ryanvergel
New Member
Because the base is 1. Hong Kong and Malta both receive 1 invite. Why does Slovenia get 2? They're not even paid, lol. Why not just have 1, so that we have more legitimacy for the event?
Sentiments after Nationals
- Thread starter ryanvergel
- Start date
- Status
Because the base is 1. Hong Kong and Malta both receive 1 invite. Why does Slovenia get 2? They're not even paid, lol. Why not just have 1, so that we have more legitimacy for the event?
NoPoke
Active Member
Neither you nor I have any idea why two is the right number for Slovenia. One too many? Why do you say that, assuming you accept that you are as ignorant of the local circumstances of Slovenian OP as I am.
paint panic
New Member
I can't believe someone is actually backing this analogy up instead of calling it out. Isn't comparing Worlds to the House of Representatives ignoring the fact that there is a second, upper house of the United States Congress in which each state receives two representatives regardless of population?
yoyofsho16
New Member
...because they get 2 invites out of 13 people? That is ridiculous, I don't care what their "circumstance" is.
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
Why the hate for Slovenia?
If Afghanistan was being given extra invites, I could understand . . .
If Afghanistan was being given extra invites, I could understand . . .
ryanvergel
New Member
It's not hate. I am just asking why they have 2, when they aren't even paid, and they have so few players? It can't be because there is some base amount- the base amount is 1. It can't be because they have the funds, because they aren't paid. It can't be because their numbers warrant the amount, because the facts show otherwise. So why do they have 2 invites?
ShadowCard
Active Member
Maybe it has to do with their OPs. Like NoPoke has pointed out, we know very little about them both.
Would the parents of US junior and senior division players be just as likely to take their children to Worlds without a travel voucher, or did you just offer up the Masters division travel vouchers as a sacrifice?
It's when you say intelligent stuff like that makes me want to learn more in school
ryanvergel
New Member
Maybe it has to do with their OPs. Like NoPoke has pointed out, we know very little about them both.
Would the parents of US junior and senior division players be just as likely to take their children to Worlds without a travel voucher, or did you just offer up the Masters division travel vouchers as a sacrifice?
It's when you say intelligent stuff like that makes me want to learn more in school
I meant, we could add +8 invites to Nats, making it t16 invites/4 paid trips, and the lack of travel vouchers for the other 12 wouldn't be as bad as other countries- so the people would still usually go, especially after getting t16 at nats and likely getting nice stuff.
Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:
I never said Slovenia should have less. I simply asked why they have 2. I can't think of a really good reason for it.
The trips are from the LD, so you can't keep including them. Same likely goes for the scholarship money. We are discussing INVITES- the only thing that we can actually discuss. Money for trips/scholarships, which you for some reason keep bringing up, is a non-factor as a different party is responsible for that.
Unless something changed in the past year. Last year it was the LD (or whatever country entity) who had control over trips and scholarships and prizes pretty much.
You also keep suggesting that the US getting more invites necessitates another country getting less. There is no line of reasoning to think this.
I don't care if you give Slovenia fifty invites, but we should also consider ourselves too. I have not ONCE suggested taking ANYTHING away from any country. I have only argued to change the US system. You keep insisting and arguing that I am trying to take away from other countries when that is not the case.
What would be wrong with giving all regional winners an tripless invite? Would that not really help the US and make it more fair to get into worlds for our players? It doesn't take anything away, it just adds a bit more swag and a few more cards to be printed up by Pokemon. What would be wrong with making the NA zone have 40 rating invites?
Is the only reason the NA zone is being neglected so that NA/USA has fewer participants at worlds so it isn't as American-heavy? Really? I've been playing for quite a few years now, and I really want to know why we have less invites, and so much less in terms of invites. Whyyyyyy?
Last edited:
Let's see how much growth the game would have if that became the case.
Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:
Prime, it was simply an example of representation based on a population.
If you come up with an example based on population, feel free to post it.
Last edited:
NoPoke
Active Member
T16 invites at USA nats masters looks like a good fit to me for the scale of the event. But I'm struggling to come up with a compelling arguement. One that would make it hard for POP not to allocate 16 invites at USA nats . The best I've managed so far is that USA nationals in masters has by all practical measures turned into a T128 cut. A size which is begging for some kind of increase in invites if only to make the finish line not quite so far away. But it is a weak arguement. All POP have to do is say that they disagree and I have no response. Even if POP say that they will consider it, I'm still left with nothing further if I'm told later that there will not be an increase.
Even with a compelling arguement POP are still making the decisions. But just personally I feel better if I've made a solid case for change and not a weak one.
Even with a compelling arguement POP are still making the decisions. But just personally I feel better if I've made a solid case for change and not a weak one.
I would think representation based on number of players as a percentage of worldwide Pokemon player would be a reasonable thing.
And if a county has participation that is too small to warrant representation, combine several of those countries into a "region."
If England has 25% of the worldwide Pokemon players, then England should have 25% of the players at World.
Likewise, if the US has 50% of the Pokemon players in the world, the US representation should be 50%.
How is that not the right thing to do?
And if a county has participation that is too small to warrant representation, combine several of those countries into a "region."
If England has 25% of the worldwide Pokemon players, then England should have 25% of the players at World.
Likewise, if the US has 50% of the Pokemon players in the world, the US representation should be 50%.
How is that not the right thing to do?
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
If 25% of the players were from England, should Worlds be in England 25% of the time?
Seems fair to me. It's the only way those players would actually be able to afford to go.
Seems fair to me. It's the only way those players would actually be able to afford to go.
right, lets give 50% of the worlds invites to the us, 30% to japan, and let the whole rest of the world fight over the remaining 20%.
THAT's definitely the way to grow OP worldwide, yep...
*sarcasm detector implodes*
'mom =/
THAT's definitely the way to grow OP worldwide, yep...
*sarcasm detector implodes*
'mom =/
Seems fair to me as well.
So ur saying theoretically, we should give a country of 1 person the same amount of invites as the us? for the sake of being more international?
SlimeyGrimey
New Member
By having more invites in smaller OP areas I think POP is increasing the likelihood of growth. If it is relatively easy to earn prizes it will be easier to attract new players since they are more likely to believe they have a shot of winning them. If you could somehow make it just as hard to earn an invite in Slovenia as in the US, then the potential for growth would be pretty much non-existant, no? The US already has a healthy player base that is growing steadily, so it's not really a concern. I'm pretty sure POP wants a very diverse Worlds, not one dominated by American players.
Implode all you want. And keep your sarcasm to yourself.
We have a saying at work - Keep your BEST employees happy.
The same holds true here. Who keeps Pokemon going? Is it Belgium? Is it Denmark? Do they have more players in OP?
And do you REALLY think the World Championship is the mechanism by which OP grows? This game grows by the TOs around the world every weekend. Not by one tournament.
BINGO! you win, sir...
'mom
NoPoke
Active Member
But who are POP's best employees? The USA PTO with a ready made player base or the Slovenia OP manager that has a much harder task to grow a game from close to zero?
I am not knocking any USA PTOs here. Just that whenever anyone says BEST you have to ask the terms of reference.
Just off the top of my head I'd say that Portugal and Germany have a strong case for the BEST employees.
- Status