Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Dear TPCi: Scrap the disaster that is 50+3!

Status
Not open for further replies.
In my opinion, the problem with the current tournament structure isn't the Best-2-out-of-3, the 50 minute time limit, or the ties. It's the fact that there can only be a Top 8.

If you play through a massive 9 round tournament, and do well enough to make it to the Top 32, you deserve to compete for the title of Champion. You should be able to compete in Top Cut. You've earned it. If there's anything to be changed about the current system, I believe that TPCi should allow Top Cuts of more than just 8 once again.

I suppose there is some argument to be made against 50+3. Timing can definitely be an issue, especially for the Masters division. But the few States and Regionals that can make it to 9 rounds usually have a Day 2 anyway. Why not have a cut off as to how long a tournament can play each day?

Let's say we have a 9 round Regionals. The Masters division players just finished Round 7 and it's 8:45 PM, meaning that Round 8 wouldn't be posted until about 9:00 PM. To avoid running the event late into the night, and thus having frustrated and tired players, you'd have the final two rounds the second day, followed by a Top Cut of 16 or 32. Players who traveled from out-of-state for the event most likely already have a hotel room booked for that night anyway, and those who didn't are most likely close enough to the event that they can easily make it the second day.

If ties are the only reason you're complaining, then there is something that you can do to at least try and avoid them. For example, maybe instead of using a slow deck that has a much higher possibility of tying at one of these big events, such as Darkrai/Garbodor or Trevenant/Accelgor, you could use a faster deck that can easily finish 2-3 games in less than 50 minutes, such as Plasma variants or Darkrai/Yveltal. If you insist on using a slow deck, then you can try and play faster, or try and play out one long Game 1 and try and not even have the need for a 3rd game. After all, decks such as Darkrai/Garbodor and Dragonite/Reuniclus have already done extremely well at some of these events, and they somehow figured out a way to make it through all 9 rounds. While this plan may not be completely foolproof, if you really have that much of a problem with ties, either take these suggestions or don't play in these events. After all, ties are a part of the game now, and you can't change that.

Just my two cents.

EDIT: Also, if you have the cut off for how long tournaments can run each day, you can have 60 or even 75 minute rounds with little to no problems, therefore reducing the amount of ties as well
 
In my opinion, the problem with the current tournament structure isn't the Best-2-out-of-3, the 50 minute time limit, or the ties. It's the fact that there can only be a Top 8.

If you play through a massive 9 round tournament, and do well enough to make it to the Top 32, you deserve to compete for the title of Champion. You should be able to compete in Top Cut. You've earned it. If there's anything to be changed about the current system, I believe that TPCi should allow Top Cuts of more than just 8 once again.

I suppose there is some argument to be made against 50+3. Timing can definitely be an issue, especially for the Masters division. But the few States and Regionals that can make it to 9 rounds usually have a Day 2 anyway. Why not have a cut off as to how long a tournament can play each day?

Let's say we have a 9 round Regionals. The Masters division players just finished Round 7 and it's 8:45 PM, meaning that Round 8 wouldn't be posted until about 9:00 PM. To avoid running the event late into the night, and thus having frustrated and tired players, you'd have the final two rounds the second day, followed by a Top Cut of 16 or 32. Players who traveled from out-of-state for the event most likely already have a hotel room booked for that night anyway, and those who didn't are most likely close enough to the event that they can easily make it the second day.

If ties are the only reason you're complaining, then there is something that you can do to at least try and avoid them. For example, maybe instead of using a slow deck that has a much higher possibility of tying at one of these big events, such as Darkrai/Garbodor or Trevenant/Accelgor, you could use a faster deck that can easily finish 2-3 games in less than 50 minutes, such as Plasma variants or Darkrai/Yveltal. If you insist on using a slow deck, then you can try and play faster, or try and play out one long Game 1 and try and not even have the need for a 3rd game. After all, decks such as Darkrai/Garbodor and Dragonite/Reuniclus have already done extremely well at some of these events, and they somehow figured out a way to make it through all 9 rounds. While this plan may not be completely foolproof, if you really have that much of a problem with ties, either take these suggestions or don't play in these events. After all, ties are a part of the game now, and you can't change that.

Just my two cents.

EDIT: Also, if you have the cut off for how long tournaments can run each day, you can have 60 or even 75 minute rounds with little to no problems, therefore reducing the amount of ties as well

The problems are that
A. It's not just a few regionals hitting the 9 rounds. All of them east of (and including) Houston have had over 227.
B. Sure, you can limit day 1, but that doesn't help when day 2 could easily extend to 5-6 PM at Regionals—not practical for events where players may have to drive 10+ hours. Making players local stay an additional night on Saturday isn't desirable either.
 
The problems are that
A. It's not just a few regionals hitting the 9 rounds. All of them east of (and including) Houston have had over 227.
B. Sure, you can limit day 1, but that doesn't help when day 2 could easily extend to 5-6 PM at Regionals—not practical for events where players may have to drive 10+ hours. Making players local stay an additional night on Saturday isn't desirable either.
If TPCi removed the Top 8 restriction, allowing for Top 16 and Top 32, the 227-kicker Day 2 event would be eliminated. It would simply be the Swiss rounds and Top Cut, just as it's always been. If we stay true to the old Top Cut system, you'd need 8 players for a Top 2, 12 players for a Top 4, 32 players for a Top 8, 64 players for a Top 16, and 128 players for a Top 32; and every Regionals in the US so far has had 128+ players (in the Masters division, that is).

I suppose there could be a valid argument with your second point there, but TPCi can't realistically make everyone happy. I suppose you could say that we could go back to 30+3, single game Swiss, allowing enough time for Day 2 to finish at noon-1:00, but then we'd still have players complaining about being donked and saying that "the time limit is discouraging Stage 2 decks".

What we could do is have 60 (or even 75) minute Best-2-out-of-3 rounds, with a Day 1 limit, and a maximum of a Top 16. This would reduce the amount of ties, not have the tournament run late into the night, and not have nearly as many sour grapes about good records (like X-1-1, X-2-0, etc) whiffing Cut.
 
There are no longer any donks—Rule changes.

This time limit is far more detrimental to Stage 2s then 30+3.

75 minutes is 15 extra minutes on every round; an extra hour every 4 rounds. Say 9 rounds of 50+3 optimistically ends at 11:30pm right now. We'll say round 7 would end at 9 as is, your proposed timeline above. Tacking on the extra 1:45 for 75+3, that's 10:45. If you want to end by 9:30, you can only play 6 rounds on Day 1.

You won't even have Day 2's Swiss done by noon, and finals by 5, assuming your Top 16 number.

The problem is that Top 16 is just too small for 227+ people; the numbers just don't work. That isn't even a suitable solution.
 
The one thing I don't agree with other players on, is that Bo3 is "too exhausting." I agree that it can be exhausting, but thats where it just comes to how you prepare. The mental strain of Bo3 weeds out skilled players from unprepared players.

No, it weeds out the older players from the younger players. I haven't finished an event larger than Cities this season. After 15 games of Pokemon over 6 hours with no breaks, I'm too tired to play anymore. I guess in your world, I should have prepared more.
 
If you can admit that we have a broken system, it should be fixed ASAP.

I think that means Nationals. I'm not sure what people having made travel plans has to do with refusing to fix the problem sooner. "I regret having made travel plans, I planned on playing in a subpar tournament environment of Type X and this is a subpar environment of Type Y."

Also, plenty of people have commented on stalling not being "too bad" of a problem. We really don't have data to support this. Please don't try to qualify the severity of the problem.
1) Cheaters aren't keeping public records on this.
2) It's tough to trust internet gripes on this one, some people are naturally play slow and might get the win that way while others intentionally manipulate the clock. These are varying levels of bad which we can't reliably measure.

I'm open to /long/ events. I'm not open to /unreasonably grueling/ events. How do I determine the difference?
Long events start on time, run promptly, and might require me to put in an 8am-11pm day of Pokémon.
Unreasonably grueling events make me show up on time to avoid risking a round 1 loss, then waste my time by starting late. There is some kind of food break before round 3. The round after the food break doesn't start on time. I end up putting in a day of playing Pokémon that lasts from 8am-11pm+.
I strongly dislike the argument that rounds should be less time because too many players get tired. I greatly prefer stamina being part of the game than winning game 1 of a best of 3 or being forced to try and 'time manage' your opponent when it is clear they will win game 2, forcing a tie by going to game 3.

I think it's wonderful the way the game has grown. I think we need to work as a community to ensure that the growth is managed in a way to continue. We have one of the most fantastic National Championships across all TCGs, let's keep it that way.
 
Hard to determine what the people want. But next season is the next natural opportunity. I'd say too late for Spring Regionals since venues are already booked, players notified, schedules planned, etc. Nationals would appear to be the only chance to do something meaningful before next season.

I agree that next season is a natural opportunity and at that point I absolutely expect change of the system to occur.

If a change could occur for nationals I think it would be make the tournament more enjoyable particularly just switching it to best of 1 30 mins two flights with basically a day two of swiss for the top 64 in each flight cut down to a top 8.

I've gone to a handful of nationals but it was safe to say at every single one there has been confrontational matches/rulings that have gone way way over the allotted time(pushing waiting between rounds somewhere upwards of 20 mins). If this also occurs this year with a 50min + 3 (which it will undoubtedly will) I bet we have rather large time issues finishing the necessary swiss rounds in the first day which in turn will make the next day run even longer. Sounds like a grueling tournament if we keep the current time system.



Side thought:

I don't think we will get a ton of response from TO's (if any), but I would honestly like to know how they feel about the new best of 3 50 min tournament structure. After organizing an entire season within this format I'm sure they have opinions on it.
 
I hate the time limits, but I despise these extremely small cuts even more. Cutting to a T8 out of 100 people when size clearly shows a larger top cut is necessary is hard for me to understand. It honestly makes me not want to travel anymore knowing how many players with such a small top cut.
 
I don't have a huge sample size, but the one 50 Bo3 tournament I've played in this year (IL States), I drew three times and then dropped to play old formats with friends. Every game 1 and game 2 I played went to six prizes, and I never saw anything remotely close to slow play from my opponents. There just simply isn't enough time to play three games in 50 minutes.
 
I dislike the super long tournaments that Best 2/3 with Top Cut of 8 presents. If we truly want to keep the Best 2/3 system which I suspect the majority of the competitive player base wants ( I also like Best 2/3). Then make it 75 min but with the caveat that outside of Nationals and Worlds there is no Top Cut. This will permit tournaments getting completed at a decent time and not having to worry about any 2 day events until NATS and Worlds. Yes even Regionals should not have a Top Cut. This system is currently what Yugioh does and it seems to work out fine.
 
The Top 8 maximum cut wouldn't be a problem if there were enough Swiss rounds to justify it. Compared to the past, States are running the same amount of Swiss rounds, but they have a smaller cut size; that shouldn't happen. No matter what your feelings are on 50+3, this is a clear problem that needs to be addressed.
 
Yugioh has T8 cuts at Regionals

Jay - This last weekend was Yugioh Regionals in NY and there was no Top Cut. Undefeated at the end of Swiss was 1st place then so on and so forth. But I digress just as I posted elsewhere my point is you cant make everybody happy. You cant have even longer tournaments with best 2 out of 3, 75 min rounds and Top Cut. Somethings gotta give. Its just ridiculous to propose 2 day tournaments for Cities and States. Enough is enough. With work and family commitments 2 day tourneys outside of Nats and Worlds is just asking too much out of the majority of the player base especially given the frequency of Cities and States. Im sure Im not the only person that is against 2 day events for Cities and States.
 
Jay - This last weekend was Yugioh Regionals in NY and there was no Top Cut. Undefeated at the end of Swiss was 1st place then so on and so forth. But I digress just as I posted elsewhere my point is you cant make everybody happy. You cant have even longer tournaments with best 2 out of 3, 75 min rounds and Top Cut. Somethings gotta give. Its just ridiculous to propose 2 day tournaments for Cities and States. Enough is enough. With work and family commitments 2 day tourneys outside of Nats and Worlds is just asking too much out of the majority of the player base especially given the frequency of Cities and States. Im sure Im not the only person that is against 2 day events for Cities and States.
Where's this talk about two-day Cities? That's just ridiculous.

The problem is that Top 16 is just too small for 227+ people; the numbers just don't work. That isn't even a suitable solution.
And I agree, but it's certainly better than what we have right now.

The Top 8 maximum cut wouldn't be a problem if there were enough Swiss rounds to justify it. Compared to the past, States are running the same amount of Swiss rounds, but they have a smaller cut size; that shouldn't happen. No matter what your feelings are on 50+3, this is a clear problem that needs to be addressed.
QFT. I would be fine with the Top 8 if we had more rounds; all TPCi has done now is make it harder to Top Cut.
 
The Top 8 maximum cut wouldn't be a problem if there were enough Swiss rounds to justify it. Compared to the past, States are running the same amount of Swiss rounds, but they have a smaller cut size; that shouldn't happen. No matter what your feelings are on 50+3, this is a clear problem that needs to be addressed.
This is something I don't think ANYONE likes. It's very obviously a HUGE problem with the 50+3 system that makes luck way, way too important.
 
This is something I don't think ANYONE likes. It's very obviously a HUGE problem with the 50+3 system that makes luck way, way too important.

Ness is a vocal proponent of Best of 3 with more time, and is content with a small cut, since both together showcase skill. He has also stated that Best of 1 Swiss with more rounds would introduce more luck than Best of 3 does. So regarding luck...which way is right?
 
I agree with most of you, 50+3 doesn't seem to work. The tie system leaves a lot to be desired and the time limit has proven to be way too short. There's a lot of viable alternatives, and I'm sure that TPCI would be able to find one that fits both players and their own needs if they decide to change it all up. I'd personally prefer it if the top 8 cut stayed and they just made swiss 30+3 bo1 with a few more rounds added, but again, that's just personal preference. There are several alternatives available, and the vast majority would be much better than 50+3.
 
Ness is a vocal proponent of Best of 3 with more time, and is content with a small cut, since both together showcase skill. He has also stated that Best of 1 Swiss with more rounds would introduce more luck than Best of 3 does. So regarding luck...which way is right?
I don't feel like long games = skillful games. Just because there is lots of time for a Bo3 does not mean more skill will be involved than in a shorter Bo3, all it means to me is that there will be less ties (which has it's benefits). Of course, Bo3 is going to reduce luck's importance compared to Bo1, but I think Bo1 with extra swiss rounds (meaning multiple extra rounds) has a similar effect. The benefit of Bo1 with extra swiss is that your tie breakers are less important than perfect swiss with Bo3. I've seen too many tournaments where 1 person with a record the same as half the top 8 misses cut on tie breakers.
 
Why don't we start a USA Nats boycott/petition until they change the ruling. If we get 300+ players (specifically masters) that can comment or sign their agreement to boycott Nats, measures will be taken 300 x $20 = lot's of money they will be missing out on.. Think about all the people who are going to spend their own money to travel and get screwed over by this system and not the play of their decks come Nats this year. It's just not fair. I dropped from the game as a whole after the Indiana Fall Regionals just this past year because I didn't care to participate in this system.
 
Seems a little harsh to plan a boycott when you don't even know what you are going to be boycotting...

TCPi has had representatives at all the Regional competitions in the US (and will in April as well), and has been tracking and reacting to feedback on the Bo3 system (see the option that States tournaments had to run Juniors and Seniors in the Bo1 format). I have also wondered what Nats will look like this year - whether it will mimic a super large Regional with folks eliminated after one day, or with a larger field playing Swiss on the 3rd day - but I don't know! And neither do any us! I'm sure that from the end of the first Winter Regionals (if not before!) they have been working through possible Nats schedules and trying to figure out the best way to implement the tournament this year. Give them some time to share what they have learned, before you decide that the "end is near", please.

As losjakal has pointed out, there may be some limitations to what can/will/should be changed before Nats this year, but I'm sure that all of us had several bumps and bruises before we could bike all the way to the end of the block also. Changes don't get done perfectly the first time, and rarely the second time either!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top