Making U.S Nationals more legitimate

[Flaming_Spinach]

I do not agree with running pods.

You will just replace ten 7-2's missing the cut with thirty 6-2's missing the cut.



Of course, those are just approximations. If you change around the number of players, these numbers change accordingly.

 

[Mew]

I say that Pods are by far the most practicle, and best solution to this problem. The only drawback to that is someone will be stuck with Seena, Moss, Chuck, Ness, Me (=-D), and William Hung, all in the same Pod; while someone like Bobby Malec will get into a Pod with absolutely nobody else.

I'm sure this has been brought up before, but I just wanted to reiterate that.

Perhaps, someone can come up with a solution to this problem?

 

[tglilly]

ironic how the game of Pokemon you need a lot of luck...It's also the same thing getting the cut in Nationals. I guess some people are just more luckier than others.

 

[DukeFireBird]

imo guys, 9 rounds, T64

Nuff said

 

[PuRpLe]

Um, wow? So, the fact that some 7-2s miss the cut and others go onto WIN A TRIP TO WORLDS or cash because they had a computer decide whether they get in or not is fair? Yeah, ok.

Look, this is a game. If you get cut at 7-2 then get over it, it happens. It wouldn't have happened had the person got 8-1 right?
I would be grateful to get in at a 7-2 / would try my hardest next year to get 8-1 or 9-0 so I wouldn't have to have a computer decide. And even next year if I got 7-2 and got cut it would be my fault for not doing better and getting 8-1 or 9-0.

I KNOW it's not easy at all [I'm not stupid, of course it's hard] but like I said, it's a game. The best of the day 9-0, 8-1 will have no worries. That's how competition goes. If there was a competition of 400 people to get as many basketballs into a hoop and were given 9 shots each then would I expect to get in missing 2 and making 7? Would I feel entitled to make it because I did good? Not at all. I'd congradulate the people that made 8 and 9. They did more than good, they did GREAT. They had better record for the day so they deserve it.

Your post is exactly as you say - you haven't been to Nationals. You don't know how it is. Nor do you have any idea who I am, so let me fill you in -- first of all I didn't miss at 7-2 and secondly, I won a free trip to Nationals. This isn't a sour grapes post. Get your facts straight before you start attacking people.

Umm... I really couldn't care less who you are... so... yea lol. I wasn't talking about you, I was talking about in general. I have no reason to attack anybody, like I said, I do not care about Pokemon like that. I'm just trying to say that this is a competitive game. Every 7-2 person that makes it should be happy and any that didn't shouldn't get mad because if this were a more competitive event then NONE of the 7-2 would make it.

Purple, it isn't that easy to win every game you play in, even if you are good. Lets take Bobby Malec for a instsnce: 2 T1 Skill Hacks. He was 33rd too.

I know it's not easy... I've gotten cut at events because of resistance before.

So PuRpLe, why dont you become good and X-1/ X-0 every tournament?

Um... cause I don't care. Don't care to go to league every week even though it'sjust 30 minutes away, don't care care to go to tournaments when they're 30 minutes away [and I could go to extra tourneys in other states that are like an 1-2 hours away], don't care to trade for deck cards... I just don't care. I top cutted before with rogue decks that I make 30 minutes before the tourney... and when I say rogue I mean rogue with Masterballs, Greatballs, Oak and some other weird stuff with Pokemon most "serious" players would use for toilet paper [Ninetails ex, Camerupt ex, Jolteon ex, DX Manectric ex, DX Manectric with the bench damage, Raichu ex].
Many Poke friends have told me to resume playing and to come to league / events because if I "just try" I could do great and not just the regular good I do when I don't lift a finger. But no, I haven't played in months and gave all my Pokemon-ex and deck cards to my friends. That's just me. I know for a fact I can do awesome if I did care. I'm a slacker with POP.

I'm one of those kids in school that has all the potential in the world but doesn't use it. Lolz.

 

[SPARTA]

I wasn't at Nats, but I was told how it was. Resistance deciding who gets in is insane, no, BEYOND insane. We have enough luck in out game as it is, now we have some computer throwing even more luck out way? Top 64 probably would help out, and I have no idea how Pods would work out, but someone going 7-2 and missing the cut is bad (Airman829 told me about going 7-2 in grinder 06 and missing worlds, I can sympathize).

 

[Jaeger]

Personally I think it should never go above top 32, and scholarship money should always be played off for so no earlier than top 16 however top 8 isn't horriple as for the 10 rounds I don't think that would be a bad idea that would be all 10-0 9-1 and 8-2 and a few 7-3.

Let me also add this Pokemon and Nintendo manages this game better than any other TCG I know of and if you guys don't like our nats definitly don't play yu-gi-oh 400 and a top 16 half the 8-2 don't make it or even worse a couple years ago 400 top 8 9-1 record and only 2 8-2 got in.

 

[THE FT. LAUD. LOUD MOUTH]

FYI Guys....

High resistance means you played better players
Low resistance means you played bad players

Why should someone who played lower quality players be let into a top cut?

Also a side note- Kudos to Chad on another sour grapes topic :nonono:

 

[SPARTA]

Also a side note- Kudos to Chad on another sour grapes topic :nonono:

=/

...so let me fill you in -- first of all I didn't miss at 7-2 and secondly, I won a free trip to Nationals. This isn't a sour grapes post. Get your facts straight before you start attacking people.

You can't spell OR get facts straight it would appear....

 

[GinoLombardi21]

There is way to much drama in pokemon.:nonono:

 

[Scizor]

=/


You can't spell OR get facts straight it would appear....

Nice attack, don't know what you're talking about. What is with you people? I'm actually trying to do some GOOD here and I just get attacked over and over. This forum is just an absolute jokefest at times.

 

[Flaming_Spinach]

Nice attack, don't know what you're talking about. What is with you people? I'm actually trying to do some GOOD here and I just get attacked over and over. This forum is just an absolute jokefest at times.

Don't dispair.

It happens to me all the time, but that doesn't stop me from presenting my side of the issue.

 

[tglilly]

It may not be fair but this is just a game. If you don't make it this year just try your best at the next. Some times life is not fair and it will throw you a curve ball every now and then. I have missed a few cuts my self but I just shrug it off and look froward to my next tournament.

 

[Cyrus]

K...I think a lot of the criticisms aren't even actual criticisms of Chad's ideas. Nice going, intellectual body of the internet. =/

Pods: we've gone over pods a lot before, Chad, and I'd say that it's a slippery slope, but it'll work as long as it is FLAWLESS.

Larger cuts: unlike pods, I'm a big advocate of large top cuts for many reasons...

-It suggests to people looking outside that this game is so large that it NEEDS a cut like that at the U.S. nationals.

-It actually represents the field better than a top thirty two. A couple years back, it was made very clear that top cuts were meant to represent, more or less, the _top 25%_ in a field. What happened to that?!

-Usually an extra round at a major event does so much good. I pushed for a seventh round at Worlds '07, and although we didn't get it, it made people realize that adding on a little extra time to a tournament makes it THAT much more legitimate. It may not be PRACTICAL at something like U.S. nats, but it's at least worth considering (if not a top 64 cut).



Also, all arguments about little kids should be dropped. The only age group where this is an issue in is the 15+.

 

[Articjedi]

I agree with kettler. I'd rather have a larger top cut than more rounds, it would let in those low resistance players so they'd have a better shot, with more 2/3 games.

Smaller age groups wouldn't be affected, they don't bring in the same numbers as the 15+, adding more rounds or a larger cut won't affect them as much.

No, I have no right to complain about anything. Complaining and trying to improve a game is a bad thing. I shouldn't say anything even if I feel certain players are being mistreated, because it's only game game. Life is unfair, but why should I be satisfied with that? I can at least say something and try to get something done. Or should we should just leave things alone so nothing ever happens? Especially, if Chad wants something, Chad is a bad man because he only wants what's best for the game. =\

This whole topic is about ensuring that nationals is more fair. I'm sick of hearing about the sour grapes, but it doesn't EVER come down to "try harder next year." You can't beat resistance, it determines too many placings to be a measure of the best players in the room. Yah, it's just a game, aren't games supposed to be fair to the players who work the hardest? I didn't come close to making the cut, yet I sympathize with every person here who didn't make the cut because they faced a weaker player in an early round who killed their chances at making eliminations.

I'd like a tenth round, it would create less of a resistance factor, or even do a larger cut, more players will make it in on something other than some guy they faced 0-9ing the tournament.

 

[NoPoke]

PODS are a sub-optimal solution to squeezing a big tounrment into venue time restrictions. PODS are sub-optimal because whilst the venue time constraint can be met everything else gets worse. everything.

PODS have to be the last resort of any TO. To make such an obvious mistake as a suggested 'improvement' brings all the other suggestions into doubt too.

Some top cut math here http://pokegym.net/forums/showpost.php?p=889120&postcount=72 more than 585 players and none of the X-3s will make a T32.


If you don't make the cut then win more games next time. Its brutal but it is also brutally fair. It applies to everyone.

 

[eriknance]

Nice attack, don't know what you're talking about. What is with you people? I'm actually trying to do some GOOD here and I just get attacked over and over. This forum is just an absolute jokefest at times.

Yeah... so...

Why are people attacking Scizor? I kind of have a hard time accepting the "DEAL WITH IT" idea that has come up in this thread. "Deal with it" doesn't help the game at this time, it hurts it. If we all just dealt with the things that we don't agree with, nothing would get fixed, nothing would improve. One of the things that I like about this game is the fact that some pretty important people visit these threads in search of ways that the game can be improved, so I feel like my opinion is actually worth some weight when I give it.

I'd hate for someone important to read the original post of this thread to only find out that people should "deal with it." Personally, I'm in favor of voicing my opinion on a forum when it actually means something. Apparently, some people (like Scizor) feel the same way. And if you can't accept that... then just DEAL WITH IT.

:wink:

ps - I would personally like a larger top cut, though I don't know how plausible that is. All I do know is that I would hate to spend a nice chunk of money to drive 10+ hours to a location where I compete against 500 players and miss the cut because a couple players I went against decided to drop.

 

[bullados]

You can't compare a 7-2 record in Pokemon to a 9-7 record in the NFL... First of all, Pokemon has alot of luck involved, and odds are alot of very good players can get donked twice in 9 rounds, and miss because of that.

9-7 in a game of mostly skill means just that. You have 7 losses and are a mediocre team, and probably deserve to miss the playoffs. You can't say someone who went 7-2 at US nats played a mediocre tournament. If all the 7-2s made cut last year, nobody would be complaining.

It is a legitimate comparison because the NFL has one thing that Pokemon does not.

Parity.

GREAT parity.

The difference b/w a top team in the league and a cellar dweller is usually a couple of plays in a couple of close games. The talent level across the board is roughly equal. There is no "haves" and "have nots" over an extended period of time. Eventually, all of the dynasties fall due to a combination of factors. Age, experience, coaching, ownership, all are variables that determine a team's outcome. You can assume that, if you're playing in the NFL, you are at the very least a good player. It's just a comparison between players at that point.

In Pokemon, however, there is very little parity. There is a very clear distinction between the "Haves" and the "Have Nots", and the latter group is usually a LOT bigger than the former. Because of this, you have to adjust how you determine a borderline player when there is much less parity. The difference in skill (playing, trading, deckbuilding) between your average 7-2 and your average 2-7 in Pokemon is MUCH greater than the difference between your average 12-4 and your average 2-14 in the NFL. Why? The bulk of the 2-7 players simply do not have the same resources as the 7-2 players. Same with the 3-6, the 4-5, and the 5-4. Remember, there is nothing resembling a Salary Cap in this game. The people that are 7-2 have generally simply spent more money on the game than those with lesser records. They're not necessarily better than them. They just have more access to good cards and are able to netdeck well. Those that are 8-1 and 9-0 are certifiably great players because they are able to create great decks from a large card pool, can play them well, and can overcome their difficulties with relative ease.

I appreciate that the guys at PUI recognize this. X-2 in an open tournament really is NOT good enough. You should be sweating it out on X-2 in an open tournament. Again, I've missed the cut in a 5 round tournament with one loss. No sour grape wine and cheese coming out of this player, either.

When Pokemon Nationals has similar parity to any other good comparison, then I will support increasing the cut at Nationals to include ALL X-2s. However, it's because of the complete and utter lack of parity in this game that the X-2s need to sweat it out.

Above all, this needs to be said. Win your games, and then you have nothing to worry about. Plain and simple.

 

[Bobby]

I say that Pods are by far the most practicle, and best solution to this problem. The only drawback to that is someone will be stuck with Seena, Moss, Chuck, Ness, Me (=-D), and William Hung, all in the same Pod; while someone like Bobby Malec will get into a Pod with absolutely nobody else.

I'd rather have the legit pod! No one there plays Skill Hack! :frown:

A Top 64 would be great if we have that many players this year. They could even play it out at the end of Day 1 if time on Sunday is an issue. Chad and I were talking about the pods yesterday and depending on attendance, I like the way they would turn out. It's at least worth considering. Something really should be done, thought.

How is 7-2 at such an event as Nats possibly "not good enough"?

For one thing, weak resistance does not always equate to weak opponents. Good players can have bad days. Opponents can (and will) drop once they realize they don't have a shot at top cut. Besides, how are you going to determine a player's skill level based on performance at one event? Saying one did not perform well enough to make cut because they got edged out by a couple of percentage points is, frankly, a little offensive. I really don't want to think that I'm that much worse than the Claydol ex deck that made top cut in 11-14 eek... The thing is, things like my Shiftry horrors are going to happen in an event of the size we can expect, and it isn't unlikely that it will happens to one of your opponents. How on earth does that make them a weaker opponent? How is losing before you get a 2nd turn a test of skill?

Simply put, top cut matches are way more legit than swiss matches because it's best of three. Losing T1 in one game is just something that happens, but it is very, VERY unlikely that this will happen two games out of three against the same opponent. A bigger top cut makes more legit matches, and pulling the Top 64 would, I assume, pull most of the players with "worthy" records. 5-4 is not good enough for top cut, and 6-3 is definitely pushing it, but 7-2 deserves cut,

As a side note, this tournament is becoming more and more of an endurance test. Playing nine, and now possibly 10, rounds of Pokemon in a row is mentally and physically (yes, physically) exhausting.

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

If there was a competition of 400 people to get as many basketballs into a hoop and were given 9 shots each then would I expect to get in missing 2 and making 7? Would I feel entitled to make it because I did good? Not at all. I'd congradulate the people that made 8 and 9. They did more than good, they did GREAT. They had better record for the day so they deserve it.

I wouldn't either, considering shooting baskets is INFINITELY more skill-based than Pokemon. In Pokemon, you can draw an unplayable hand and lose to an unsleeved theme deck with a player who had never played before. I don't think a random guy who had never shot hoops is going to come beat you, because how many baskets you shoot is almost, if not totally, under your control.

and when I say rogue I mean rogue with Masterballs, Greatballs, Oak and some other weird stuff with Pokemon most "serious" players would use for toilet paper [Ninetails ex, Camerupt ex, Jolteon ex, DX Manectric ex, DX Manectric with the bench damage, Raichu ex]

Yes, we serious players definitely consider Master Ball, Great Ball, Jolteon ex, and Manectric ex to be total garbage. :smile:

Mhmm.

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

The people that are 7-2 have generally simply spent more money on the game than those with lesser records. They're not necessarily better than them. They just have more access to good cards and are able to netdeck well. Those that are 8-1 and 9-0 are certifiably great players because they are able to create great decks from a large card pool, can play them well, and can overcome their difficulties with relative ease.

Rofl? I'd like to see a 7-2 at Nats who was a "netdecker with good cards". Let's look at my dear friend Anthony "Thoy" Caspanello, for example. He went 6-3; lower, even, than your netdecker standard. He played an Infernape deck, and yes, it was hyped online, but he worked on his deck, won a Battle Road, and added his own ideas to it (Mawile/Blissey ex). No one who went 7-2, and I'd wager a lot who went 6-3, didn't just steal an idea from the internet. You have to be GOOD to pull a record like that at United States Nationals. Chad, Matt, and others have already said why.

I appreciate that the guys at PUI recognize this. X-2 in an open tournament really is NOT good enough. You should be sweating it out on X-2 in an open tournament. Again, I've missed the cut in a 5 round tournament with one loss. No sour grape wine and cheese coming out of this player, either.

With every added round, the results become more representative of the skill of the players who make top cut. Maybe you deserved it that day! But the fact of the matter is that a five round event is vastly different from a nine or ten round event. I've made a top cut at 3-2 before, and people have missed top cut at 7-2 before. How is this fair? If I felt like I had legit, well-played losses where the opponent actually played better than I did, I would have no grapes, either. I'm glad you aren't upset about missing cut at 4-1, but again, it's easier to go 4-1 than it is to go 7-2.

When Pokemon Nationals has similar parity to any other good comparison, then I will support increasing the cut at Nationals to include ALL X-2s. However, it's because of the complete and utter lack of parity in this game that the X-2s need to sweat it out.

Above all, this needs to be said. Win your games, and then you have nothing to worry about. Plain and simple.

etc

 

[DarthPika]

^ yes it's a game, but if you really tried hard all year and didn't make top cut because of maby a bad matchup and a donk, thats just sick.

Look if you don't care don't respond in this thread.