"We" meaning who, the USA players?
'mom
'mom
The Big Events Are Coming. Play To Win.
- Thread starter Flaming_Spinach
- Start date
- Status
ryanvergel
New Member
Yes, the US players.
*shrugs* It's Worlds, not a US-plus-a-few-'other'-players event.
Be glad we have that many invites: after all, 'Worlds" could have been run like the old Tropical Mega Battles with one or two players from each age group (-10 and 11-14 ONLY) from each country...
Seems like what were previously the 'big' fish in the little pond are starting to feel the pressure? The pond is getting bigger, deeper and more populated, and the formerly 'big' fish are discovering they aren't quite so 'big' anymore and have more competition both among themselves and the newer fish in the pond for the big prizes/events...
JMHO,
'mom
Be glad we have that many invites: after all, 'Worlds" could have been run like the old Tropical Mega Battles with one or two players from each age group (-10 and 11-14 ONLY) from each country...
Seems like what were previously the 'big' fish in the little pond are starting to feel the pressure? The pond is getting bigger, deeper and more populated, and the formerly 'big' fish are discovering they aren't quite so 'big' anymore and have more competition both among themselves and the newer fish in the pond for the big prizes/events...
JMHO,
'mom
Professor_Chris
Active Member
Alright, I understand that Worlds is an elite event, and I understand the Championship series progression.
But, I don't understand how taking down a Regional Championship (13 of them) can't qualify you as an elite player worthy of a spot at Worlds while a semi-local Gym Challenge (53 or so last year, thats 13 more than there are State Championships!) does.
The progressions of 1337ness (highest to lowest in the US) is as follows:
Worlds (1)->Nationals (1)->Regionals (13)->State Championships (40-ish)->Gym Challenge (53-ish)->City Championship (a whole bunch!)
State Championships seem like a harder event to win than a Gym Challenge since there are less people winning them due to less events. Winning a Regional is much harder than winning either of them. Last year there were only 12 people in the 15+ in the US who won a Regional (I won two. :tongue
. I think those 12 people demonstrated they they are indeed 1337 enough to be in Worlds.
If Worlds is supposed to be an elite event where invites are at a premium, wouldn't it make more sense for the more elite events to give out invites rather than less elite events?
But, I don't understand how taking down a Regional Championship (13 of them) can't qualify you as an elite player worthy of a spot at Worlds while a semi-local Gym Challenge (53 or so last year, thats 13 more than there are State Championships!) does.
The progressions of 1337ness (highest to lowest in the US) is as follows:
Worlds (1)->Nationals (1)->Regionals (13)->State Championships (40-ish)->Gym Challenge (53-ish)->City Championship (a whole bunch!)
State Championships seem like a harder event to win than a Gym Challenge since there are less people winning them due to less events. Winning a Regional is much harder than winning either of them. Last year there were only 12 people in the 15+ in the US who won a Regional (I won two. :tongue
. I think those 12 people demonstrated they they are indeed 1337 enough to be in Worlds.If Worlds is supposed to be an elite event where invites are at a premium, wouldn't it make more sense for the more elite events to give out invites rather than less elite events?
Professor Dav
Master Trainer
ryanvergel said:
No, we don't fail to realize that at all.
In addition, what you may fail to realize is that there were over 200 players from the US participating in Worlds last year out of a total of approximately 398 players. You also are only pointing out that the US has lost a few invites, but not that the total invitation numbers will remain the same this year. Meaning, that we are keeping the attendance levels the same, just not for 'you'.
Also, our data doesn't support the assumption that the biggest growth is in the US. International player base, and sales numbers are up consistently over the last several years, so what about them?
Whether or not it's you, or others saying this, I'll reiterate that the general tone I've gotten from this entire topic is extremely ethnocentric, and self concerned. You want the world to be better represented, but not if that means the US loses invites. So, the only assumption left is that you want the total attendance increased across the board to create this balance.
You really need to look no further than Magic: The Gathering to see a number of flaws in your arguments. The DCI has more players than POP, likely by several thousand. However, to my knowledge, their World Championships has never exceeded 256 total players. Last year, our World Championships was 398 players+. It simply does not matter to us that we have 3 age groups, and that 'your' age group didn't have 256 players invited.
We pull our invite numbers based on our goals for our World championship event, regardless of total players in the system. In addition, IF we were to ever consider something along these lines, it would follow that we would want to see numbers close, or equal to the total player base for a game such as Magic in EACH age group that would have a World Championship attendance at that level. So, assuming that MTG has 100,000 players worldwide (hypothetical number), we'd be looking to have 300,000 players worldwide before even considering that type of a move. Even if that were the case, it would have to be discussed as to whether that truly met the goals from brand and OP for what the World Championships should be.
Prof. Dav
Flaming_Spinach
Feature Editor
SD PokéMom said:
Oh please. WOTC didn't care about the popularity of the game. They killed the game because they simply DIDN'T CARE if people played or not.
PUI is smarter than that.
@ Professor Chris: AMEN TO THAT! An excelent summary of this thread so far.
Professor Dav
Master Trainer
Professor_Chris said:Alright, I understand that Worlds is an elite event, and I understand the Championship series progression.
But, I don't understand how taking down a Regional Championship (13 of them) can't qualify you as an elite player worthy of a spot at Worlds while a semi-local Gym Challenge (53 or so last year, thats 13 more than there are State Championships!) does.
The progressions of 1337ness (highest to lowest in the US) is as follows:
Worlds (1)->Nationals (1)->Regionals (13)->State Championships (40-ish)->Gym Challenge (53-ish)->City Championship (a whole bunch!)
State Championships seem like a harder event to win than a Gym Challenge since there are less people winning them due to less events. Winning a Regional is much harder than winning either of them. Last year there were only 12 people in the 15+ in the US who won a Regional (I won two. :tongue
If Worlds is supposed to be an elite event where invites are at a premium, wouldn't it make more sense for the more elite events to give out invites rather than less elite events?
Valid points all Chris, and none of these have escaped us. You guys have to realize that we're already doing our planning for '07 and '08 NOW. We're often aware that things we implement in the short term may be sub-optimal for any number of reasons; mistakes on our part (yes, we do acknowledge when we don't get it right), unforseen circumstances, or an interim move as part of a transition, or others.
There are a great number of reasons that we do what we do, and some of them are clearer than others to our fans for any number of reasons. All I can say at this point is, the invitational structure this year isn't perfect, but it's exactly what it needs to be to make the invite structure 'work' at this point.
Prof. Dav
It may or may not be that WotC didn't care about the game (certainly different levels of the company did have different views of it!), but it's totally beside the point when it comes to TMBs.Flaming_Spinach said:
TMBs were TPC's event, top to bottom.
Japanese run, start to finish.
The only input WotC had was in selecting the specific individuals to receive invites. Not the number of invites, nor the age ranges.
F_S: WotC didn't have ANYTHING to do with the TMB other than determining what player (via ranking) got the invite; the TMB was _TPC's_ 'show'.
[edit: whoops, 'Pop's post wasn't there when I began my post...]
'mom
[edit: whoops, 'Pop's post wasn't there when I began my post...]
'mom
a_shy_girl_1999
New Member
when i said over 100 invites, i didnt mean just the US ... this is "worlds" ... we should consider the other countries as well... in the US i think we get the most invites compared to other countries... unless you can name another country that gets at least 50 invites .... if the US had 100 invites alone that would be just crazy ... and then could it realy be called the "world championships"? IMO, no ... the other countries should have more chances too ...
as for the grinder, i thoulght the top cut is based on how many open spots there are?
as for the grinder, i thoulght the top cut is based on how many open spots there are?
Flaming_Spinach
Feature Editor
a_shy_girl_1999 said:
Not any more. This year it is 8. No more and no less.
Allow me to correct myself... 30 people in 15+. I apologize for the confusion. Average attendance for Gyms was 58 if you total all age divisions. Thanks for proving my point though that Gym Challenges are lame and not worthy of invites to Worlds. I'm not dismissing the fact that there are 2 other age divisions but the Grinder is pretty much an auto-in for any good player in 14-.Professor Dav said:
I think you are agreeing with me here that Gym Challenges don't fit with the natural flow of invitations. They're completely out of place and I've already stated my opinion on the level of competition. Gym Challenges should be equal to Cities, depending on the area.Professor Dav said:
I think we need more trips TO Nationals and then more invites from Nationals to Worlds.
So take those Gym Challenge rewards and forward most of them to Nationals. Take the remaining Gym Challenge money and distribute that throughout the country for trips to Nationals. That, to me, is the most logical way to do it. Earning a trip to the World Championship from a very small, local event makes no sense to me. That'd be like if you won the NFC West and automatically got to the Super Bowl.
EDIT: My post is confusing what I'm saying is use most of the Gym Challenge money to get people TO Nationals. Then use the rest of the money to increase the invites from Nationals TO Worlds. Basically, make the National Championship the premier event and the biggest source of invites. As it stands now, Gym Challenges send more people to Worlds than Nationals and that's just illogical.
Also, I don't me to come off as arrogant or rude, I just think that we've all accepted the fact that Gym Challenges are not equal to most other events, competition-wise, and yet I don't anticipate change in PUIs distribution of invites. Its like we all know that its not quite right but nobody wants to change it.
Last edited:
Professor Dav
Master Trainer
TacC said:
I disagree that Gyms are a 'joke'. But I do agree that they aren't set correctly in the structure at this time. I also explained why things like this happen, and that we're already working on the next two years of event schedules at this time.
Prof. Dav
Professor_Chris
Active Member
Fair enough. I know you guys don't just pull this stuff out of you-...thin air.Professor Dav said:
I was just voicing my concerns with the current invitational structure. Granted, I'm probably biased.I'm an American, I don't like the invites in the US being decreased.
I won two Regionals, I don't like the removal of Worlds invites from Regionals.
I'm actually okay with one and done. It seems the lesser of the two evils. It's one thing to have someone running around snatching up all the titles for themselves, it's another to have someone running around helping all their buddies get trips.
I think it's going to be very interesting to see what happens next year.
And moreso the year after.[EDIT]
This is pretty much the only thing that sets Gyms apart from Cities. Now, say if you offered the Trip at States (which would help assure a balanced representation of States in Worlds) then they'd become more competitive due to the nature of the prize. But, as it is, it's probably harder to win a States which will still draw in the surrounding areas for the $300 than it is to win a Gym, simply because there are more Gyms.PokePop said:
This is an idea I was personally thinking about...
Let's say that State Championships become exclusive to State residents and offer a Trip to Worlds. Now, there are currently 10 States without a State Championship, some of them have leagues and some of them don't. Let's say a minimum active playerbase is required to have a State Championship. If a State fails to meet the minimum the top ranked player in a State will recieve the award. This assures each State gains representation. Now, obviously, some States have more great players than others, while some States might have NO good players. This would mean a lot of unworthy players on a National scale would make it to Worlds, but they can be assumed to be the best of their State. [insert shot at some European countries]
Then we'd have Nationals to award more trips to States with more good players. However, if we take the T8, that's 58 people right there with places like California pretty much left out completely. So, maybe a few more invites and a Regional-type event are in order to award States with more good players around the Nation.
My idea is flawed, but it is something that was just bouncing around in my head that I feel I wanted to share with everyone.
Last edited:
Articjedi
Active Member
TacC said:
The real problem with channeling all of the invites gyms into nationals would be that it would be incredibly biased toward that particular region wherever nats is held. Now only players that are able to travel to nats, or the ones who live closeby are the ones who will make it to worlds. However, if that extra money were put into say invites to worlds via regionals, it might work a little better for those of us who don't live near columbus.
Some things:
1. If Nationals is supposed to be THE open event in a given country, why are there less opportunities to gain some travel money to get there? (this is especially regarding the West Coast) 1st Place at States and 1st Place at Regionals are the only opportunites for this. Last year, there was a travel allowance for 1st at States, 1st AND 2nd at Regionals, it was only $300 for all of them and not a paid trip, but it was also less orientated around getting 1st place. Also, it IS in Ohio every year, yes, Worlds is in Califronia for the 2nd straight year, but just because you can go there doesn't mean you can play, you still have to earn an invite.
2. Has anyone from PUI checked out the topic on Intentional Draws and the issue of time? Any comment on why Nationals and Worlds were ran with a Top 32 and probably both will be this year again? Is there a significant reason to why POP has decided to run a large top cut?
3. Is there a set standard somewhere for the time limit in top cuts for matchplay? Is it always to be 60 minutes, regardless of the PTO's decision? If not, would it be legal to run with say a 90 minute time limit for them? Has POP determined that 60 minutes is the correct time. I recall you, Dave, or someone else mentioning that in 2004 Worlds most of the games in the top cut did not exceed the time. This year, I have rarely heard a report from someone at a State Championship that has won or lost in less than the 60 minutes alloted. What have you found?
1. If Nationals is supposed to be THE open event in a given country, why are there less opportunities to gain some travel money to get there? (this is especially regarding the West Coast) 1st Place at States and 1st Place at Regionals are the only opportunites for this. Last year, there was a travel allowance for 1st at States, 1st AND 2nd at Regionals, it was only $300 for all of them and not a paid trip, but it was also less orientated around getting 1st place. Also, it IS in Ohio every year, yes, Worlds is in Califronia for the 2nd straight year, but just because you can go there doesn't mean you can play, you still have to earn an invite.
2. Has anyone from PUI checked out the topic on Intentional Draws and the issue of time? Any comment on why Nationals and Worlds were ran with a Top 32 and probably both will be this year again? Is there a significant reason to why POP has decided to run a large top cut?
3. Is there a set standard somewhere for the time limit in top cuts for matchplay? Is it always to be 60 minutes, regardless of the PTO's decision? If not, would it be legal to run with say a 90 minute time limit for them? Has POP determined that 60 minutes is the correct time. I recall you, Dave, or someone else mentioning that in 2004 Worlds most of the games in the top cut did not exceed the time. This year, I have rarely heard a report from someone at a State Championship that has won or lost in less than the 60 minutes alloted. What have you found?
LittlePichu
New Member
Idk, but I was looking at the Prizes every year, they are sure cutting down trips to worlds every year?
Pretty soon there going to be one way to win worlds but IDK,that what looks to me. I could be wrong. but that my 2 cent. < /shuges>
<IDK= I don't know: to all that didn't know that>
Pretty soon there going to be one way to win worlds
but IDK,that what looks to me. I could be wrong. but that my 2 cent. < /shuges><IDK= I don't know: to all that didn't know that>
- Status