Lameness

[SomethingElse]

If they show up, they will have nothing to do and that needs to be made very clear.

If they'll have nothing to do, then they just won't go. Or they can just help out, selling stuff, cheering stuff on, even do pairings and such. I'm just saying, there has to be some way to make this more fair...Someone getting 3rd and a very competitive place and winning no trip, yet someone going to a later, same populated tourney, and getting 4th, with even possibly a much worse record, gets a trip? No way is that fair for the player(s)

 

[The Gorn]

Would you feel better if there was no trickle down?

That way, these later 3rd place finishers would not be getting trips (just like the earlier 3rd place finishers did not get trips).

 

[Prime]

I like the idea of 1 and done. Makes sense to me.

 

[Tyranitar666]

You know, from a players perspective who feels just this way, one of the major draws of this tournament is that you can stack your money that you win. If I couldn't win more than one Regionals, or compete in them, it would really turn me away from the game. Especially with Nationals? Ok, you won a trip at Regionals, you can't compete at Nationals because you have a trip? Even though its prizes are higher? That seems legitimate? What about the trip to Origins? If you won a State would you not be allowed to compete in a Regionals since its prizes overlap? If you say they can, because there are additional prizes, what about the fact that the trip prizes overlap, but there are also additional prizes in scholarships. I think that the current system is fine.

The difference in competition and number of wins you need also doesn't reflect evenly based upon skill level of area. For instance, you could have a state with minimal good players, vs a tournament where myself, moss, seena, drew, tom d, jason k, alex b, aj, foisy, psycodad, wetz, and more show up at ( This has happened ) How is winning a trip there requiring the same effort as winning a trip at a small regionals with weak competition. Its the same issue, different reason,a nd it can't be dealt with. I think the issue is null and void, and to tweak it is only for the worst.

 

[Drift]

Come on. To say players would travel everywhere to gobble up prizes is crazy. Don't you think it cost alot of money to travel to many events and still your not guaranteed to win. My son just moved up into the 11-14 age group and really didn't expect to win his regional due to the new experienced level of players. With this in mind, I told him we would go to nationals to give him a shot at worlds. I payed for the airfare and hotel which is going to cost around $900 minus the $300 travel expense from his state championship in the 10 & under before he turned 11. He then goes on to win his regional which is awesome but I just wasted $600 to go nationals. That $600 would have been nice money to spend at worlds instead on a trip to nationals. The only reason I booked the trip in advance was to get cheaper prices and available lodging since this is such a big event. The only good thing from this series of events is we have never been to nationals before. In summary, play for fun and take what ever comes your way. :thumb:

I would not be surprised, and if i had a deck for the current format I would. I play pro-halo. I go to any event I can, from one side of the country to the next to play an event. I have fun, and sometimes I win some stuff. I'd do the same for pokemon, so i could tell you the cost, and i can tell you all the ways to make it a lot cheaper. I'm sure some of the top ranked pokemon players dont pay 800 bucks to *maybe* play and win an event,

 

[Drift]

and in reguards to my above post, i'll make an exsample.

Living in baltimore for awhile i needed to get to columbus for an event, my total fare including travel,sleeping, food, and event cost. Total: $34

 

[NoPoke]

even 1 and done causes a degree of imbalance. Ture you wont get a player with a poor record getting a trip but the field will nonetheless have been thined which could make getting a good record easier.


1 then done:

positive benefit: no risk of collusion.

negative : excludes players.

 

[dld4a]

Who just happen to own and manage the most successful and longest lasting TCG in the history of TCGs. If they managed to keep a player base of over a million players while using next to no advertising and even less family friendly atmosphere, imagine what some of their thoughts might do to Pokemon.

IMO the overwhelming drive behind MTG's success is a phenomenon unrelated to WOTC's rules, abilities, or even the game quality itself. It was undeniably an incredible innovation. I believe it is a combination of that (being the first on the market with no competition for a long time) and the "coolness" of the subject matter it deals with, along with their ability to keep the rules close enough to right to get by, that gets the credit for the games' sustainability. The game itself is too convoluted and un-synchronistic for it to be the reason behind its' success. As far as what their thoughts would or could do to Pokemon... They intentionally tried to destroy Pokemon! Enough said about their thoughts and what they’d do to Pokemon!

 

[NoPoke]

some at Wizards tried to damage pokemon.
some at wizards tried to promote and protect pokemon.
it isn't as clear cut as wotc bad pui good.

However this isn't a thread about wotc vs PUI its about an apparent 'unfairness' in the present tournament structure regarding trips. personally I think that all systems are flawed and the best we can hope to do is to minimise the worst flaws, even when sometimes reducing a big flaw introduces a brand new small one.

 

[Adv1sor]

Reason enough not to do that right there! WOTC blows.

WOTC and the DCI may have tried to kill Pokemon by using it as a gateway for MTG, (eliminating the 15+ division for example), but from their software to their floor rules, they do a great job with organized play.

POP has been great in supporting us with big tournaments, prizes, trips, etc. But that doesn't mean they couldn't do better or that they shouldn't borrow some ideas from WOTC.

That said, I like the situation just as it is. Players should never be held back from entering a tournament just because they are winners. The trickle down trip and invites makes it a fair deal for the rest.

If you can't go to more than one qualifying tournament then you are at a disadvantage. No two ways around it. But you shouldn't expect POP to change the rule because of this fact.

 

[dld4a]

I like the situation just as it is. Players should never be held back from entering a tournament just because they are winners. The trickle down trip and invites makes it a fair deal for the rest.

If you can't go to more than one qualifying tournament then you are at a disadvantage. No two ways around it. But you shouldn't expect POP to change the rule because of this fact.

Well said right there!

 

[Rainbowgym]

Excluding players seems to be very trendy in Europe.

So why not in the USA.
Why not give away 2 trips at the State Championships and restrict attendance to residents of that state only.
The same applies for Regionals, no resident of the states it's covering you are not in.
Save up the sholarships and give those away at Gym Challenges.

And if there is anything left over, send it to Europe or Asia to support poor distributors who are not able to pay for 1 trip for each agegroup at the only real big tournament some countries have like Nationals.

 

[Moss Factor]

1 and done is stupid. I'd be upset if they took that angle. The system is just fine, nothing is perfect and there are just some unavoidable shortcomings to everything. This is a great system, just sometimes it sucks performing as well as someone else and not getting a trip.

I don't even really care that much, I just wish there were more ways to play at worlds as my part of the country is extremely competitive and I know some good players are going to be at home during worlds. We keep some of our best players at home because they live in competitive areas and then people wonder why the Japanese swept worlds =\

 

[PokePop]

We keep some of our best players at home because they live in competitive areas and then people wonder why the Japanese swept worlds =\

Ah. That explains it. It wasn't that they just were better players.

 

[The Gorn]

Ok, you won a trip at Regionals, you can't compete at Nationals because you have a trip? Even though its prizes are higher? That seems legitimate? What about the trip to Origins? If you won a State would you not be allowed to compete in a Regionals since its prizes overlap?

If Nintendo were to go to a 1-and-Done approach, I would hope that the situation you mention doesn't happen.

Regionals, States, Nationals, and Gyms are different events.

I would hope 1-and-Done would apply only to tournaments of the same kind (you win a Regional, you're done with other Regionals. You win a State, you're done with other States. And so on.)

As for a State winner winning at Regionals, let the prizes pass down. It's pretty simple.

 

[PokePop]

So, what is someone wins an invite but not a trip.
They'd be able to compete at a later event to try to get the trip? And would the extra invite pass down if they succeed?

 

[Lawman]

Pop: This year, all invites in the US are also awarded travel awards, ergo no splitting of the "big prizes". No one would need to compete to get the travelportion added on. From the OP website, this is in the Worlds 2005 info area: "In addition to invitations, all invited North American players (except those from the Last Chance Qualifier) will also win travel awards, which include travel and accommodations for those players to the World Championships. (Players under the age of 18 will receive an award for themselves and a legal guardian, who must attend for the player to be eligible to participate.)

Keith

 

[Prof Clay]

Yes..they gave everyone with invites from last years world's a trip too.... I finally found out. Man, and I had Gym challenges planned all month too.

Clay M

 

[Moss Factor]

Ah. That explains it. It wasn't that they just were better players.

Better flippers maybe, but players? Nah.

 

[P_A]

Perhaps you may be right, but if you were humble, you'd realize that's all part of the game as well, so that made them better players too.