Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Are there going to be enough Masters able to qualify for Worlds this year?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let's not get into pass down's of invite or points. No matter how you spin it that is not earning an invite. It has having one given to you for being ALMOST good enough. Masters seniors or juniors it doesn't matter.
 
So there's this game with an entry requirement that has a somewhat arbitrary requirement. Those above the bar are obviously "good enough" and those just below the arbitrary entry bar are not? Those just below the bar should be dismissed as "almost good enough"?

Who earned the invite most in the following scenario: the player who attends a number of low attendance events and does well or the player who goes to lots of large events and though does well doesn't get as many top finishes as the player in the smaller tournanents?

The arbitrary bar is there to give players a fixed target to aim for and to set the nominal size of worlds. To think it is selecting between those that are "good enough" and those that are "almost good enough" is a big mistake.
 
NoPoke said:
Who earned the invite most in the following scenario: the player who attends a number of low attendance events and does well or the player who goes to lots of large events and though does well doesn't get as many top finishes as the player in the smaller tournanents?
Click to expand...

And you JUST made the argument I've been trying to make for over a year, only to be consistently shot down by you. Funny how the world works, don't it?
 
No Ryan, I'm arguing that interpreting the bar as a discriminator between good players and not so good players is wrong. It can never do that task properly.

Note that I did not answer that question you quoted. My answer is that you can't tell. Adding attendance based points to the CP system so first at a big event gets more will have bad consequences for a fixed bar system. The CP system needs fixing but at the other end wher ethe points drop off a cliff unless you hit some magic number for attendance.
 
NoPoke said:
So there's this game with an entry requirement that has a somewhat arbitrary requirement. Those above the bar are obviously "good enough" and those just below the arbitrary entry bar are not? Those just below the bar should be dismissed as "almost good enough"?

Who earned the invite most in the following scenario: the player who attends a number of low attendance events and does well or the player who goes to lots of large events and though does well doesn't get as many top finishes as the player in the smaller tournanents?

The arbitrary bar is there to give players a fixed target to aim for and to set the nominal size of worlds. To think it is selecting between those that are "good enough" and those that are "almost good enough" is a big mistake.
Click to expand...

I love you, just sayin :)

Anyways I think 400 is a pretty high mark, you basically have to do good at regionals to make it and since the game is kinda lucky right now.. Im almost there but I played so many tournaments that I really dont even enjoy it anymore and I wish I could just stay home on the weekend but its another 10 hours of trains :/
 
I think that this is the first year with CP being in the 10s variant instead of 1s variant. I expect it to be updated accordingly next year. If that means that the grinder allows more players (8-16) this year, fine. If it means that next year the rates for each age group are modified, sure. It's a learning process. It takes time to figure out what works and frankly every year we think it's going to be X and it ends up being wrong and it ends up being Y. We had 41 players last year with 49 or higher last year in Masters. Let's see how many players, minus the 4 players who automatically got invites from Worlds, and see if we still have 41 players who qualify.

Drew
 
It's not like there's anything stopping them from looking at the number of people who qualified at 400 points after Nationals, deciding it's too low, and being all "loljk it's actually 385 points!"

Obviously they could never raise the limit midseason, but I see nothing wrong with them lowering it. (Not that I think they will, but it's not like it's an impossibility.)
 
If you sort juniors by rating, 40 of the top 50 either have an invite or are very close. In seniors, its looking like way more than 40 will get in. So the only group suffering by people still playing is masters,.
Look at Jay. I think he also won a regionals. Thats 120 points some other person didn't get. So my point about passing down points for those that have already T4 Worlds last year really apply in the MA division so it wouldnt really help the JR./SR attendance this year.
 
In the Masters, there are currently 14 players qualified, and another 28 within 100 points with 3 major CP tournaments remaining.

Seniors have 34 qualified, and another 36 within 100 points.

Juniors have 26 qualified, and another 26 within 100 points.

The only age group that I might be concerned about would be the Masters, but I think they'll still get between 30 and 40 players qualified through CPs by the time Nationals is over. Seniors will get around 60, and Juniors will get around 45-50.
 
I expect there will be some legal shenanigans at spring battle road tournaments, with friends conceding games to players who are very close to qualifying.
 
The system seems unbalanced.
In Germany, almost every good player gets the 400 points if he wants, even bad players in senior division achieve the score if they go to many tournaments and travel a lot.
Since we all know each other over here, there are tournaments where people scoop against each other so that those who still don´t have the invite get CP.
Now that I hear these shocking numbers from the USA, I hope they´ll change the system next season.
 
In masters, how many North American qualifiers is appropriate?

Not all the top 50 ranked are qualified yet but will most likely make it.
 
Prof Clay said:
In masters, how many North American qualifiers is appropriate?

Not all the top 50 ranked are qualified yet but will most likely make it.
Click to expand...

I think Top 50 (excluding those who already have an invite from last season) would be appropriate. I wouldn't mind top 60 either, but any more than top 60 and I feel it's too much.
 
Keep in mind that the tournaments from this weekend likely haven't been uploaded yet. They should be uploaded by some time next week.
 
North America cutoff for CP

Players within Striking distance (Winning Regional, Winning 6 Battle Roads, and Placing T16 at Nationals)

Masters have 325 players within THE 400 point requirment
Seniors have 228 players
Juniors have 139 players

Granted that at this stage not everybody can earn full battle roads points for 6 wins, but this is considering 0 BR points earned during fall

This is current as of 3/25 at 3:00 PM PDT

States uploads will still modify these numbers and will be changed accordingly
 
DukeFireBird said:
North America cutoff for CP

Players within Striking distance (Winning Regional, Winning 6 Battle Roads, and Placing T16 at Nationals)

Masters have 325 players within THE 400 point requirment
Seniors have 228 players
Juniors have 139 players

Granted that at this stage not everybody can earn full battle roads points for 6 wins, but this is considering 0 BR points earned during fall
Click to expand...

What would your estimates look like if they were realistic? Only 5 people can win regionals and only 16 can T16 Nationals. In my opinion, there are only 100 or so players left who have a realistic chance of making Worlds without the invite from T8ing Nationals. (That being said, I'm not sure what my definition of "striking distance" is. My estimate is a pure gut feeling.)

Your definition of "striking distance" seems a little too unrealistic. Maybe Top 16ing Regionals and Top 64ing Nationals with 2 more Battle Roads wins seems more appropriate.
 
Consider that the week 3 States haven't been uploaded yet. They should be by next week. And there's going to be some changes to the earlier States ratings points.

As far as "Striking Distance"? I'd say 100 points sounds about right at this point in the year.
 
Someone could do that math to precisely see how many points are left to be awarded. For instance, 1 Master at each remaining Regioanal will earn 120 pts. #2 will get 110. #3 and #4 will get 90 and 90. #5 - #8 will get 70 each. And so on. Then do this for Nationals. Too many Battle Roads I suspect to do that math, but I guess any Master's given record could go up by 30 pts at most (I'm making that up, based on competition and that they probably already have some best finish limits in the bag).

As of this morning, there are 25 Masters between 300 and 400 points. I just don't know if there are enough points remaining to get all of them in....especially since a fair amount of the points will be won by people under 300.

I feel Nationals Top 64 (30 pts) and Top 32 (40 pts) will be required of many players to put them over the 400 mark.
 
psychup, im not saying my numbers are realistic, rather this is showing how many people are still in the running. There is a mathematically eliminated line, and guess what, thats what my numbers show. Striking distance, which i defined, is getting the maximum possible remaining points for the season (290), not including the 500 for a T8 Nationals.

So anyone with under 110 points is actually mathematically eliminated from a worlds invite, barring a t8 or lcq.

Anyways, I always look at the elimination line and report that. Granted it isn't the most likely scenario, but after Regionals, we will have the elimination line move closer to the top.

Just keep in mind, after Regionals, the elimination line moves to 230, then after Battle Roads, it moves again to 80.

After Battle Roads gets uploaded and we have the final standings before Nationals, I would then post a speculation as to a more "realistic" number, as there wont be many variables to consider, unlike how it is right now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top