My take on the cut at nats

[Prime]

Nats as a 3 day event would work. I think there would be a bigger need for staff though since we couldn't have all the same people working all 3 days (just too much work - they need some rest). Origins is 4 days long anyways. Why not have the professor cup on Thursday, Nationals day 1 on Friday, Nats day 2 on Sat. and Nats day 3 on Sun? I know that some people might have work and school and can't miss Friday, and that is why it's cram packed into a weekend, but it would help it a bit if it was stretched out and maybe a little shorter each day (Noon-7PM x 3 = 21 hours or 9AM-7PM x 2 = 20 hours).

 

[Pokemon No Baka]

Does this guy complain about everything?

No, my husband doesn't complain about everything. He has an opinion about everything, though! I don't see how his post was complaining per se, then maybe I'm looking at it through "wife-colored" glasses. But let's take a look:

Now we see the problem with having Nationals at Origons, we are at Origons Mercy on when we need to clear out of by Sunday, If Nationals was held at a Convention space it would cost more to run the event but Sunday would not be so limited on time that a top 64 could not be run. It is sad that due to time constraints 5 deserving masters players did not make the top cut despite going 7-2 in a 400+ player event.

Pokemon TCG Nationals is absolutely at the mercy of the Origins planning group and the Convention Center. They say how long Nationals can be based on how long they have rented the space. If they have to be out by 5, then we have to be out by 4:59. Now whether or not the players who went 7-2 "deserve" to be in the top cut or not is strictly a matter of opinion.

Also how fair is it that JR and Sr get top 32 despite having less then 200 players each while masters at 400+ gets the same top cut.

This one is pointing out a perceived inequity in the system. But it does sound like a complaint. (even to me!)

One way to solve the masters problem is to deal with the fact that it is just way too big of an age group. It would help to break it down into two separate age groups say 15-20 and 21+ with no monetary prizes (Scholarships) going to players in the 21+ age group.

That would help from a logistics standpoint of creating 4 Nationals age groups that would have been roughly the same this year instead of 2 age groups under 200 and one over 400.

Feasible or not, this is a suggested solution to a perceived Masters "over-crowding" issue. It would be nice if the Juniors and Seniors age groups finished the same time as the Masters, but in many tournaments here in Washington State, Masters gets 1 or 2 more rounds, leaving a lot of kids wandering about waiting for their parents. (Ah, sweet revenge for all the times the parents have waited around for them, great for parents, BAD for store owners.) It's a better solution than, let's say, doing away with the Master's Division alltogether. ^_^

From a competitiveness factor there is absolutely nothing wrong with the current Masters age group.

I second this one! One thing about having such a large field is that there is consistently great competition.

Bottom line is that Pokemon TCG is POP/PUI's baby, and we can't work them until they die. It's not fair, and (I assume) none of them gets paid enough to work 24 hours a day for 4 days straight. Besides, who would want to deal with Prof Dav with no sleep and too much Mountain Dew? <<<shudder>>> I can see it now!