Should Championship Points Rollover and be like Currency?

[Mekkah]

Because they could a great player, but don't get to attend (and win) a lot of tournaments. With Worlds defined as it is (the people who have won the most that year), they shouldn't have an invitation. If you change the definition of what Worlds is, then you can develop an answer to your question. Competing at Worlds every 3-4 years could be a reward for someone who has played the game well enough during that entire time. There wouldn't be anything sudden about it.

Yes, if you change the definition of Worlds as a very prestigious tournament where the best of the best compete, then this idea makes a lot more sense. But I don't think it makes sense for the World Championships to mean anything but "best of the best". A tournament that rewards people for attending throughout several years is a good idea, but it should be a different one.

The tournament structure shouldn't really try to cater to people who "could" win more if they did more. I do think it should focus less on people who have the money and time to travel around, but a better way to do this would be to increase CPs for Regional Championship winners in the US, for instance.

 

[Glaceon]

Because they could a great player, but don't get to attend (and win) a lot of tournaments. With Worlds defined as it is (the people who have won the most that year), they shouldn't have an invitation. If you change the definition of what Worlds is, then you can develop an answer to your question. Competing at Worlds every 3-4 years could be a reward for someone who has played the game well enough during that entire time. There wouldn't be anything sudden about it.

Or be a player with 100 Play Points and 100 CP... every single year.

 

[Ice'Cold]

As a concept this doesn't really work. Worlds is supposed to be the culmination of the best performing pokemon players of the year. To use an analogy from teaching, say players who make the 400 CP get an "A" grade and those who fall short (350-399?) get a "B" grade. Asking for Championship points to be able to be "banked" or carry over is somewhat like saying if a student earns a "B" grade in all 4 years of high school math, the fact that they performed consistently in their freshman, sophomore, and junior math classes should turn their senior math grade from a B to an A. Is letting "B" grade players into worlds what the goal of the system is?

The only reason for doing something like this would be if we felt like "deserving" or "A skill level" players who consistently get unlucky (*cough*BigChuck01*cough) and fall short of a worlds invite deserve a way to decrease that luck factor, but I think there are enough events players can choose to attend in a single year that we don't have to worry about that problem.

A much better idea to "reward" players who do well and get close to an invite, or who qualify but are not able to attend worlds for other reasons, would be to do something similar to the new Play! Point reward system and send those players exclusive cards, collectible items, or something of the like. Maybe a free prerelease coupon would be nice. The creation of PTCGO really helps as very soon they could also give these as digital card rewards at little or no cost to them.

 

[falcom4ever]

I dunno for rest of the world, but in Europe player rewards will disappear in 2014...

 

[psychup2034]

Because they could a great player, but don't get to attend (and win) a lot of tournaments. With Worlds defined as it is (the people who have won the most that year), they shouldn't have an invitation. If you change the definition of what Worlds is, then you can develop an answer to your question. Competing at Worlds every 3-4 years could be a reward for someone who has played the game well enough during that entire time. There wouldn't be anything sudden about it.

Competing at Worlds every 3-4 year could indeed be a reward for someone who has played the game well enough during that time, but getting 100 CPs over 4 seasons does not fall under any reasonable definition of "played the game well enough."

 

[losjackal]

How many points per year would you consider is well enough?

 

[falcom4ever]

500 for north america
400 for europe
300 for south america
200 for asia-pacific and africa

 

[cf11]

The 500 vs. 400 points does mean something. It means that you should stop going to tournaments after you already have your invite.

That is completely wrong. The whole reason you play the game is for fun. So if I top 4 worlds I should have to sit out a year?

 

[JandPDS]

What is the real major difference between a player with 400 championship points and one with 380? Both had very good season. Maybe the 380 player got donked more often then the 400 player? Why shoud all that work amount for nothing at the end of the year?

What about the junior player who only gets to attend local BR an Cities but now States or regionals because parents either cant or wont take them to more tourneys. So it takes them 2-3 years to qualify for worlds why is there harm in letting them in.

You say that worlds is for the best of he best. But it has never been that. It has always been the those people how qualified and are able to travel to worlds to play. each year there are many players who qualify for worlds yet do not show up to participate in it. Player qualify from contries with National Championship attendance smaller then a typical BR in the States. If a junior wins a National Championship invite by going 3-1 are they really more deserving then a player who only gets to or 6 events a year. But does extreamly well at them and gathers 400 points over 2 or 3 years?

Each year at worlds there are players who go 0-2 or 0-3 and drop. I am fairly certain that if it took a player multiple years to make it into worlds they would not take the experience for granted and would finish the event. Even if their start was less then optimal.

 

[ajhawk]

I have thought about this, but I don't think I like it. One of the biggest problems are the people who have more than 800 points at the end of one year. Say someone like Jay gets T4 at Worlds and had 800 points going into the next season. That would allow him to literally not play a single event for two years, and still go to Worlds.

Also, Worlds is supposed to be the culmination of the year.

 

[BJJ763]

What is the real major difference between a player with 400 championship points and one with 380? Both had very good season. Maybe the 380 plaer got donked more often then the 400 player? Why shoud all that work amount for nothing at the end of the year?

The MLB should allow players to roll over their RBIs. That way the person who comes in second in the Batting Title has a shot of winning the title next year. Just because he didn't get as many At Bats or faced better pitchers shouldn't matter. He should be rewarded for all his hard work too.

 

[GodBlessAmerica]

I have thought about this, but I don't think I like it. One of the biggest problems are the people who have more than 800 points at the end of one year. Say someone like Jay gets T4 at Worlds and had 800 points going into the next season. That would allow him to literally not play a single event for two years, and still go to Worlds.

Also, Worlds is supposed to be the culmination of the year.

In Magic, they have a Hall of Fame, and the people that are a part of this very exclusive group get automatic invites to every pro-tour. IMO all star players like Jay, Pooka, and Ness all deserve to be in this kind of group. Sami Sekkoum, Ross Cawthon, and Yamato also deserve this kind of treatment.

Jay is an incredibly consistent player, with almost 1000CP if I'm not mistaken.
Ness is the first and only two time world champion, and is a role-model for new players.
Pooka Has 4 Nationals Top 4s, and 3 of them were back to back.
Sami is one of the most consistent Worlds competitors of all time, with multiple undefeated swiss records, top 8s, and a 2nd place.
Ross is the only player I can think of that has played in every single world championship, and has performed well multiple times.
And finally, Yamato consistently grinds in because it's so difficult to qualify in Japan, and he is the first World Champion.

These players all deserve to be invited to every world championship at this point, in my opinion. Just because they don't have to work for their invite doesn't mean they'll stop playing altogether. Harrison Leven got his invite and he's been playing this season. Same goes for Jay and Mike Diaz.

 

[falcom4ever]

What is the real major difference between a player with 400 championship points and one with 380? Both had very good season. Maybe the 380 plaer got donked more often then the 400 player? Why shoud all that work amount for nothing at the end of the year?

The real difference ? The real difference is the 400 has an invite and the 380. Everthing in this world has a limite. For 1 meter you can miss a home run, for 30 sec can mean life or death, 9 sec 58 you are Usain Bolt more than 10 sec no body knows your name, etc...

400 is the minimum, a lot of people can have more than 400 is they want.

What this thread is the same as saying that if you spend 16 year in a university you deserve the same diploma as the normal persons that do that in 4 years...

If the 380 player was donked very often, he might then have chosen another deck than RayEels or Blastoise or have build diffrently, it's part of the game !

What about the junior player who only gets to attend local BR an Cities but now States or regionals because parents either cant or wont take them to more tourneys. So it takes them 2-3 years to qualify for worlds why is there harm in letting them in.

It is true that there are 50% less juniors with invite and 20% less seniors in comparision with the masters. But if parents are not willing to let them play seriously, then they will not take them to worlds. The grinder is also a possibility to get the invite to worlds, if they are good they have their chances.

You say that worlds is for the best of he best. But it has never been that. It has always been the those people how qualified and are able to travel to worlds to play. each year there are many players who qualify for worlds yet do not show up to participate in it.

You are wrong. Worlds has always been a tournament for the best. Only the best at Nationals or the TOPx of each continent had a chance to participate.

The players that do not show up are mostly non-north american players, because an intercontinental travel is quite expensive for most of people. The system in this thread would only benefit to americans, and especially US players. I am not sure how interesssting would be a tournament with 80% us players.

Player qualify from contries with National Championship attendance smaller then a typical BR in the States. If a junior wins a National Championship invite by going 3-1 are they really more deserving then a player who only gets to or 6 events a year. But does extreamly well at them and gathers 400 points over 2 or 3 years?

In the US you have more tournaments in a single state than most of the countries in the worlds. It means more chances to have the points. SPT does not even exists in Europe for example. Also a bigger attendance at tournaments means also more Championship Points to be given, that means that for lower junior attendance only a very few will get points. Not talking about that fact that US has Last Chance Championship Points and the other countries not.

It is already too easy for American players to get the points, and the statistics are there :
http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?p=2445645#post2445645

You talk about juniors? Then there you will find that even if National are coming to an end in all the countries, and it has not even started in US, US juniors represent almost 50% of the players with an invite. I don't even mention that fact that most of non-North-American juniors will not come due to the high cost of travel.

Seniors ? Almost 50% too. Masters ? Roughly 25%. And with the national and last chance CP coming, this numbers will significally grow for the US. Also don't forget that at the grinder, most of players will be also North-Americans, due to the geographic proximity.

With your suggested system it would make Worlds more American than ever, and I am not sure that it is for the interesst of the competition.

Each year at worlds there are players who go 0-2 or 0-3 and drop. I am fairly certain that if it took a player multiple years to make it into worlds they would not take the experience for granted and would finish the event. Even if their start was less then optimal.

Players come to worlds and dream to be Champion. After three losts the dream is over. Some people do not accept the defeat as good as you.

Even I hope to make topcut, I know how difficult it is. But I would never drop ! SPAAAAAAARTA !!!

 

[dtrain]

Worlds is supposed to be an exclusive event. Sorry if you didn't qualify for this year but almost getting an invite this year shouldn't mean you should have an advantage for next year. It just wouldn't feel right to play at worlds because it's supposed to be exclusive event that only the best of the best should be able to play, not someone who is almost the best.

 

[Glaceon]

What about the junior player who only gets to attend local BR an Cities but now States or regionals because parents either cant or wont take them to more tourneys. So it takes them 2-3 years to qualify for worlds why is there harm in letting them in.

If you are saying they deserve it for their commitment, wouldn't going to more than just BRs show more commitment than going to two BRs and two Cities every year?

 

[Otaku]

Because they could a great player, but don't get to attend (and win) a lot of tournaments. With Worlds defined as it is (the people who have won the most that year), they shouldn't have an invitation. If you change the definition of what Worlds is, then you can develop an answer to your question. Competing at Worlds every 3-4 years could be a reward for someone who has played the game well enough during that entire time. There wouldn't be anything sudden about it.

I think there might be come messaging issues here... or perhaps I am just reading things wrong.

The point of Worlds is to allow the best players of the year to face off for the title. Inherent limitations means a prolific but less qualified player can make it in... sometimes at the cost of a more qualified but less prolific player. A "reward" for coming in short of Worlds should be a separate thing than getting someone into Worlds; a consolation Prize, not breaking the system even more.

The "Hall of Fame" idea has merit for helping long time players that have proven they have the core skills of the game remain prominent without having to constantly "re-prove" themselves. I would also consider expanding Last Chance Qualifiers/Grinder events; such tournaments would need to be extra grueling so that players aren't lucking into a win... but if you can only attend two tournaments a year, a Grinder gets you into Worlds.

After all... if we dwell on "points" to much, we miss that it a person what just misses the point cut off for Worlds and is honestly one of the best players in the Worlds isn't fair... and it still isn't fair if s/he has had a busy year, is still one of the best, and has zero points.

 

[FunnyBear]

Or maybe TPCi just doesn't see any reason for this pointless action.... Yup that's it.

fixed
.....................

 

[JandPDS]

The MLB should allow players to roll over their RBIs. That way the person who comes in second in the Batting Title has a shot of winning the title next year. Just because he didn't get as many At Bats or faced better pitchers shouldn't matter. He should be rewarded for all his hard work too.

They do let you roll over our RBI's and HR's and everything it is called Career RBI list and Career HR list.

 

[Otaku]

They do let you roll over our RBI's and HR's and everything it is called Career RBI list and Career HR list.

Isn't that technically a separate stat?

Kind of like how a car's odometer will have a "lifetime" tally as well as a trip tally you can clear out when you wish, so that you can keep track of two separate but related figures, due to the differing significance of each?

...really asking, as I don't know baseball beyond the basics.

 

[LunarWolf21]

I think there should be some sort of consolation prize for those who come close, and I really sympathize with people who can't make it because of traveling expenses. But the big reason why carrying over points would be bad is that the format usually has significant changes every year, and the players should have to prove themselves in the current format, not format(s) from year(s) ago.