2of3 match play and the 10 and under age group

[cattdreams]

I know that most major events now are pushing for 2 out of 3 match play for the top 8 in each age division. as recomended by pui. With slightly larger prizes at stake this is an understandable move.

However, I think that with the 10 and under group, this may be producing more stress than is favorable for the age group. Simply put, I belive that it's too much for the majority of 10 and unders to effectivly cope with.

I also know that many parents are already aware of the potential stress that this can cause and believe it was a major reason for many of the 10 and unders avoiding entry into the LA (actually irvine) Gym Challenge.

Other Majorly accepted competitions geared twords younger groups all acknowledge this, and adjust their play accordingly, even at the highest levels (youth soccer, baseball, basketball, karate, the list goes on and on).

With that, I'd like to caution other judges on running 2 of 3 match play for their 10 and unders. I'd highly suggest avoiding it if possible.


-CattDreams

[Prof Clay]

I highly disagree with your statement. As a parent, I would not want my child to have to experience a loss in a championship match due to 1 bad opening hand. If you have experienced your child losing on turn 2 after a day of playing I think you might feel differently. 2 of 3 gives them a some room to make mistakes too. I am a teacher and I know that kids can handle the stress. They are tough little buggers. But if I thought my child could not handle the stress of such competitions, I wouldn't allow her to play

I have seen comments on the professor forum about parents being upset that 2/3 makes the tournament too long. But that is not usually the case and again, as parents, I hope we want to give our kids as many chances to succeed as possible. These tournaments can be so important to them.
.
Have you asked your child which they prefer?

[annisarich]

Another parent here.

My boy played in that and it seemed to be no worse than at bat with 2 outs in the last inning in a Little League™ game.

With so much at stake I think it works nice because luck is slightly removed. My boys oponent really didnt shuffle well and all his needed cards were in his prizes game one. A quick win for my son. But not because my son played better or had a better deck. This gave the boy a fair chance to prove himself with two games left.

Even if there is a single elim game there will be stress. Maybe more because its one and out.

My .02

Hope this doesnt turn into a poll :)

[meganium45]

Poke_Dad, congratulations for this weekend. You didn't do well, but a certain Dragonite_girl secured her invite!

10 and under 2 of 3 is a necessary change. You want pressure? Try a one game match, where it all rides on your opening hand....

This is not a poll, but a reality. ALL the people who I have spoken with like 2/3 for the finals (except Sensei). Makes for a better, more meaningful event.

Talk with you soon.

M45

[spookees]

Agreeing with Poke Dad, annisarich and Meganium45.......(does this make it a POLL now, sorry)

i am going to put my 2 cents in as well. My son is 10 and has been playing for years now. We favor the 2 out of 3 for the final matches..... only if there is enuff players in that age group to cut to a top 4 or top 2.
My son played in Irvine this weekend and yes 7 rounds for the 10 and under was too long, with only 8 players i believe there should have been less rounds and no cut to top 4. We have been to a few gyms and they are handled differently at each place. I hope the "powers that be" put into place a format/structure that ALL TO's follow, right now that isnt happening.

just my 2 cents ....or is that 4 cents now with inflation and rising interest rates! (hehehe)

[mewsmom]

Lynch Mob's 4 cents.

We have 1 in the 10- he is actually going to be 9 soon. We couldn't support 2/3 any less than the other parents have stated. My son and many of the other's that we know and play against are not the least stressed at all. They are more stressed in a single lim game if they come out with a bad hand or instant weakness without a chance to even play. They all know what is at stake and want the best chance possible to play a fair match. With 2/3 they know there's atleast 1 more game to change things around and this is HOPE for them. When a player has hope their spirits are up and keeps their energy flowing.

In our situation, my son and his other 10- buddies burn off their stress and anxiety by running around crazy and playing together like the crazy 10- boys they are inbetween their matches. Let them be the 10- kids they are inbetween matches and you'll see they are ready and wanting to go and not a sign of stress.
We are very thankful that several of our events, allow or have the area for these little guys to do their 2nd favorite thing, to play like BOYS!!

Do note this is just the same for the older groups as well. We all burn off our stress by hanging out with our friends and going over matches or other pokemon issues. LOL

[farbsman]

We have been to a few gyms and they are handled differently at each place. I hope the "powers that be" put into place a format/structure that ALL TO's follow, right now that isnt happening.(hehehe)

The PTO's are given a format, for some reason some decide to run it there own way. Directions were shipped with our supplies for the events.

[GymLeaderPhil]

The PTO's are given a format, for some reason some decide to run it there own way. Directions were shipped with our supplies for the events.

2/3 top twentyfive percent single elimination were suggested, not required. Just like the Penalty Guidelines.

However because everyone made a big stink about the structure of the single elimination at States (thanks Vince et al) we ran 2/3 with no time limits. That is the the only fair way to run 2/3 games right now. The players wanted 2/3 and they recieved 2/3, especially ther 15+ who played for a good four-five hour top eight single elimination. We got out of of our venue around 11:30pm.
-Phil

[cattdreams]

Perhaps I should redefine what I ment by stress, I more ment stress from fatigue. I should also specify that I didnt mean for them to switch to single game elimination, I more ment that they should stay in swiss play.
Everyone has posted valid points, but I still really think that it would have been much better for the 10 and unders to keep to single game swiss play. rather than going through a long day of swiss play then onto even longer rounds of 2 of 3 elimination play in finals.
there are also other things that come into play with a cut to effectivly a new tournament. for instance, we had one ten and under lead the swiss play with an excelent record all day long, keeping a firm lock on first. then switching to elimination play, he was knocked out in the first round, effectivly making his hard work for nothing. that to me is worse than just losing a single game to a bad hand.
(that kid also wound up running off in tears, where I had to go find him, then find his parents)

I guess what I'm really tring to get at, is the current structure unnessessarily long and fatiguing for the 10 and unders when it doesnt have to be? do we NEED the cut to the 2 of 3 or is it redundant after all the swiss rounds that they have to play anyways?

I really appreciate seeing everyones viewpoints, Please excuse me for not clarifying my point exactly how I ment in my first post. I look forward to reading everyones thoughts on my revised post (be they agree or disagree)

[GymLeaderPhil]

I really think that since the 10-Under attendance is lacking, there is no reason to follow through with single elimination finals. Georgia States, Florida States, and the West Palm Beach GC are the last three events I've judged at and all have had such a small showing of younger kids that we didnt need to do single elimination (although at the Gym Challenge it was required).
-Phil

[meganium45]

WE had 19 10- in Memphis, a bigger group than any other!

This group came ready to play.

No time limit 2/3!!! WOW!!! Didn't anyone hear my story of a 3 hour match.....

Man, nice to be blamed for something worthwhile for once!!!

M45

[mewsmom]

Perhaps I should redefine what I ment by stress, I more ment stress from fatigue. I should also specify that I didnt mean for them to switch to single game elimination, I more ment that they should stay in swiss play.
Everyone has posted valid points, but I still really think that it would have been much better for the 10 and unders to keep to single game swiss play. rather than going through a long day of swiss play then onto even longer rounds of 2 of 3 elimination play in finals.
there are also other things that come into play with a cut to effectivly a new tournament. for instance, we had one ten and under lead the swiss play with an excelent record all day long, keeping a firm lock on first. then switching to elimination play, he was knocked out in the first round, effectivly making his hard work for nothing. that to me is worse than just losing a single game to a bad hand.
(that kid also wound up running off in tears, where I had to go find him, then find his parents)

I guess what I'm really tring to get at, is the current structure unnessessarily long and fatiguing for the 10 and unders when it doesnt have to be? do we NEED the cut to the 2 of 3 or is it redundant after all the swiss rounds that they have to play anyways?

I really appreciate seeing everyones viewpoints, Please excuse me for not clarifying my point exactly how I ment in my first post. I look forward to reading everyones thoughts on my revised post (be they agree or disagree)


Why run one age group differently than another? Well since they are 10- let's do it this way, 11-14 we'll do this way and the 15+ well, they are basically adults and only need single lim or so on??

This is not structure. This is a game of strategy and hate to say it but luck as well. So a 10- player learns to play one way and then once they move up to another age bracket we'll it's different now buddy because your older.

Well then why not have different levels of maturity in the game. Ok, you've only been playing 4ms, well we shouldn't make you play a player whose been playing 4yrs. We all go to play these games to be the Pokemon master. There's always been a swiss and no reason to change it. I'm very glad to see Nintendo promoting to use 2/3, this has been very effective for Magic and lesson's the luck in the game.

My son is down there in the 10- and is just fine. There are days he will go undefeated and then loose in his 2/3 or days he'll go into top with a 4/1 record and take 1st. We need to keep the tourneys all structured and not cater to an age group or skill level. Regardless of anyones record there will always be that player who will leave in tears. I myself would have tears if I ended up 2nd and missed the trip. It's very emotional and that's a way of expressing just how you feel. My son teared up a bit in our last Gym Challenge because he ended up 3rd, with our assurance and encouragement that he played awesome and did great, there will be more tourneys and it's ok to be 3rd, he was right there watching along for the battle of 1 and 2nd. He had no hard feelings and wished them both luck and congratulated them both on their victories.

It's all in the Sportsmanship we teach these children!!
By the way my son is still battling for his Invite to Worlds. So I'm not saying all this because he's got his in the bag. I have no favortism just stating the facts and too keep structure. To us a tourney is just another day at league with bigger prizes at stake.

[Lawman]

As a father to a 10- player, I think the 2/3 format is just fine in the cut down process. Many times, these games end early bc of bad starting hands, etc. The kids can handle it just fine. It's the parents who have a hard time w/ the stress of worrying/watching. just ask Poke-Dad sometime!! His daughter and my son played each other in the 2/3 format in the Nashville GC. My son won the 1st game quick, Taylor won the 2nd fast and the 3rd game was the best of them all. Talyor won that match and has shown her ability all over the State. My son was proud of the battle, not stressed over it. That's my .02 worth.

[SteveP]

...we ran 2/3 with no time limits. That is the the only fair way to run 2/3 games right now.


Like M45 said, untimed finals is undesireable. Here in Colorado, we did 60-minute semis and 90-minute finals.


Regarding best-of-3 for 10-under, in over 2 years of doing best-of-3 at almost EVERY tournament here in Colorado, I've NEVER gotten a complaint from a 10-under player or their parents. In fact, the only person who somewhat likes 1-game matches here in Colorado is an adult player. (I might add that this same player was our Gym champ who wouldn't have been the champ if we did 1-game matches--he lost the first game of the finals.)

[cattdreams]

in reguards to MewsMom, following your argument, then why do we have age divisons?

[WeileMom]

Why run one age group differently than another? Well since they are 10- let's do it this way, 11-14 we'll do this way and the 15+ well, they are basically adults and only need single lim or so on??

This is not structure. This is a game of strategy and hate to say it but luck as well. So a 10- player learns to play one way and then once they move up to another age bracket we'll it's different now buddy because your older.


Why? For the same reason we have T-ball vs. regular Baseball. The same reason why younger kids need more sleep.
It wasn't only the one child who ended up exhausted and upset. Even the 10 & U who won was upset because he felt terrible for beating the other kids. That is where exhaustion comes into play and where the parents won't return for another tournament. The kids did have a great time, but after awhile even the most rabid of players will fall apart after 10+ hours of play.
I don't really see what the solution is, but the problem is real.
---Nicole
WeileMom

[Prof Clay]

(steps up on soap- box)


That sounds more like an organizational problem than a flaw in the actual tournament system. I agree that 10+ hours of tournament play is too long for many kids. Thats too long for most adults too. Something is definitley wrong in that department I will agree whole heartedly

But gain, have any parents actually asked their children how they would prefer play in the tournament? Most will tell you they want to play just the same as the olde kids/adults because they think they are just as capable.

My daughter came in 3rd in the city, state and Nashville GC tournaments and believe me there were tears every time. But she and I treated every one of those loses as a learning experience for her. She is 10 now, and besides the natural maturation that occurs over a 2 year period in that age, I have seen her go from a hot tempered sore loser to a calculating, thoughtful tournament player. More than one time was she taken out of a Saturday's OP and made to sit out one or 2 weeks as punishment.

She put it all together in this weeks Gym Challenge. She admitted to me that she never really actually believed she could win because she had never beaten the top two from the past. This week she shined.

I think if the kids know in advance how the tournament is being run and that winning every game in Swiss is NOT a guarantee of victory, they will accept it for how things are gonna be and do their best.

(step down from soap box)

--Clay M--

Poke_Dad

[WeileMom]

[QUOTE=Poke_Dad

I think if the kids know in advance how the tournament is being run and that winning every game in Swiss is NOT a guarantee of victory, they will accept it for how things are gonna be and do their best.

(step down from soap box)

--Clay M--

Poke_Dad[/QUOTE]

Congratulations to your daughter!! My 11-14 is feeling the same way right now. She's not sure if she'll ever beat the kids who keep beating her.

The thing is...the tournament ran smoothly. There were no glitches to speak of. We had a lot of players and a lot of rounds to get through. If the 10 & U age group had been bigger we could have run it as 3 separate tournaments but we didn't have enough.
Second, the issue wasn't that the kids were upset about losing. As I said, even the winner was excited but upset at the same time.
They were just plain worn out.
---Nicole
WeileMom

[SteveP]

Like Poke Dad said, 10 hours is probably too long for child 10-under. I know the child labor laws for Hollywood often are a deterant for some film makers and TV show producers from using children.

This topic has made me think about how 10-under should probably be run at the Stadiums, Nationals, and Worlds. By separating the age groups, and with the 10-under typically being a smaller group size, we might be able to give the 10-under kids larger breaks between rounds.

cattdreams has a VERY LEGIMATE concern, but like PokeDad stated, it's more about the length of the tournament day rather than best-of-3.

BTW, the 10-under kids almost ALWAYS finished their matches before the older players at our Colorado Gym. It's the 15+ players that appeared to be the MOST stressed at our Gym.

[cattdreams]

after reviewing other peoples statements, I think that perhaps the flaw was infact in the idea that the la gym challenge ran way too long as opposed to the ones run in other areas ( such as stevep's and poke-dad).

so this brings up what what differantly, and how can this be avoided at other events?
we had 7 rounds of 30 min swiss play before the cuts. exactly how much did everyone else have? how many swiss rounds are needed if there's going to be 2 of 3 play so that at the very least the 10 and unders are not playing for an excess of time?

any input?

-CattDreams

[Prof Clay]

we had 7 rounds of 30 min swiss play before the cuts. exactly how much did everyone else have? how many swiss rounds are needed if there's going to be 2 of 3 play so that at the very least the 10 and unders are not playing for an excess of time?

any input?

-CattDreams

7 rounds might be too many. We had 19 10- under in Memphis and only ran 5 swiss. If the rounds were completed before the 30 minute time limit, we jumped right into a new one as soon as pairings could be figured. We had a top eight easily figured. And then the top 8 in the age group only took about 2 hours max (seemed like an eternity while I watched my daughter from a distance) to determine a champ in 2/3 play. The older groups took somewhat longer to finish the 2/3 rounds, but not significantly. Our age groups were kept distinct thru most of the tournament because we had a good turn out (51+). We have been lucky to have so many new kids coming and playing lately. Averaging between 25 and 35 at our Saturday gym OP (many Kudos to Gym Leader Niesha at Triple Play for taking the time and effort to get it rolling)

[cattdreams]

did you seperate the age groups durring swiss play? (as in, run effectivly 3 differant tournaments)

[SteveP]

cattdreams, if you separate the age-groups, you accomplish two things:

1. the younger players don't have to stress out by playing older players
2. you can run fewer rounds

That's what we did in colorado.

[MrMeches]

As a Father of a ten year old, I think that MewsMom is right in the fact that lettin the kids do what they want between rounds is important as long as it isn't destructive. The issue in Length adn Exhausiton is always going to go hand in hand, but the Parent can determine the right and worng way for between round events for the child. Sometimes letting them run around, all be it an annoyance at times whe ntrying to pay attention to matches going on, is a good thing. Their energy levels are in "spurts" and at the end opf the day, they are just as tuckered as we are, but keeping an UPBEAT and POSITIVE attitude during the evnet is key to how the kids will react. If you go aroound seeming tired and stressed, the ppl around you will become that way as well. If you ENJOY Pokemon, as it was intended, then everyone will enjoy the experience and not be as tuckered or stressed.

It is a mind thing more than a time thing. If it were 10 hours of playing video games for some kids, they wouldnt think twice about it til it was time to totally stop. Allowing the kids to play "pick up games" between rounds is fun for some as well. It is all about being positive and constructive during the tween times. The actual playing will handle itself. And best-of-3, IMHO, is worth the idea of a kid going out winning at least 1 game against a top ranked player than not winning at all. Most of the kids I know in that group are just excited to get to top whatever. Playing is almost an added BONUS for them. Sounds like to me, adults trying to state what kids are feeling instead of listening to the kids. To reiterate, ask THEIR opinion on single lim or best-of-3. I bet most of them will say, As long as I can play, doesn't matter to me. That is what my son said... form the mouthes of babes.... it shouldn't matter the number of matches, we just get to play is good nuff for us...

Cha-Ching.... $0.02 deposited.

[WeileMom]

In LA we had 20 11-14 year-olds and 8 10&U's. I know our 15+ age group is fine, but are the other two big enough to run separate tournaments?
That seems to be the only solution.
---Nicole
WeileMom

[SteveP]

In LA we had 20 11-14 year-olds and 8 10&U's. I know our 15+ age group is fine, but are the other two big enough to run separate tournaments?
That seems to be the only solution.

The recommendation sheet that came with the Gym package told PTOs they could separate any age that had 24 or more (***CORRECTION*** - 16 or more) players into a separate age-pod; otherwise, the recommendation was to do age-modified swiss rounds.

Here is Colorado Springs, we detest age-modified for major events like States and Gyms, so we decided to separate the age groups regardless of the numbers (we had 11, 14, 12 for our 10-under, 11-14, 15+ respectively).

If there were only 8 players in the 10-under division in LA, your PTO could have easily separated them out, ran 3 rounds, and cut to top 2 or top 4. But, I've seen a tendency around the country to NOT separate but to follow POP's "recommendation" to do age-modified. That's just something I don't understand. Not only does it force the 10-under to play against the "big boys/girls," but it also forces them to play as long. NOT good IMO, especially at locations with large-sized older age-groups.

[annisarich]

Yes we crashed at the hotel that night.
We also come home and nap after a Webelo Scout Camping overnighter. Where the boys are up and active 8am till 11 pm.
Same thing happens after a day at 6 flags.

Dont want it to be that way every day, but ocassionally is fine.

[PTE_Karl]

Jump on soapbox [graceful leap from stage right].

I would have loved to run each age group as a seperate tournament--it would have made everything much easier overall for the organization of the event. However, because POP issued Gym Challenge recommendations I felt it wise to follow them. I know POP is trying to promote consistency for all of the events around the country. They have the difficult task of finding a balance between game play, fairness, player exhaustion, and event length. I would recommend that every TO implement and follow the POP guidelines where given, this allows us to give constructed feedback to POP, which they can use to improve future events. As POP remarked recently in another related consistency issue, "if heat has to be borne, let us [POP] bear it" (paraphrased), which means...if the players are unhappy with some procedure, rule, or program as it is followed and implemented by us at POP's direction, then POP will bear the heat. We will report back to them about problems and they will fix the situation where able.

I have met most of the personnel at POP and they are all responsive and ameanable to change, and strive to find ways to make the events better, more fun, and better attended. This is both of our goals. So, let's follow the program as recommended, make changes were necessary, and grow our events to be consistent overall, pleasurable, fair, and timely. My .02, for what's it worth.

On the topic of seperate tournaments (age pods), per POP's recommendations, "If your lowest attended age group has as least 16 players, you may run Age Pods instead of Age Modified Swiss." This does not mean that any age group of 16+ can be seperated off, but *all* age groups must be at least 16+ to each run in pods. We missed that mark by 8 players in our 10 and under.

We had 67 players overall, which placecd us at 7 Swiss rounds. With that many games occurring each round, there were always some that were called on time--we never finished early. We were very happy and surprised that the TMS software ran without any errors (we used ver. 1.13)--this was a first with us as all of the past events had some TMS problem.

For the Top 8's and Top 4 for the 10 and under, we did the best 2 out of 3 games with a 60 minute time limit for quarters and semis, the finals were not timed. The day was already long when the cutoffs began. The playoffs lasted 4.5 hours overall (the 15+ group finished up last). All of the players enjoyed the finals format, but...and here's the point Cattdreams was making...the day was way too long and exhausting, both for players and parents, and, yes, even for the judges and staff.

After all of this, and thinking and mulling over the pros and cons of best 2 out of 3, I have to say I am not a proponent of it in it's current form--it lengthens the event way too much. I would prefer to run straight Swiss, adding in a couple more rounds to add differentation/tie breaks between the players. This is the univeral procedure when not cutting to playoffs. This would accomplish several things.

First, all of the play would end at the same time, instead of staggered as it is right now. This means that a large public awards announcement/ceremony could be done. Group pictures of winners could be taken. The event would have a definite final conclusion.

Second, the overall event length would be much shorter (by about 2-3 hours I would estimate). This is the biggest benefit!

And Lastly, the overall event would be enhanced--see points 1 and 2. Just a way to reiterate them again. :)

In summation, I will work for change, promote change, and, at the end of the day, follow the guidelines/recommendations POP puts forth.

Soapbox exit [stage left].

Thanks.

Karl F. Batdorff
PT&E President
Premier TO, Southwest

The recommendation sheet that came with the Gym package told PTOs they could separate any age that had 24 or more players into a separate age-pod; otherwise, the recommendation was to do age-modified swiss rounds.

Here is Colorado Springs, we detest age-modified for major events like States and Gyms, so we decided to separate the age groups regardless of the numbers (we had 11, 14, 12 for our 10-under, 11-14, 15+ respectively).

If there were only 8 players in the 10-under division in LA, your PTO could have easily separated them out, ran 3 rounds, and cut to top 2 or top 4. But, I've seen a tendency around the country to NOT separate but to follow POP's "recommendation" to do age-modified. That's just something I don't understand. Not only does it force the 10-under to play against the "big boys/girls," but it also forces them to play as long. NOT good IMO, especially at locations with large-sized older age-groups.

[SteveP]

PT&E1, you do what's best for your location and players. Here in Colorado, we feel it's best NOT to mix the 10-under with our adults. Plus, our numbers were small enough to do best-of-3 for the Swiss rounds.

Consistency is important, but not essential.

In summation, I will work for change, promote change, and, at the end of the day, follow the guidelines/recommendations POP puts forth.

A good statement coming from a PTO who wishes to maintain a good standing. I understand. We choose to deviate from those recommendations, but those deviations were enhancements that were feasible because of our lower numbers and because we planned for it.


BTW, as I said in another post, I think the recommended minimum number of players in the smallest age-group should be 8 instead of 16 (the same minimum to hold a sanctioned tournament). JMO.

[meganium45]

Yeah, go figure, in Memphis it was the 15+ division that was 4 players short...

good younger play base there...

Would have been nice to separate, as we could have only done 4 swiss rounds, and then cut to the top, but heh, not in the cards (no pun intended)

M45

[Lawman]

Most swiss rounds will pare down the filed to a defined top 4/8 in 4 to 5 rds (if run properly).

[mewsmom]

Weile Mom & Catt

I think you misunderstood me?? Age division is fine, it's having different rulings and the way we run a tournament that needs to stay structured. We can't have different pairings, rulings and how we determine the winner being different amongst the ages. Too many differences cause kaos.

I'm sure the same rules and structure apply in T-ball as they do in baseball?? The whole point of having younger versions of any game is to teach and prepare them for future continuation in the game.
That's all I was saying, keep the same structure amongst the whole game.





Why? For the same reason we have T-ball vs. regular Baseball. The same reason why younger kids need more sleep.
It wasn't only the one child who ended up exhausted and upset. Even the 10 & U who won was upset because he felt terrible for beating the other kids. That is where exhaustion comes into play and where the parents won't return for another tournament. The kids did have a great time, but after awhile even the most rabid of players will fall apart after 10+ hours of play.
I don't really see what the solution is, but the problem is real.
---Nicole
WeileMom

[bulbasnore]

My son played in Irvine this weekend and yes 7 rounds for the 10 and under was too long, with only 8 players i believe there should have been less rounds and no cut to top 4. We have been to a few gyms and they are handled differently at each place. I hope the "powers that be" put into place a format/structure that ALL TO's follow, right now that isnt happening.

Good to meet you in person at the Irvine GC!

After following this thread I trust your not stating that the Irvine event was run contrary to the structure given... in fact following the given structure is exactly what created 7 rounds for the 10- players. Our PTO & HJ are communicating with POP about this... you will shortly be able to use the 'feedback' link under 'my stats' for this tourney, and your other 'few gyms', to provide feedback about the tourneys as well as the 'structure' for the events defined by POP.

We might not have an answer before the SD GC rolls around but we should have some adjustments to the structure or at least confirmation in time for WCSC.

Cheers,

[SteveP]

One more comment. I remember back in the WOTC days when they had Challenges with trip prizes. Those events were ALL run as age-separated.

Yet another reason why PTOs should consider running their Challenges as age-separated during the Swiss rounds too.

[EnjoiPandaPoo]

Hey, I know this has nothing to do with 2/3 match lay but I was wondering if my 4 year old brother (just turned 4 today) could play at my GC. He can't really read, but I've taught him basic mechanics of the game. Just would like to know. Thanks

[spookees]

Good to meet you in person at the Irvine GC!

After following this thread I trust your not stating that the Irvine event was run contrary to the structure given... in fact following the given structure is exactly what created 7 rounds for the 10- players. Our PTO & HJ are communicating with POP about this... you will shortly be able to use the 'feedback' link under 'my stats' for this tourney, and your other 'few gyms', to provide feedback about the tourneys as well as the 'structure' for the events defined by POP.

We might not have an answer before the SD GC rolls around but we should have some adjustments to the structure or at least confirmation in time for WCSC.

Cheers,
SO glad to meet you too bulbasnore! My son and I had a ton of fun in Irvine! We have learned to 'adapt' to the differences in how things are run at different places. I have talked to the 'big guys' with different ideas regarding the 10 and under group and they sound encouraging to present the ideas at their meetings. I will pm you my concerns on what happened in Irvine, they are not appropriate to post on this thread as it was an isolated incident. (no worries here, we favor 2/3 for the finals just like it was done) Its all good Bulb! :)

[Hagrid23]

Hey, I know this has nothing to do with 2/3 match lay but I was wondering if my 4 year old brother (just turned 4 today) could play at my GC. He can't really read, but I've taught him basic mechanics of the game. Just would like to know. Thanks

There is no minimum age restriction (that I know of). Let the TO/judge know so that they can look after him.

[SD PokeMom]

Whoa..."look after him"? Other than perhaps shuffling the child's deck (which many -10s need help with) and helping the child find their table, what is the TO/judge supposed to do to 'help' a 4 y/o?

There may not be a minimum age limit, but IMO a child MUST be able to play the game independently to participate in a tournament, especially one on the level of a Gym Challenge. If the child can't read, how is he supposed to know what the other player is doing?

Is this the child's very first experience in organized play other than at home with a sibling, who reads/explains each card to him? If so, and if that is what will be expected of each of that child's opponents...then that is too much to expect of another -10 player and is also not fair to that player. And in a tourney of this type, with signifigant prizes on the line, a parent/sibling can NOT 'coach' in any way; sure, at league that would be acceptable but not here.

JMHO...
'mom

[Prof Clay]

Whoa..."look after him"? Other than perhaps shuffling the child's deck (which many -10s need help with) and helping the child find their table, what is the TO/judge supposed to do to 'help' a 4 y/o?

There may not be a minimum age limit, but IMO a child MUST be able to play the game independently to participate in a tournament, especially one on the level of a Gym Challenge. If the child can't read, how is he supposed to know what the other player is doing?

Is this the child's very first experience in organized play other than at home with a sibling, who reads/explains each card to him? If so, and if that is what will be expected of each of that child's opponents...then that is too much to expect of another -10 player and is also not fair to that player. And in a tourney of this type, with signifigant prizes on the line, a parent/sibling can NOT 'coach' in any way; sure, at league that would be acceptable but not here.

JMHO...
'mom

I have to agree on this one. To play in this highly competitive arena, its really necessary to be able to stand on your own. Its not fair to the child and his/her opponent to be put into that situation. When my daughter 1st became aware of the game at age 5, she wanted to learn to play. I had to tell she couldn't play until she learned to read.....so she did. At age 6 she was in her 1st tournament.

Let the kid learn to play at local gyms and get to where he can learn the rules and grow into the game. I know there is no age restriction, but lets not put the kid into the deep end before he can tread water.

[meganium45]

The simple rule is no parents or siblings by the play area.

All shuffling must be done by the judges.

a 4 year old will most likely fall due to many procedural errors and misplays that will lead to a DQ.

I am not going to judge to quickly. My 8 year old played (independently) in sanctioned events at age 4, and even finished top 3 at times, so it can be done.

It all depends on the skill level of the child.

M45

[Prof Clay]

ah, the lawyer in you shines thru ;) .

Clay M

[annisarich]

The kid needs to know their deck and be able to play on their own.

My 5 year old can do that and plays well at events.

As a parent I make sure he plays his deck for a week before a tourney.

He did well at both Gym Challenges
Took in the top 5 in MI states
second in one of the CC's

My favorite game at the IN GC was a side event where he played the final game against the oldest player there.
5 vs 57

everyone had a good time

[Prof Clay]

I'm not saying younger kids shouldn't play in big tournaments. As a matter of fact I applaud parents who get thier kid involved early. But they definitely need to be able to play at a level where they do not need help with their game (reading, shuffling etc). Different kids are ready at different ages. Plus they also need to be familiar enough with the rules so that a unscrupulous opponent (and we have all seen them) cannot take advantage of them. As parents we would want to help, but in that situation, our hands would be tied.

[SteveP]

a 4 year old will most likely fall due to many procedural errors and misplays that will lead to a DQ.


Yah, but with the new penalty guidelines, you'd have to give the 4-year at least 2 cautions for the same minor infraction before elevating it to a warning. I could be a documentation NIGHTMARE. I'd be hard-pressed to DQ ANY 4-year old who was a new player. Chances are, he/she will loose most of their games anyway. JMO.