Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Nats Sour Grapes

BigChuck01 said:
The whole rating system situation is just so disgusting right now. I could go on for hours talking about every little flaw in it, but I wont. All I'll say is I will not be playing Pokemon next season if a legitimate system doesnt show up. People are actually losing friends over this garbage. DMTM is spinning in his GRAVE. Spirit of the Game is officially in the same place as Chivalry: dead.
Click to expand...

I agree so hard. SO HARD. Especially the losing friends part.
 
BigChuck01 said:
There is no possible rating I could have that would make me sit out Nats. There is no possible rating Jason, Jimmy, Moss, Fulop, Eric Craig, Pooka, Pablo, [insert any other legitimate player] could have that would make them sit out nats. Any player whos been around the game for a while can tell you that Nationals is infinitely superior to Worlds in terms of players, and fun factor. People just see the words "Hawaii" and freak out about the trip because they have some misconception that Hawaii is some magical land where dreams come true, and not just some Island where people go to get eaten by Sharpedos.

It is actually ridiculously stupid to sit out Nats for any reason, ESPECIALLY for the trip. The prizes for Nats are basically the same as the prizes to worlds. Are you telling me you're gunna pass up a chance at $5000 and the title of National Champion for a trip to Hawaii? Assuming you can stay with a friend (which is highly likely), you only have to pay for a flight to worlds, which is at max $500. Doesnt take the best Poker player in the world to figure out that 10:1 pot odds is a good deal!

In my opinion, everyone who sat out Nats is a coward, coward, COWARD, and is basically admitting their metagame is horrible. Ross and Kettler wont even HESITATE to play 30 battle road games but not a single Nationals game? (actually, ONE nats game, and it was a loss) That's basically saying "I know my metagame is bad. I refuse to play against people who actually know what they're doing. Why would I play against good players when I can just beat on the bad ones". Let's say Ross's rating before his last battle road was 2030. Are you telling me this kid will play a tourney with 2030, but NOT with 2050? He has to be SO sure that his opponents are gunna be GOD awful at that battle road in order to justify that. He knows that if he takes ONE loss, then he will lose points on the day, thus in order for him to correctly play the tournament, he has to be CERTAIN that hes not taking a loss. When you're CERTAIN you're not taking a loss in a game of luck, you just know your battle road is full of horrible players. Same goes to Kettler. Kettler dropped after round 1 of Nats after a loss "just incase I get unlucky". Where was that reasoning for battle roads pal? Can you not get unlucky at battle roads? It just makes me so sick that people try to intentionally dodge the good players.

The whole rating system situation is just so disgusting right now. I could go on for hours talking about every little flaw in it, but I wont. All I'll say is I will not be playing Pokemon next season if a legitimate system doesnt show up. People are actually losing friends over this garbage. DMTM is spinning in his GRAVE. Spirit of the Game is officially in the same place as Chivalry: dead.
Click to expand...

QFT
 
That's such a vain way to think about it, Chuck, so open your eyes on this one.

Nationals, like you just admitted, isn't just about one game or the tournament itself: it's about the atmosphere, the people, and the FUN! I got my money's worth (or rather, my free trip's worth) that weekend, so I'm content, even if I only played one round.

The reason why 0-1 dropping nats isn't a burn to my own metagame is because I was in a position to 100% guarantee worlds, while I was never in that position prior. My ranking was "competitive" before regionals, but afterwards, I became primed to earn a good Battle Road showing. By taking out many worthwhile, decent players, with rankings to match, such as Soles and Weldon (two people you know well), I had all but secured an invite (aka another fun time with pals, and possibly my last fun trip before I bust my *** studying for the next seven years). 0-1 dropping in "general" should be enough to prove to anyone that I wanted a go at this event. I fully understood that the prizes on the line were the second best all year, so I played. However, I will not let myself get punished by the system if something screwy happens at the end of the day.

Of course people are going to kill each other over this cutthroat crap, and friends will be lost. By the end of my first tournament, I knew that rankings would make people go NUTS. Because I've known this system inside and out from the start, I could detail to you on aim every little flaw you may or may not have even considered. However, as flawed as the system may be, we all have to make the best of it in our own way. Me? I still don't know if I've made the best out of this awful system. All I know is that I've given every tournament I can a go this season, and I've had a blast every time.
 
Patriarch said:
That's such a vain way to think about it, Chuck, so open your eyes on this one.

Nationals, like you just admitted, isn't just about one game or the tournament itself: it's about the atmosphere, the people, and the FUN! I got my money's worth (or rather, my free trip's worth) that weekend, so I'm content, even if I only played one round.

The reason why 0-1 dropping nats isn't a burn to my own metagame is because I was in a position to 100% guarantee worlds, while I was never in that position prior. My ranking was "competitive" before regionals, but afterwards, I became primed to earn a good Battle Road showing. By taking out many worthwhile, decent players, with rankings to match, such as Soles and Weldon (two people you know well), I had all but secured an invite (aka another fun time with pals, and possibly my last fun trip before I bust my *** studying for the next seven years). 0-1 dropping in "general" should be enough to prove to anyone that I wanted a go at this event. I fully understood that the prizes on the line were the second best all year, so I played. However, I will not let myself get punished by the system if something screwy happens at the end of the day.

Of course people are going to kill each other over this cutthroat crap, and friends will be lost. By the end of my first tournament, I knew that rankings would make people go NUTS. Because I've known this system inside and out from the start, I could detail to you on aim every little flaw you may or may not have even considered. However, as flawed as the system may be, we all have to make the best of it in our own way. Me? I still don't know if I've made the best out of this awful system. All I know is that I've given every tournament I can a go this season, and I've had a blast every time.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that you were going to Nationals and playing in the main event until you lost.

And you must of lost so convincingly that you were afraid of losing your rank if you went any farther =/

And you say hanging out with your pals. And your pals are out there in the tournament busting their butt off to get prizes and what if they don't get in? While you got to sit on the other side of the ropes and watch them.

That's what tears up the relations with Poke-Pals.
 
So you're saying that you were going to Nationals and playing in the main event until you lost.
Click to expand...

Mildly correct: if I took an early loss, I would drop. If I didn't lose until round 4, then I would continue the full event.

And you must of lost so convincingly that you were afraid of losing your rank if you went any farther =/
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. I had to have a game plan going into this, and I stuck with it. Read the reply to your first part.
And you say hanging out with your pals. And your pals are out there in the tournament busting their butt off to get prizes and what if they don't get in? While you got to sit on the other side of the ropes and watch them.

That's what tears up the relations with Poke-Pals.
Click to expand...

I sat on the ropes because it was my choice to do so. It's also ridiculous to think that all you do during a nationals weekend is play nine measly tournament rounds (more if you top cut). I had some unforgettable moments with people I respect and appreciate, and as cliche and cutesy as that sounds, that's where the fun in these events comes from.
 
I dont think its fair that anyone is blaming the players for this decision.

Most players would of done what Kettler had done in his situation.

In a 418 player event, the odds of getting decent prizes are very low already. losing the first round pretty much means you have to go 8-0 the rest of the way to make top cut, because your resistance will most likely be horrible. Kettler made the right decision to take the trip and not risk points on insane odds. As good of a player as Kettler is, I doubt anyone can be confident they can go 8-0 in quite possibly the hardest field in Pokemon TCG history.

As for Ross, I believe he should of did the same thing as Kettler since his rating allows him to also have that 1 loss buffer to stay in the top 8, but it was his decision, and he decided to play it safe.

I'm sure Eric went into Nats with a similar game plan, but he just couldn't stop winning!

Whatever happened, Kettler, Ross and Eric are still 3 of the most deserving players going to Worlds this year and I'm sure they'll show it at Worlds.
 
BigChuck01 said:
In my opinion, everyone who sat out Nats is a coward, coward, COWARD, and is basically admitting their metagame is horrible. Ross and Kettler wont even HESITATE to play 30 battle road games but not a single Nationals game? (actually, ONE nats game, and it was a loss) That's basically saying "I know my metagame is bad. I refuse to play against people who actually know what they're doing. Why would I play against good players when I can just beat on the bad ones". Let's say Ross's rating before his last battle road was 2030. Are you telling me this kid will play a tourney with 2030, but NOT with 2050? He has to be SO sure that his opponents are gunna be GOD awful at that battle road in order to justify that. He knows that if he takes ONE loss, then he will lose points on the day, thus in order for him to correctly play the tournament, he has to be CERTAIN that hes not taking a loss. When you're CERTAIN you're not taking a loss in a game of luck, you just know your battle road is full of horrible players. Same goes to Kettler. Kettler dropped after round 1 of Nats after a loss "just incase I get unlucky". Where was that reasoning for battle roads pal? Can you not get unlucky at battle roads? It just makes me so sick that people try to intentionally dodge the good players.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's totally correct!

So, when they go to Worlds, will they face suck players then, too? Is that why they didn't go to Nationals? "Bah, there's not gonna be anyone good at Worlds. Everyone who matters will be at our Nationals. Heck, it's not like the T4 from last year's worlds will be at this year's Worlds, nor will there be any good non-Americans attending. Thus, I should avoid nationals: Worlds is softer!"

I mean, it makes perfect sense: Why else would two competitive players, both of whom have GUARANTEED INVITES, not play to win an event which has the grand prize of MORE INVITES? "Hmm, I have this yummy apple here, but there's another apple of the same species over there just past those flying knives. I want that apple."

Chuck, Ross and Kettler would not be anywhere nearly as respected as they are if they freely displayed such logic.
 
But which is more important to a player's ego: to win Nationals or to win Worlds? Let's face it, if the prizes are nearly the same, then it is the notoriety which is at stake. If I had been top-rated before Nationals, I might've sat out Nationals only so that I could compete for "World Champion."

So, the question is, should a Pokemon player who sits out Nationals be *allowed* to compete at Worlds? It's a good philosophical question.

Let's say Ross becomes World Champion. The question is, does he *deserve* the title if he sat out Nats? That is the question, right?

Certainly, if he wins the World Champ tourney, he *is* the champ, and no one will be able to take away his trophy and prizes.

I say, leave it alone. If this occurs, then Ross would be for sure World Champion, without an asterisk (you know, Roger Maris and 162 games, or Barry Bonds and steroids, that kinda thing).

But certainly Ross would have no claim to National Champion.

Now, there *are* two things about "World Champion" which I like which might've made me sit out Nats if I had had Ross' rating beforehand: (1) the trip to Hawaii, which is very cool, even with the Sharpedos, and (2) the possibility of having my deck become a World Champ deck, sold on the shelves of FYE (I don't think the National Champion receives that).

So, I agree with Ross' decision. If he has different priorities than winning Nationals, who are we to judge his courage?
 
well think about it this way.......

OUT nationals is and proly will be the hardest tournament in history and worlds this year will be eh, so and so i guess, there are VERY FEW "GOOD" players playing in worlds, and yes the prizes are better and the comp is way easier.....

so i guess what the people who sat out were thinking why try and win a harder event for less prizes when i can try and win a easier event with way less comp, no matter how you guys switch the words up and replace words this still sounds bad and shwoing that you guys dont care about anything BUT going to worlds.....:nonono: :nonono: :nonono:

and for all the people who say, "MOST PEOPLE WOULD HAVE DONE THE SAME THING"....that honestly only goes for people who dont think they can win consistently on a big stage.......and i say if i had a chance to do it all over again i wouldnt, that event and those games were toooooo fun!

the national champ aka chris fulop will most likely have more respect that the worlds champion, unless some1 like jimmy,jason,chuck,jeremy, or eric wins cuz that would just mean those guys that i just named dominate the big stage, i mean com on t8 or better two year in a row is AWESOME and to say you did it when there were good people at worlds would make that person feel even better.....

;-)
 
most people would do the same thing because if they did play nats and messed up/got donked then they go away with nothing.
 
It just depends on which title means more to you.

I don't think that Ross considers Nationals "worthless" but that he values Worlds more.
 
I wonder if a trip to hawaii for 3 days is something worth losing friends over. If they were your "friends" in the first place that is.

All I get from the posts of some of these "top players" is that "I'm the best there is and unless I'm there, it's not a true worlds" and if not, whine until they are let in.

I'd rather have the following to end all this endless rambling:
Top 16 or 20 From Rankings - 8-12 more. Happy now?
Top 8 from Nats - since the #'s keep rising.
Winner of Regionals - Bringing this back would end half of this.

Just sour grapes? This entire thread is like the whole bad grape vine.
 
Scizor said:
I don't know what your problem with Ryan is, but I'm personally tired of you insulting a friend of mine over and over again. If you're going to constantly call him out, why don't you just bring it to a PM instead of this.
Click to expand...

What part of "Do you ALL have a problem with reading english" do you not understand? All means all the posters making light/fun of the inflatables and where that budget comes from. They dont affect PUI's budget ONE RED CENT! There, understand that? Likewise, I quoted the most recent poster, which happened to be Ryan. Ryan is a big boy and I'm sure he understands. Ryan knows who I am, where to find me, etc. IF he has such a problem with it, he can talk to me about it. (In fact, in the past, we have talked via PM when there was an issue he and I went back and forth on).

Chad, I respect your skills as a player and support your issues when it comes to West coast number of events vs east coast. The rankings bear that out. Please don't try to be Ryan's mommy here and get on me bc I quoted him.

Keith
 
Flaming_Spinach said:
Moss's first post was dead-on.

Give people 50 ratings trips, and they'll all chill out.
Click to expand...

If by "they" you mean the 50 people who get ratings trips, then yes, "they" will all chill out (or most of them will, anyway). But the guy who comes in fifty-first is going to be complaining about not having 100 invites, and the year after that, the guy who comes in at spot number 101 will say that the whole idea of a rating system is a travesty and that we need Gym Challenges back. It's a thankless procedure, to boot.

And then there are the people whose grapes are sour who made it to Worlds anyway. Chuck just made the quarterfinals of what is, quite probably, the hardest tournament of the year, and secured himself a ranking invite for the World Championships, and he feels the need to rag on people who didn't do it exactly the way he did it. The reasoning he gives for his behavior is that he thinks those people are cowards, and that they have admitted that their metagames are terrible. I guess Chuck thinks that he has to do more work than other highly-ranked players because he lives in a very competitive region. That might even be true, although the way he goes on about Texans being illiterate is a pretty ridiculous exaggeration. But I don't see any solution to this "problem."

So no, Flaming_Spinach, they won't "all chill out." =/
 
Phazon Elite said:
I mean, it makes perfect sense: Why else would two competitive players, both of whom have GUARANTEED INVITES, not play to win an event which has the grand prize of MORE INVITES? "Hmm, I have this yummy apple here, but there's another apple of the same species over there just past those flying knives. I want that apple."
Click to expand...

That's probably the best logic I've heard over this topic in ages, but here's another way to think about it.

EC and myself want "two" apples (the first apple being the guaranteed trip, the second being the wonderful nats prizes), so we gladly take a little bit of a risk, and run through the flying knives for a lwhile. If we get hit by one knife, then obviously we'll need to go back to the hospital for recovery, but Ross is 100% content with the apple he has.

Ross, rather than risk one of those knives hitting him square in the head, sat, content with his one apple. EC avoided any of the flying knives until late in the day, but I got hit by one, and had to be sent back to the hospital (by a particularly sharp knife, might I add).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top