" to drop (by encouraged I mean drops because they can't be bothered playing anymore to an event they signed up for) whilst the superior players are rewarded not to drop, thereby resulting in a more competitive tournament. Sounds like the system works to me.

 

[jeffrey123]

Ok so let me get this straight, you're complaining because a player that performs poorly is "encouraged" to drop (by encouraged I mean drops because they can't be bothered playing anymore to an event they signed up for) whilst the superior players are rewarded not to drop, thereby resulting in a more competitive tournament. Sounds like the system works to me.

Incorrect.

Why play if you cannot win anything, why play? I don't know about you, but I play because I want to earn something. If I know that I have no chance at ANYTHING. Sure you signed up, but signing up is pointless if you can't get anything in return. The superior player gets donked twice. That's the end of everything for him, not just cut. Points.

 

[yoyofsho16]

I like desert eagle's suggestion about giving out Championship Points to people who at least make a top cut-worthy record.

Nah.
Let's say top cut is capped at 5-2.
Someone who went 5-0 and then lost 2 had a WAY harder time getting there than the person who went 0-2 and then won out.

If you just needed a couple propoints you could even strategically throw your first game for this advantage.

 

[desert eagle]

Nah.
Let's say top cut is capped at 5-2.
Someone who went 5-0 and then lost 2 had a WAY harder time getting there than the person who went 0-2 and then won out.

If you just needed a couple propoints you could even strategically throw your first game for this advantage.

Which is fair, because the person who went 5-0 then lost 2 gets to have a chance to play in top cut for even more, while the person who lost 2 then won out just gets the 1 point or whatever for getting that record, but whiffs
cut. I don't see your point.

and no, it'd be retarded to throw your first game because you throw away your chance at more than just the cutoff point/points. If you really have that little confidence in your ability to win games, you don't really need the CP as you have no shot at worlds anyways.

The current system is unfair because the person who goes 5-1 gets the same rewards as someone who went 0-6. This is just absurd as you can't even expect Jason or Pooka to go 6-0 at every event - bad matchups, donks, that stuff all happens. That one game buffer is huge for us who are seriously playing for the invites, and losing out on CP cuz of resistance really could come back to bite in bigger tournaments.

 

[Pokeplayer101]

I've noticed the issue with x-2 drops in Masters, because there is nothing for you to gain. I do agree that there is nothing good for the game in that. I do think X points for win is good, but 8 points at the later events is a little crazy in my opinion. Some value should be given to swiss though, other than top cut seeding.

---------- Post added 10/02/2011 at 07:29 PM ----------



500 masters? What? There were over 1,000 last year, not sure where you get 500.

Well I meant that is about how many Masters in each pod.

 

[Beltiger]

Statistically Speaking on Championship Points

Breaking down the potential point totals and ranges of potential point totals should give us an idea of what Pokemon might/should/could do with Championship Points.

Max Points
Battle Roads: 2 x 8 = 16
Cities: 6 x 5 = 30
States/Regionals: 10 x 4 = 40
Nationals: 14 x 1 = 14
Total Max Points: 100

Min Points
Battle Roads: 1 x 8 = 8
Cities: 4 x 5 = 20
States/Regionals: 5 x 4 = 20
Nationals: 8 x 1 = 8
Total Min Points: 56

Min Kicker Points
Battle Roads: 1 x 8 = 8
Cities: 1 x 5 = 5
States/Regionals: 1 x 4 = 4
Nationals: 3 x 1 = 3
Total Min Kicker Points: 20

Analysis: Points Range 100-20

If Pokemon uses the "BARE MINIMUM" point total to qualify players for Worlds, 20 points would gain an invite.

Looking at the World Championship Points, 25 for first and 20 for second, this would make the most sense if they used World's points for NEXT season. A 20-point requirement would GUARANTEE the Winner and Runner-up of World's an invite to the next season's championship tournament. While the 15 points given for 3-4 and 10 points for 5-8 would provide a strong starting point for those players return.

This past weekend, I've heard players declaring that it will take 40 points to qualify for World's and if you don't gain any Battle Roads points you can just forget getting an invite. I feel this is ridiculous noting the statistical information above and the analysis of it.

Does anyone else believe that it will take more than 20 Championship points to get a World's invite? If so, is it 25 points - the total given to the World's Champion? Wouldn't that make the most sense as Pokemon WANTS to keep the maximum number of players involved IF AT ALL POSSIBLE?

Thoughts, comments, criticisms? Please reply below. I am anxious to hear what the community thinks.

 

[homeofmew]

I would agree on this slightly, it could be better.
I went 5-1 at a BRs and didn't make t4. 0 Champion points

 

[chrataxe]

Just a little rant, let me know what you think.

Ok. But, just for the record, you did ask.

I think you need to get better at the game, then reevaluate why you play. You are complaining about voluntarily dropping because you showed up late, then lost to an "inferior" player. Yes, stupid losses happen. I got donked on PTCGO the other day by a starter deck because I started a lone Yanma and wiffed on on the collector and got hit for weakness 2 turns in a row. But, lets reevaluate your whole situation: YOU showed up late. THEN, lost to a beginner, who also lost his first round, and undoubtedly had a horrible deck. There are 3 things I can safely assume by reading this.

1. You don't care too much about winning since you can't even make it on time
2. You aren't as good as you seem to think since you lost to an "inferior" opponent at the bottom table
3. You obviously aren't playing this game because its fun

So, if you need a reason to stick around and play, let it be because the game is fun, which is why most people play. If you are angry about not getting points, try winning. Then, when you do lose, do it by showing up on time and to good opponents. If you take this advice, I assure you will find yourself racking up more points than 0-2 drops.

For the record, going x-1 at BR's with a round loss for being late automatically DQ's you from top cut since you will ALWAYS have the lowest resistance from your loss.

As for not getting points on bubbles, the point is, you bubbled because you had inferior opponents. You didn't get cheated. And, while it is a valid complaint that you can't pick your opponents, the people that finish above you have just as much to complain about you getting a point for having an easy day while they had to work harder to get the same reward. Yes, it is small points we are talking about (1 at BR's) and it IS larger at Cities and up, but also remember, the cut gets bigger with the season. If you are only good enough to struggle to make TC, you consistently not getting those points seems far more fair that people that consistently GOT them should have a higher ranking than you. If you go 5-3 and Regionals and miss the cut, you shouldn't get 5 points for being the 32nd 5-3 and the 1st place 5-3 get 5 points and have a substantially harder day than you. I think the point you are missing is fairly simple: the points are rewards for doing BETTER, not doing "just as good."