Points Required to Qualify for the World Championships: 500 CP for Masters? WHAT!

[jeffrey123]

isn't US nationals a 'prestigious goal' that's 'accessible to the player base'?

Think. Then post.

 

[BlazeTK]

One question I can't help but ask, though, is why are the amount of invitations given out dependent on the venue? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Shouldn't TPCi determine the "right" amount of invitations (based on budget and player demand) and then choose the venue accordingly?

This all day long.

 

[yoshi1001]

Points Required to Qualify for the World Championships: 500 CP for Masters? W...

I got the impression (this is supposition on my part) that part of the reason for the split in regional dates was to give PTOs more flexibility in venues. Being locked down to a single date is hard on planning. While having extra dates gives more opportunities than before, drawing a direct line to the CP requirement seems pretty shaky to me.

Also, I would NEVER accuse the folks at TPCI of not working to further the game. They may not always make the right decision (or may not be able to make the one they'd like), but I know them far too well to accuse them of wanting a mass exodus (and I know many of you criticizing the system know that too).

 

[Mykel]

would US nationals be considered a more prestigious event if the PP requirement (which people complained bitterly about last year, as i recall) was raised? or if there was a CP requirement for entry?

No. The reason why people complained bitterly about PP is because it's about quantity, not quality. You could play in a regional, win it, and not be able to attend nats. PP says, 'this many tournaments, it doesn't matter how you do'. That's not prestigious at all.

I don't appreciate your poorly thought and sarcastic remarks when both sides here are having a very mature and intelligent discussion. Stop trying to provoke people.

 

[Pablo]

The prestigiousness comes from the name: WORLD Championship. The INTERNATIONAL atmosphere. Only the US care about USA Nats, like each country cares about theirs and that's it. Any Nations Nationals will NEVER replace or attain the prestigiousness of Worlds.

 

[deckmaster]

As I mentioned in a post about a year or so ago, the introduction of the CP system was going to require multiple adjustments of the overall system until it was tuned to where we felt it needed to be.

Last year (2013 Season), we discussed what we thought the targets should be at length, and used the data that we had to make our best guess. Several of us, myself included, felt that 400 was too low, and we should set the target between 450-500 and assess the number of invites shortly after Nationals, and move the number down, if we felt the invite quantities were too low. Doing this would have obviously been viewed more positively by the player-base than going the other way.

However, because Worlds was scheduled in a much larger space than previous events, there was also a concern from management that it would feel "empty" and the entire team (not just OP, but events, marketing, PR) were tasked with doing everything possible to make it feel full.

With that, we decided we'd set the target at 400, and see what happened. This would give us good data to tune the numbers in the future, and would likely "over invite" from our previous events, which was fine. We were also aware that there would be complaints, such as those in this thread, regarding our readjustment of the targets when the time came. It feels like we are taking something away this year, rather than like we gave you something last year.

Were you at worlds, you may have noticed that the back of the tournament hall had a large pipe and drape section hiding part of the room. This was a pretty large amount of space, draped off to make things feel more cozy, and the hall feel fuller. This was done even though we had far more attendees than ever before. That's just how large that space was.

Our goal is, and has pretty much always been, 128 players per age division in attendance at Worlds, and there are a number of factors that have to go into how we're going to get there. This isn't just entirely about the number of invites awarded, it's about the location, the estimated attendance rate and invitations and how they work together.

Hawaii, for example, always throws a wrench into things because there's much higher player attrition from the number of total invitations because of the expense and distance for travelers, particularly Europeans.

Past years, our invitation numbers were between 120-150 per age division (including LCQ, JP and KR and the winners from the previous year), and our high attendance from those years was about 133 (for any division). As the years have gone on, our attendance rates vs. invitations have steadily increased, leading to adjustments along the way. For example, when we stopped passing down ranking invitations from those that had already been earned at a National, or not earned by someone not opted in.

Our total percentage of attendees vs. invitations now runs at 80%-86% in total. However, our breakdowns by region are much, much different.

Our attendance by age division respectively (JR, SR, MA) was:
NA: 90%, 94%, 93%
EU: 74%, 63%, 88%
LA: 57%, 64%, 53%
APAC: 50%, 76%, 64%

It's worth noting that due to whatever reasons, connectivity, access, etc. that JR and SR players in LA and APAC have a very low account activation rate, which dramatically reduces the number of player eligible to receive invitations. So, for example, the 50% attendance rate for APAC Juniors was a total of 4 players of 8 invitations.

Given the location of this year's World Championships, we would anticipate that NA attendance rates will remain similar, EU attendance rates will increase, and that LA and APAC are likely to remain similar, or increase slightly. Our goal is to bring invite rates to a level similar with past years, which we don't feel is too low. At 500 CP, we'd have seen about 30 North American Masters last year. That's only 10 off of the invite rate of previous years, and it's not unreasonable to expect that 5-10 more players would earn invitations given that another 13 NA Masters were within 50 points of 500, and that a high rate of attendees would come from the 30-40 invitees. We saw 60 EU Masters in that range, and at an attendance rate of about 88%, we'd hope to see about 50 in attendance.

Numbers were adjusted for the Senior division similarly to bring the total attendance down slightly from 2013, with Junior attendance at 118 for 2013, we did not feel that any adjustment was necessary.

I understand that the above will not satisfy many of you, but I felt it appropriate to at the very least address this thread from the OP/TPCi standpoint so that you'd at least understand some of the reasons why this has been done.

Thank you,
Prof_Dav

Can you and your team at PTCGO add tournament support with Championship Points going to the winner on PTCGO? That would help many players and mitigate the costs and other problems Pokemon TCG has encountered because it grew to a point beyond sustainability.

 

[pokeMATHter]

The problem with PTCGO is you don't really know who is at the other end. A parent with a Junior who is close to an invite might be tempted to give his son or daughter advice while they play, or even play for them.

It is also a common worry for those of us who teach on-line classes. Is that really the person registered from the class taking the test?

 

[KeNTa_FiNe]

New CP structure makes it IMPOSSIBLE to qualify from Mexico =(

Hello,
My name is Roberto, I’ve been playing the TCG for 7 years (locally and internationally) and I would to share my opinion and point of view and my inconformity regarding the amount of CP required to qualify for Worlds from Mexico.

In Mexico the number of tournaments is very limited, in the sense that not everyone can attend some that are very far away (living in Mexico City, going to Guadalajara, Monterrey, is not feasible). The cost can go from US$70-200 just for transport, plus food, hotel, etc. Along with a 7-12 hour trip on a bus/car AND going doesn’t guarantee of course that you’ll do well and the investment will pay off to reach those 500 CP’s. A regular player can go to 2-3 CC’s and maybe 1 or 2 States tops, and that tells you how very few possibilities we have to actually get enough points.

We have few events, and unfortunately we don’t even get Regionals like the US or Canada; there have been occasions where Mexican players have to travel out of the country in order to get enough points (once again without any guarantee that their investment will pay off). Last year only 2 players from Mexico made it past de 400 mark (not counting Nationals Top 4 of course) and they made an incredible investment. One of them (Miguel Lopez) had a sick season and won 50% of the tournaments he attended. The other (Josue Palomino, Top 16 this year) had placed Top 32 at Worlds 2012 and had a head start on points.
My main point is, Mexico has always been under the same region as the US and Canada under a HUGE disadvantage, and these changes are very unmotivating to many players as it’s not only about points required (which seems impossible), but the cost associated to attend and now PLAY IN the tournaments.
I would like for the points to be seriously reconsidered as not only am I, but several other players, very upset and share the same point of view, and we would like to be taken into account.

Thanks for reading.

P. D. My friend Pablo Meza helped me to translate large part of this publication because my English is not very good, thanks Pablo.

 

[JandPDS]

I just curious who they want to play in Masters this year? The money cost requirement for Masters will discourage and drive away lots of newer and casual players from participating. The huge increase in championship cost requirement for Worlds will discourage and drive away lots of veteran elite players from participating.

So if we thin out the newer casual players from the player pool at the same time we thin out the serious players from the player pool who exactly will be left to play at the events and collect the 500 Championship Points?

 

[Mystery Thing]

Shouldn't TPCi determine the "right" amount of invitations (based on budget and player demand) and then choose the venue accordingly?

That would require them knowing exactly how OP is going to be functioning and exactly how many people will both get invites and actually show up a minimum of a year, perhaps even longer in advance. It's not like the venue gets booked after Nationals once they know how many people have invites.

The venue will always have to come first, just because of booking requirements.

 

[JandPDS]

That would require them knowing exactly how OP is going to be functioning and exactly how many people will both get invites and actually show up a minimum of a year, perhaps even longer in advance. It's not like the venue gets booked after Nationals once they know how many people have invites.

The venue will always have to come first, just because of booking requirements.

That makes zero sense, PTO's have to book States and Regionals with a greatly less idea in advance of what the Participation of the event will be then the organizers of worlds have. And PTO's manage to pull that off successfully each year.

Really it is not hard to find a venue big enough for Worlds in Major Cities, it is not that tough of a task. If a venue for a 400+ person regionals can be found in a place like Salem Oregon, then I don't think finding a venue for a 300+ person worlds in our Nations Capital will be very challenging.

 

[pokeMATHter]

Actually PTOs have a pretty good idea what attendance is going to be. The Washington State Championship has been slowly growing over the past several years from 250 to just over 300 players. I'm guessing this year it will be pretty similar. Even though I am expecting a little smaller number of players, we will likely need about the same amount of space. I anticipate fewer poke-dads and poke-moms will be playing, so I will need a larger parent area.

I also took a chance this year and reserved the room nearly a year in advance. I made the reservation for the Washington State Championship last April for the event this coming March, making an educated guess on the window of available dates set by Pokemon. Of the three weekends for states, the room was only available one of the weekends. I really hope B.C. and Oregon can schedule around us.

In the past, we have waited to find space until January, and have ended up at less-then-ideal locations. Remember the King Oscar hotel, where each age division was in a separate room, and because we booked the Masters room last minute, they didn't turn on the AC? We had a similar problem the following year at the Tacoma Convention Center, where we put Seniors in the smaller room? Ideally we would run all three age groups in the same area.

If you want one of the best places in town, and you have only one or two weekends to choose from, you need to be looking close to a year in advance, if not earlier.

In putting together the Spring Regional, I really didn't have a choice of locations. The Seattle Center, the Tacoma Convention Center, the Fair Grounds in Puyallup, and all hotels in the greater Tacoma area with a enough conference space were booked. The Washington State Convention Center in Seattle had only one Ballroom available, so I took it. And this is 8 months out.

I know your experience is with Sakura Con and it may seem that Sakura Con has no problem booking the convention center. But Sakura Con has an advantage of always being in the same place on the same weekend, so the Convention Center staff anticipate the request, and probably have penciled in the Con several years out. Pokemon Worlds keeps changing locations, so there hasn't been the opportunity to develop a long-term relationship with the venue.

 

[Electric Spider]

I think this might be the year I'll be taking a break from Pokemon.

 

[FirestormXVI]

I think Salem, Oregon might be easier to book for Pokemon because I can't imagine anything else happening in Salem, Oregon

That would require them knowing exactly how OP is going to be functioning and exactly how many people will both get invites and actually show up a minimum of a year, perhaps even longer in advance. It's not like the venue gets booked after Nationals once they know how many people have invites.

The venue will always have to come first, just because of booking requirements.

I think what Jason meant was that we'd prefer it if the folks at P!P designed the tournament structure for the season and set an estimated attendee number then booked a venue. This is similar to what PTOs do for their events. They book a venue based on the date and expected attendance. They do not book a venue then change entry requirements to control attendance.

I recognize that there's a lot of uncertainty being in a new area for Pokemon but from a player's perspective, the way that things were done is frustrating. Washington, DC will be interesting considering the qualification method combined with the population of that area. We were already set to have the largest Last Chance Qualifier in history, but this is going to make Friday even longer.

 

[losjackal]

Mr. Schwimmer, Thanks for the peek into TPCi's mindset. One question I can't help but ask, though, is why are the amount of invitations given out dependent on the venue? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Shouldn't TPCi determine the "right" amount of invitations (based on budget and player demand) and then choose the venue accordingly?

The venue is NOT the primary constraint. The decision to shoot for 128 is. That is the "right" number in their minds. Last year was an exception because of convention space that was exceptionally large, and TPCi was fully aware "that there would be complaints, such as those in this thread, regarding our readjustment of the targets when the time came. It feels like we are taking something away this year, rather than like we gave you something last year."

(Now, I do acknowledge and agree that as the game and playerbase grows, that maybe the number ought to be more than 128. That is another debate though, because as Dave said there are complex considerations that vary per region regarding account activations, attrition from invitation, chosen city, etc. that govern how many people show up vs. how many get invited. Regarding North America, given that Worlds is in Washington D.C., it's probably safe to say that a high % of masters who get invited will indeed attend, especially given the volume of good players in the right half of the USA.)


Now to my point: with the constraint of 128, let's compare the two ways it could go:

Scenario 1) To guarantee a certain number, they could go back to Top 40. How many Cities and States and Regionals do you need to go to and win to be in Top 40 and the end? It's impossible to know now or even significantly into the season, because it's all relative. You could be in 20th place by February but if it's evenly spread, you could easily fall below Top 40 if you don't win much more. So, you simply need to earn as many points as you can until you have enough of a lead that it's mathematically impossible to miss out in Top 40, or you feel safe enough to risk it.

Scenario 2) With an established bar of 500, there is a definite line where players can feel safe. Until you cross that line, you must still earn as many points as you can. If not enough players cross the line, TPCi has the ability to lower the bar.

My question is, what's the difference?

 

[FincastlePokemon2]

Scenario 1) To guarantee a certain number, they could go back to Top 40. How many Cities and States and Regionals do you need to go to and win to be in Top 40 and the end? It's impossible to know now or even significantly into the season, because it's all relative. You could be in 20th place by February but if it's evenly spread, you could easily fall below Top 40 if you don't win much more. So, you simply need to earn as many points as you can until you have enough of a lead that it's mathematically impossible to miss out in Top 40, or you feel safe enough to risk it.

Scenario 2) With an established bar of 500, there is a definite line where players can feel safe. Until you cross that line, you must still earn as many points as you can. If not enough players cross the line, TPCi has the ability to lower the bar.

My question is, what's the difference?[/COLOR]

Frankly, from a Poke-parent perspective, I like Scenario 2 MUCH better. The first year our son (then a junior) got a World's invite, we weren't sure until after Nationals, at which point there was nothing more that we could do as parents to support his goal. This year, our daughter (a junior) was inching closer as the year went by, and we were able to offer additional travel opportunities for Battle Roads as well as planning our stay at Nationals to include the LCP tournament in an effort to support her goal of getting qualified. This year, we didn't make it, but we KNEW when we walked into the hall at the Convention Center what would have to happen if she were to make it. If we were still on the top 40 ELO system, we would not have known (without some significantly "higher" math than I usually do) until even after we got home. A finite goal, whether you feel it is achieveable or not, is signficantly easier to grasp and strive for than one that is continually changing.

We also know of at least one person who did skip Nationals this year because he had already qualified for Worlds.

 

[losjackal]

Tpo 40 ELO was dreadful! But the first year of Championship Points was still Top 40. There was a thread here when it switched that there was a collective sigh of relief of not having to "keep up" with the rest of the competitive players anymore once a threshold was reached.

 

[Vegeta ss4]

The issue is NOT about 500 CP to get into worlds. It will be hard because you need a near flawless season to qualify. The real issue is 500 CP makes it so we have no life other than Pokemon. We will be required to go to almost every possible tournament to just have a chance to get invited to worlds. I cant afford to go to 9 Regionals and 10 cities 4 states 10 LC plus nationals and then somehow pay for Worlds if I get the invite. You realize all that traveling and hotel stays and food expenses on top if the fact that I will no longer have a social life, or a JOB from taking vacation so much. This system is designed for the player base who live with mommy and daddy without any bills who STILL relieve and allowance. I HAVE QUIT THIS GAME, the way things are being ran I can't afford it anymore.

 

[losjackal]

How would your travel and competitive plans be different if TPCi said it would be Top 40 CP instead?

Because if there are other players who can afford to travel and compete nearly as much as the opportunities allow, you still need to spend all of that money and time to keep up.

 

[Vegeta ss4]

I wasn't talking about Top 40 CP, just 500 in general.