I think a lot of people are getting hung up on the nationality of the player base. I'm assuming the reason Worlds is held in the U.S. every year is because there are more players and staff here than in other countries. It's just more practical, and there's no reason to get upset about who wins worlds and stuff when it's all a matter of logistics, y'know?
I Propose Open Worlds With No Limit to the Number of Players
- Thread starter The Gorn
- Start date
- Status
oh really?well tell u what...if worlds were in europe there would be most european playersv there not u.s and japanese players.wouldn't that be a sight:smile:.and about what you say about staff.i think every european profesor/judge/TO would be happy to aid with the worlds if they were in europe.and according to a previous post that i missed...wouldn't you agree that pokemon would get bigger publicity if worlds would be held in europe?
worlds would then be a bigger and more important event to all i think
if worlds would be open and in europe
pros for worlds in europe:
-bigger player pool
-better publicity
-higher availibility to ordinary players
-higher player mixture-more nationalities----->worlds would be more worlds then today
-potentially less expenses for PUI/POP? i didnt calculate the expenses yet but i think this is right
-higher use of european invitations
-bigger visit to side events
-bigger profit to POP/PUI
-more new players
now,any cons?
btw...worlds could be open by some point-i would keep the invitational system and add more entrants via grinder and add more sideevents if they were in europe
pros for worlds in europe:
-bigger player pool
-better publicity
-higher availibility to ordinary players
-higher player mixture-more nationalities----->worlds would be more worlds then today
-potentially less expenses for PUI/POP? i didnt calculate the expenses yet but i think this is right
-higher use of european invitations
-bigger visit to side events
-bigger profit to POP/PUI
-more new players
now,any cons?
btw...worlds could be open by some point-i would keep the invitational system and add more entrants via grinder and add more sideevents if they were in europe
worlds after worlds?it would be interesting.but again there would probably be funding problems.but i would totally be for it.top 1 of each age group of each country in the world with invites and trip would be best-in europe of course.the expenses would be much smaller then.and it would be one of the most elite tourneys in the world.but then again we must ask ourselves....will PUI/POP go for it?because we do need their support.maybe we should make a petition for it:smile::smile::smile:
worlds after worlds- The top elite tournament? =P
should be interesting for everyone lol
worlds after worlds- The top elite tournament? =P
should be interesting for everyone lol
It's absolutely on the level.
Regarding the discussion as to why the number of invites for non-US countries is out-of-proportion to the number of players in the country, the standard answer is "To help grow the game in that country."
If Worlds participation is believed to grow the game, why not throw it wide open?
And, back to my original post, just imagine the energy around a tournament of the magnitude that an "Open Worlds" would create? From a purely "great tournament" perspective, it would be an amazing event.
Regarding the discussion as to why the number of invites for non-US countries is out-of-proportion to the number of players in the country, the standard answer is "To help grow the game in that country."
If Worlds participation is believed to grow the game, why not throw it wide open?
And, back to my original post, just imagine the energy around a tournament of the magnitude that an "Open Worlds" would create? From a purely "great tournament" perspective, it would be an amazing event.
bullados
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?
Open Worlds already exists. It's just that nobody calls it that.
It's quite simple to change that perspective.
Instead of the "Last Chance Qualifier", call that particular event "World Championships Day 1".
The current "Invites" would instead be called "Day 2 Qualifiers".
Just by changing the semantics, you change the perception of the event.
Worlds is already open. It's just that nobody realizes it yet.
It's quite simple to change that perspective.
Instead of the "Last Chance Qualifier", call that particular event "World Championships Day 1".
The current "Invites" would instead be called "Day 2 Qualifiers".
Just by changing the semantics, you change the perception of the event.
Worlds is already open. It's just that nobody realizes it yet.
NoPoke
Active Member
I suspect that a fully open worlds would in fact have the opposite effect. I can't see many Europeans willing to pay between $2000 and $4000 to attend an event where they are one of 1000 as against one of 100. I would expect that the only foreign players would be those receiving full travel awards.
Pidgeotto Trainer
New Member
For many people, a bigger accomplishment than winning states or top cutting x event is qualifying for worlds. This is a big deal whether you've done it multiple times or especially if you achieve this for the first time. So much of the incentive to play is to make worlds, just look at how much people care about ratings. This shouldn't be taken away. You have nationals as your open event, and that already is getting unbelievably huge.
Then I'll change the title to "I Propose Totally Open Worlds" if that will get around the semantics.
Red Haired Shanks
New Member
It's better to open Worlds. I've seen many high skilled players not make it and I have seen people cry. I don't like seeing stuff like that, neither do other people.
Even though Worlds would not be opened. There should still be more slots for the LCQ!
Even though Worlds would not be opened. There should still be more slots for the LCQ!
Last edited:
Mystery Thing
Administrator
You can't always get what you want.
How would you like it if you worked hard all season, went to every tournament you could, and then lost out to somebody who picked up a Machamp deck (or another donk deck, whatever) the day before Worlds, shows up, goes 7-2, and beats you by Opp. Win %?
Is it right for somebody who picks up a deck the day before to be able to say they're in the top 32/64/whatever in the WORLD? I sure don't think so.
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here...
It would be great to see more international players at Worlds, sure. I'm sure a lot of the PTOs and such would be happy to help out. I would disagree that there would be more publicity around the event if it were held in Europe.
I just think it makes the most sense to hold Worlds in the Country where the most players are. I'm not saying I wouldn't want to see more countries get involved in the game, or that the U.S. is the best place in the world, or anything. I'm just saying I think it's more practical.
DarthPika
New Member
if worlds would be open and in europe
pros for worlds in europe:
-bigger player pool
How on earth would you have a bigger player pool when the US has more players than anyone else?
-better publicity
How so? :/
-higher availibility to ordinary players
There are far more "ordinary players in the US than Europe.
-higher player mixture-more nationalities----->worlds would be more worlds then today
Let's just pretend that our states countries and be done with it.
-potentially less expenses for PUI/POP? i didnt calculate the expenses yet but i think this is right
One of the reasons it's held in the US is because it would cost too much anywhere else, including Europe.
-higher use of european invitations
You guy's have it easy enough as it is. >_>
-bigger visit to side events
What does this have to do with Europe?
-bigger profit to POP/PUI
How so? I would think that the US would be the most profitable place.
-more new players
Really? Again, hold it in the US and you'll get 10X as many new players as you would in Europe.
now,any cons?
btw...worlds could be open by some point-i would keep the invitational system and add more entrants via grinder and add more sideevents if they were in europe
Reply in bold.
1717171717171717
yoyofsho16
New Member
I agree. This is why I was like... "What?" when I read this. LCQ is the "open worlds." Worlds itself is like "top cut" for LCQ (if you didn't get a previous invite). Then top cut there is like top cut for the top cut.
Master Yoda
New Member
Think about that:
Worlds are open.
~1500 players
did you realy think that good players can do well?
all`?
after that everyone is crying beause "the best players" didn´t come in the top cut. like in this thread...
Worlds are open.
~1500 players
did you realy think that good players can do well?
all`?
after that everyone is crying beause "the best players" didn´t come in the top cut. like in this thread...
Prof Clay
New Member
I propose you are out of your mind :biggrin:....No way we could accommodate the number of people who show up.
Plus it would de-value the entire season of hard work by all those who strive to get there
- Status