Playing Games Best of 3

[Victory Bell]

You haven't been reading my posts, I'm not trying to eliminate luck, I'm trying to diminish it to a manageable degree, luck shouldn't be able to tell you so strongly that you're going to lose before you can make any decision.


Day 2 would have a cut, so not everyone would be playing for all 2 days, also only a small amount of people would be playing at the end of day two, in fact it might even be over before the end of that day. I also said that having this specific to certain age groups is still an option, so that eliminates the parent factor.

But what events? nats and worlds people have hotels so that doesent matter. Regs/large states people either have to get a room (Not realy fair beacuse they where they live cant be helped) or make the trip again (most of the time long beacuse there are few). And for some (good players who make cut also) are young collage students who are quite frankly, poor. Either way I see it, someone gets displeased.

 

[Sabett]

But what events? nats and worlds people have hotels so that doesent matter. Regs/large states people either have to get a room (Not realy fair beacuse they where they live cant be helped) or make the trip again (most of the time long beacuse there are few). And for some (good players who make cut also) are young collage students who are quite frankly, poor. Either way I see it, someone gets displeased.

I think I either misspoke or you misunderstood me, I only anticipated for worlds to be done in two days, and the other tournaments to be done in one.

 

[Victory Bell]

I think I either misspoke or you misunderstood me, I only anticipated for worlds to be done in two days, and the other tournaments to be done in one.

Well some one is still unhappy cause the regs and maybe states would get done very late...

 

[Sabett]

Well some one is still unhappy cause the regs and maybe states would get done very late...

If they're winning that is. They should be preparing to stay until the end anyway, unless they didn't plan to win, but then why would they come?

 

[Victory Bell]

Sure I have my trophey but now I get home at 3+. In masters people work. In juniors and seniors people have parents. How fair.
How willing will store owners, the TO, and judges be to stay then...

 

[Sabett]

Sure I have my trophey but now I get home at 3+. In masters people work. In juniors and seniors people have parents. How fair.
How willing will store owners, the TO, and judges be to stay then...

I don't think tournaments are going to last that long, with a minimum of 3 am and then plus, I can see worse case scenario being at 3a.m. Besides it's not like these are city tournaments where they're often on Saturday and then another on Sunday, you can begin the tournaments on Saturday. Also plenty of other card games have tournaments within the same time table.

 

[homeofmew]

Alex: yugioh matches don't last long and can go 2/3, heck mopst yu gi oh mtches don't last many turns anyway.

 

[Box of Fail]

..........I didn't mention anything about anything being banned at all to any extent, so for you to suggest that my post is saying that at all is taking my post wildly out of context. Pokemon was meant to be played with 6 prizes, and 1 prizes games are a superficial and unintended way to play Pokemon. Sudden Death's consistent answer to end matches, and should only be used to solve matches in the rare incidents of a tie.

Deck's that manipulate speed shouldn't have this unfair advantage against slower decks.

You did, in fact, imply that Sudden Death should be banned, or at least limited.

And if donks were unintended, why were they created? PCL made them, so they were, in fact, intended. PCL WANTS there to be games where no matter how good a player's moves are, he is still destined to lose through no fault of his own. Perhaps they intended for chances for new players to shine or something, but you can't deny that donks were intended.

Winning by benching has been part of the game since its conception. Those who you claim 'didn't intend' for cheap wins to exist invented cards like Machamp and Kingdra. One look at those says, 'donk'.

 

[bullados]

I'm going to touch on two points made here, simply b/c there's an organizer's perspective that's not being taken into account with all of this...

1. Ties. We used to have ties, back in 2004-5. It was awful. Most to all of the players in the top 4-8 tables were performing Intentional Draws for the single point to ensure they get into the top cut. Heck, I was tempted once to ID and take my chances with resistance b/c I was facing one of my best friends in an SBZ. Draws don't help the game, they hurt it.

2. Time restrictions. A 40 minute Swiss round with 200 players actually lasts an hour from round start to next round start, if not longer. I ran a 53 player City, and patted myself on the back for getting all of the players out by 6pm after doing registration at 9am, 10 start, because I was faster this year than I was last year with 39 players. At Nationals, with 1200 players, I was impressed that they kept their round times under 80 minutes, for the most part. Think about that. Double the announced time is considered an efficiently run tournament. And this is with Single Game Swiss Matches, where the tiebreak scenario is absurdly easy to determine from the gamestate (most prizes wins, play to next prize if tied). Now, think about the scenarios when going to BO3. Now, there is a different tiebreaker for each game played. In game 1, it's as if you're playing single-game-matches. In game 2, one player has to take 4 prizes for the game to be considered complete. And then, if the game is complete and there's a tie in games, you go into Sudden Death, which takes a minimum of 10 minutes to complete. 1 hour BO3 could easily take 90-120 minutes, depending on the players and the organization of the individual TOs.

Now, consider that Regionals will generally go 6 rounds T8. That's in excess of 9 hours for the Swiss rounds by themselves, not including registration time (1 hour), lunch break, and dinner break (1 hour each). You're looking at 12 hours before the top cut even begins. And this is assuming no unforseen delays such as computer glitches, registration hangups, people meltdowns (I've seen these happen many times), etc. And then you're looking at another 4.5 hours for the top cut. For an event that has registration at 9, 10start, you'll have all of the players going until 10pm with the Top Cut players not leaving the event until 2:30 in the morning.

Having judged at three different Regionals (Rockford 06, St. Louis 07, Dells 08), I've seen firsthand exactly how long these days are using just 30 minute Swiss rounds (a mistake that has since been remedied). Rockford had 170 people, with a 1030 start time. Including the usual and unusual hangups, the Swiss rounds finished at around 6pm, and the Masters played until midnight. St. Louis had 226 people, same start time, same round time. The Swiss rounds were done by 7pm, and the final players (Juniors, believe it or not) finished their rounds at 1am the next morning. The Dells had 181 people, with 40 minute Swiss rounds, and an insane 9am start. The Swiss were done by 7pm, 6pm for the younger age groups, and the younger guys were out by 9pm while the Mas played until I believe 11pm.

Now, think about what would have happened had those tournaments been BO3 rather than single-game-swiss. The best case scenario is that the extra 20 minutes of round times only added 1:40 to the event. However, as every TO knows quite well, the best case scenario never happens. There is always some kind of delay or fiasco at every tournament. Sometimes they're known to the players, sometimes those fires are put out behind the scenes, but they always happen, and they always cause delays. Currently, I plan each round to last about an hour for my City tournaments, 50 minutes for my BRs because of the factors I outlined above, and that's for a 40 minute round. If I had to do 60 minute BO3, I'd have to plan for at least 90 minutes for my Cities and probably 75 for my BRs (smaller events, easier to control), and I'd be out of the only venue in the area that will allow me to run events because of their close time. I know quite a few TOs that are in a similar boat, that venue restrictions are limiting their tournament placement.

In short, I'm AGAINST ties of any manner being recorded by the tournament software, every game must have a winner and a loser. And I'm AGAINST the use of BO3 in Swiss due to the time restrictions it places on the TO, the venue, and the event.

 

[Sabett]

Alex: yugioh matches don't last long and can go 2/3, heck mopst yu gi oh mtches don't last many turns anyway.

And this explains how MTG does it how? It still works for them huh? They still have ties, huh? Also, making the point that some yu-gi-oh games don't last that many turns is moot, some Pokemon games end on t1.

Also, once again, don't refer to me in my real name.

You did, in fact, imply that Sudden Death should be banned, or at least limited.

And if donks were unintended, why were they created? PCL made them, so they were, in fact, intended. PCL WANTS there to be games where no matter how good a player's moves are, he is still destined to lose through no fault of his own. Perhaps they intended for chances for new players to shine or something, but you can't deny that donks were intended.

Winning by benching has been part of the game since its conception. Those who you claim 'didn't intend' for cheap wins to exist invented cards like Machamp and Kingdra. One look at those says, 'donk'.

Funny, I don't see the word banned at all in that second post.

Donk's are fine, when you can fight them, also donk's don't reall connect to sudden death's in the way you think. The problem with sudden deaths is that Pokemon was intended to be played with 6 prizes, not 1, so playing as such shouldn't be common place.

I'm going to touch on two points made here, simply b/c there's an organizer's perspective that's not being taken into account with all of this...

1. Ties. We used to have ties, back in 2004-5. It was awful. Most to all of the players in the top 4-8 tables were performing Intentional Draws for the single point to ensure they get into the top cut. Heck, I was tempted once to ID and take my chances with resistance b/c I was facing one of my best friends in an SBZ. Draws don't help the game, they hurt it.

2. Time restrictions. A 40 minute Swiss round with 200 players actually lasts an hour from round start to next round start, if not longer. I ran a 53 player City, and patted myself on the back for getting all of the players out by 6pm after doing registration at 9am, 10 start, because I was faster this year than I was last year with 39 players. At Nationals, with 1200 players, I was impressed that they kept their round times under 80 minutes, for the most part. Think about that. Double the announced time is considered an efficiently run tournament. And this is with Single Game Swiss Matches, where the tiebreak scenario is absurdly easy to determine from the gamestate (most prizes wins, play to next prize if tied). Now, think about the scenarios when going to BO3. Now, there is a different tiebreaker for each game played. In game 1, it's as if you're playing single-game-matches. In game 2, one player has to take 4 prizes for the game to be considered complete. And then, if the game is complete and there's a tie in games, you go into Sudden Death, which takes a minimum of 10 minutes to complete. 1 hour BO3 could easily take 90-120 minutes, depending on the players and the organization of the individual TOs.

Now, consider that Regionals will generally go 6 rounds T8. That's in excess of 9 hours for the Swiss rounds by themselves, not including registration time (1 hour), lunch break, and dinner break (1 hour each). You're looking at 12 hours before the top cut even begins. And this is assuming no unforseen delays such as computer glitches, registration hangups, people meltdowns (I've seen these happen many times), etc. And then you're looking at another 4.5 hours for the top cut. For an event that has registration at 9, 10start, you'll have all of the players going until 10pm with the Top Cut players not leaving the event until 2:30 in the morning.

Having judged at three different Regionals (Rockford 06, St. Louis 07, Dells 08), I've seen firsthand exactly how long these days are using just 30 minute Swiss rounds (a mistake that has since been remedied). Rockford had 170 people, with a 1030 start time. Including the usual and unusual hangups, the Swiss rounds finished at around 6pm, and the Masters played until midnight. St. Louis had 226 people, same start time, same round time. The Swiss rounds were done by 7pm, and the final players (Juniors, believe it or not) finished their rounds at 1am the next morning. The Dells had 181 people, with 40 minute Swiss rounds, and an insane 9am start. The Swiss were done by 7pm, 6pm for the younger age groups, and the younger guys were out by 9pm while the Mas played until I believe 11pm.

Now, think about what would have happened had those tournaments been BO3 rather than single-game-swiss. The best case scenario is that the extra 20 minutes of round times only added 1:40 to the event. However, as every TO knows quite well, the best case scenario never happens. There is always some kind of delay or fiasco at every tournament. Sometimes they're known to the players, sometimes those fires are put out behind the scenes, but they always happen, and they always cause delays. Currently, I plan each round to last about an hour for my City tournaments, 50 minutes for my BRs because of the factors I outlined above, and that's for a 40 minute round. If I had to do 60 minute BO3, I'd have to plan for at least 90 minutes for my Cities and probably 75 for my BRs (smaller events, easier to control), and I'd be out of the only venue in the area that will allow me to run events because of their close time. I know quite a few TOs that are in a similar boat, that venue restrictions are limiting their tournament placement.

In short, I'm AGAINST ties of any manner being recorded by the tournament software, every game must have a winner and a loser. And I'm AGAINST the use of BO3 in Swiss due to the time restrictions it places on the TO, the venue, and the event.

1. None of that changes that other card games work just fine with ties, in fact I can't think of one card game that doesn't. Hundreds of thousands of other players work with ties absolutely fine, apparently something about ties are worth it.

2. If there are problems in a tournament, then they are going to happen, two more games aren't going to add or take away from that. Computer hang ups? Registration Hangups? People Meltdowns? Why are these "fires" increasing because of games being played best of 3? Sounds like playing games as such are just going to add 20 min, in addition to the time that's already there. Also, I never suggested for this to be done, in Juinors, only in high scale tournaments, which I now denounce, and high scale tournaments. That means states or regionals and up, absolutely not cities or BRs. That would be quite ridiculous. And as for it being straining on the TO, venue, and event, they should anticipate, for those high scale tournaments, to last for a very long time.

 

[NoPoke]

Bullados:

Just to pick up on one rather glaring error. At the bigger tournaments you can expect some matches to go over time. As tournament size increases this become an expectation that every round there will be incomplete matches. So the only difference between 40 minute single game and 45 minute b-of-3 is in the extra five minutes at which time is called. But there is more going on. The round runs to the beat of the very last match to complete. At the biggest tournaments where there are lots of games running over time that 5 minute difference gets absorbed into the play necessary to resolve the ties.

Draws are a very efficient means of avoiding venue time overruns. And the issue of last round IDs is not impossible to overcome with an alteration to how players are paired in the last round.

My experience has been that the 15 minutes of inbetween round time that TOM estimates is quite accurate for both 40 minute single game swiss and 45 minute b-of-3 swiss

 

[bullados]

1. Games should be decided at the table. Any system that allows for games to be decided ahead of time with no penalty for that decision should not be used. End of story.

2. Again, from experience, there's a minimum of 25% extra time that any TO has to add on to his or her events, not including food breaks. And this extra time increases more people enter the tournament, but 25% is a good enough estimate for our purposes. This time includes such things as data entry, posting pairings, Judge meetings, and overtime. When you make the move from Single Game to BO3, you also GREATLY increase the potential amount of time required for overtime matches because of the rules in place (which are absolutely, completely, and 100% correct for this game, and should not be changed). Remember that, in BO3, there is a scenario that crops up quite often that will last at least 15 minutes, if not longer, where both players are tied in game 2, both have taken 4 or 5 prizes, and the loser of game 1 wins that second game. Not only does this add time due to the Next Prize clause, but it also adds time for the Sudden Death game.

Now, I'm just looking at the events that I've been a part of, namely those in Illinois, Missouri, and Wisconsin, but I think these are a pretty good indicator of the overall health of the game as the numbers at events in this area have generally been in the average-to-above-average area compared to the rest of the US (statistics here and here). I'm also going to assume the average increase in attendance from last year to this year will stay fairly constant at 25-30%, with approximately 40% increase in the Masters.

Wisonsin States had 89 players, with 46 Masters. Based on my growth assumption (which was consistent through 3 years of this game and I don't see falling this year either), Wisconsin will get 111 players with 64 Masters, right on the border between 6 and 7 rounds and T8 or T16. Assuming the regulations stay the same, we can pretty well assume that there will be a max T8 for States, which helps in these calculations. 7 rounds of single-game matches is 4:20, not including the average 20 minutes per round for general tournament maintenance and overtime matches, and also not including the obligatory lunch and dinner breaks. Assume that, with all of those added in, it'll take 1 hour per round with 2 hours for Lunch and Dinner. That's a 9 hour tournament, before getting into the top cut. And that's also not including the computer breaks and other craziness when you get 100+ Pokemon players in the same room. Then you get the 3 Top Cut rounds, which almost always go to time and beyond, so assume about 1:15 minimum for each Top Cut round. That puts the tournament at 12:45. If you start the tournament at an insane 9am, you won't finish until, at the earliest, 10pm. Most venues don't open their doors until 9am on a weekend, so assuming an hour or more for registration, you're not starting until 10am at the earliest, which would put tourney end at 11pm. If you go to BO3 one hour, you're adding a minimum of 20 minutes onto each round, and I would put it closer to 25 because of the tiebreaker scenarios and extra data management. That's 7 rounds at half an hour or less per round extra, putting the tournament at an additional 3.5 hours, and ending no earlier than 1am. I can think of precious few venues that are willing to stay open that late in the evening, can accomadate that number of people, AND are reasonably priced for individual PTOs to afford.

Illinois States, which I judged in the Juniors, had 165 players, with 77 in the Masters. Extrapolating, that would place the tournament at 206 players with 107 Masters. Now, I know given the player base and the change in location from Rockford to Chicago the attendance will be higher than that, but I'll use those numbers to illustrate the point. Like above, that would put the end time at around 10pm ideally. Last year, the Juniors didn't finish until 10pm, and the Masters didn't finish until 1am, and this was one of the better run tournaments Regionals level and below that I had ever attended. Now, think about what would have happened if we were playing BO3 Swiss matches. That's an extra 3+ hours, and we wouldn't have finished until 4am, or well into the next day.

Wisconsin Regionals had 181 players, with 89 in the Masters age group. Based on the growth assumption above, I'd estimate that Wisconsin will get about 226 players with 124 Masters. That's right around the edge between 7 and 8 rounds, with an absolute T16. With 7 rounds a a T16, the Masters were done by midnight with a 9am start. If we would have had BO3 in the Swiss, we wouldn't have finished until 3am. This year, we could expect 8 rounds and a T16. Given that the TO has already posted the details about the tournament's 9am start, we're going with that. The tournament probably won't finish until 1am this year, given the extra round and that we pretty much were as efficient as we possibly could be in the organizational aspect of the tournament. If we would do BO3, we wouldn't be done until at least 4am, and probably not until 5am. Idk about you, but I don't particularly feel great Judging for 24 hours straight with virtually no breaks and on short rest from driving the night before and heading into short rest having to drive the next day.

Now, look at US Nationals, the biggest event of the year. Were you there? I was, and it was about as efficiently run of a tournament as I had ever been a part of. 1200 players, with 680 in the Masters. They ran 8 rounds and a T128 (I'm pretty certain). Day 1 didn't finish until after midnight as they ran through to the T32 that evening. They started day 2 at around 10am, and didn't finish the final rounds until 3pm. That's after a 10am start the day before. So that's a 19 hour tournament that would have been extended to around 23 hours over 2 days. Now, that might be reasonable for a 2 day tournament, until you consider that the Jrs and Srs were both also playing 7 or 8 rounds on day 1, and then had to cut to T64 that first day before cutting to T32. That's a HECK of a long day that would only be made longer by adding the BO3 aspect.

Again, BO3 doesn't work for this game because of the particulars of this game and the tiebreaking scenarios that absolutely, completely, and 100% work for this game in particular.

 

[NoPoke]

If best of three was so bad then it wouldn't be used in the top cut.

The only tournament system that cannot have draws is an elimination tournament. Yet even here it is only the final outcome that matters and individual games that are part of each round of the elimination cut can have draws.

The statement that draws had no penalty is incorrect: for most rounds the loss of the full credit that a win has is sufficient incentive to deter players from agreeing a draw. I've posted more than once that it is perfectly feasible to arrange the final round pairings so that at least one player at each of the top tables needs to play to win. That is sufficient to deter a mass outbreak of IDs.

Lots and lots of games allow draws. Pokemon used to as well. Change always has unforseen consequences, in the case of eliminating draws it is the ugly single prize sudden death and venue round overruns. I can't help but thinking that the cure is worse than the illness. Especially as a change to the final round pairing would have made the final round ID a rare occurrence.

 

[SteveP]

bullados is arguing against intentional draws (as am I). Eliminate them, and then you'll probably get us to listen about bringing ties back. And, like I stated in a previous post, ties must be uncommon and last resort.

Best-of-3 isn't bad. It's very appropriate for the playoffs. Nevertheless, 45-minute best-of-3 has issues. From my experience, 45-minute rounds result in too many incomplete best-of-3 matches, and as has been expertly pointed out by bullados, WILL result in increased overhead. Bringing back ties might help, but they'd fail to meet the need to be infrequent and last resort. So, to do best-of-3 justice, they need to be one hour or more, like they are at most events during the playoffs.

Sabett, because you discounted much of what a very experienced PTO (bullados) said, I tend to discount much of your debate. When you discount what "has" happened by saying that "shouldn't" happen, you're living in an ideal, yet unreal world.

 

[NoPoke]

If it takes 40+ minutes after the official round ends before the next round can begin then that is something that needs fixing.

The ID was only an issue during the last round of swiss and even then many long time players thought nothing of it as IDs are a part of many card games. If IDs had to be removed then it was only during the last round of swiss that they *had* to go. By removing draws for every game we have to live with the unforeseen consequence of long venue over-runs and players spending the majority of the time at the venue hanging around waiting rather than playing.

The behaviour that some were so upset about hasn't gone away with the removal of the ID. I still see players on table 1 decide the match without playing. There is no collusion in this. The X-0 player is in the cut regardless and often concedes to the friend they are playing in the last round. This is impossible to prevent.

 

[Sabett]

1. Games should be decided at the table. Any system that allows for games to be decided ahead of time with no penalty for that decision should not be used. End of story.

2. Again, from experience, there's a minimum of 25% extra time that any TO has to add on to his or her events, not including food breaks. And this extra time increases more people enter the tournament, but 25% is a good enough estimate for our purposes. This time includes such things as data entry, posting pairings, Judge meetings, and overtime. When you make the move from Single Game to BO3, you also GREATLY increase the potential amount of time required for overtime matches because of the rules in place (which are absolutely, completely, and 100% correct for this game, and should not be changed). Remember that, in BO3, there is a scenario that crops up quite often that will last at least 15 minutes, if not longer, where both players are tied in game 2, both have taken 4 or 5 prizes, and the loser of game 1 wins that second game. Not only does this add time due to the Next Prize clause, but it also adds time for the Sudden Death game.

Now, I'm just looking at the events that I've been a part of, namely those in Illinois, Missouri, and Wisconsin, but I think these are a pretty good indicator of the overall health of the game as the numbers at events in this area have generally been in the average-to-above-average area compared to the rest of the US (statistics here and here). I'm also going to assume the average increase in attendance from last year to this year will stay fairly constant at 25-30%, with approximately 40% increase in the Masters.

Wisonsin States had 89 players, with 46 Masters. Based on my growth assumption (which was consistent through 3 years of this game and I don't see falling this year either), Wisconsin will get 111 players with 64 Masters, right on the border between 6 and 7 rounds and T8 or T16. Assuming the regulations stay the same, we can pretty well assume that there will be a max T8 for States, which helps in these calculations. 7 rounds of single-game matches is 4:20, not including the average 20 minutes per round for general tournament maintenance and overtime matches, and also not including the obligatory lunch and dinner breaks. Assume that, with all of those added in, it'll take 1 hour per round with 2 hours for Lunch and Dinner. That's a 9 hour tournament, before getting into the top cut. And that's also not including the computer breaks and other craziness when you get 100+ Pokemon players in the same room. Then you get the 3 Top Cut rounds, which almost always go to time and beyond, so assume about 1:15 minimum for each Top Cut round. That puts the tournament at 12:45. If you start the tournament at an insane 9am, you won't finish until, at the earliest, 10pm. Most venues don't open their doors until 9am on a weekend, so assuming an hour or more for registration, you're not starting until 10am at the earliest, which would put tourney end at 11pm. If you go to BO3 one hour, you're adding a minimum of 20 minutes onto each round, and I would put it closer to 25 because of the tiebreaker scenarios and extra data management. That's 7 rounds at half an hour or less per round extra, putting the tournament at an additional 3.5 hours, and ending no earlier than 1am. I can think of precious few venues that are willing to stay open that late in the evening, can accomadate that number of people, AND are reasonably priced for individual PTOs to afford.

Illinois States, which I judged in the Juniors, had 165 players, with 77 in the Masters. Extrapolating, that would place the tournament at 206 players with 107 Masters. Now, I know given the player base and the change in location from Rockford to Chicago the attendance will be higher than that, but I'll use those numbers to illustrate the point. Like above, that would put the end time at around 10pm ideally. Last year, the Juniors didn't finish until 10pm, and the Masters didn't finish until 1am, and this was one of the better run tournaments Regionals level and below that I had ever attended. Now, think about what would have happened if we were playing BO3 Swiss matches. That's an extra 3+ hours, and we wouldn't have finished until 4am, or well into the next day.

Wisconsin Regionals had 181 players, with 89 in the Masters age group. Based on the growth assumption above, I'd estimate that Wisconsin will get about 226 players with 124 Masters. That's right around the edge between 7 and 8 rounds, with an absolute T16. With 7 rounds a a T16, the Masters were done by midnight with a 9am start. If we would have had BO3 in the Swiss, we wouldn't have finished until 3am. This year, we could expect 8 rounds and a T16. Given that the TO has already posted the details about the tournament's 9am start, we're going with that. The tournament probably won't finish until 1am this year, given the extra round and that we pretty much were as efficient as we possibly could be in the organizational aspect of the tournament. If we would do BO3, we wouldn't be done until at least 4am, and probably not until 5am. Idk about you, but I don't particularly feel great Judging for 24 hours straight with virtually no breaks and on short rest from driving the night before and heading into short rest having to drive the next day.

Now, look at US Nationals, the biggest event of the year. Were you there? I was, and it was about as efficiently run of a tournament as I had ever been a part of. 1200 players, with 680 in the Masters. They ran 8 rounds and a T128 (I'm pretty certain). Day 1 didn't finish until after midnight as they ran through to the T32 that evening. They started day 2 at around 10am, and didn't finish the final rounds until 3pm. That's after a 10am start the day before. So that's a 19 hour tournament that would have been extended to around 23 hours over 2 days. Now, that might be reasonable for a 2 day tournament, until you consider that the Jrs and Srs were both also playing 7 or 8 rounds on day 1, and then had to cut to T64 that first day before cutting to T32. That's a HECK of a long day that would only be made longer by adding the BO3 aspect.

Again, BO3 doesn't work for this game because of the particulars of this game and the tiebreaking scenarios that absolutely, completely, and 100% work for this game in particular.

1. I wasn't trying to advocate intentional ties, and intentional ties can be avoided in the same manner that bartering for people to concede are avoided.

2. I understand that the time tables for Pokemon tournaments run late, regardless of how early they begin, but all of those examples don't have anything to do with the fact that games like Magic, get more players at their tournaments and run longer matches than we run. With those things in mind, Magic has even more cripples and do this on a regular basis. But I admit, I'm out of my element and do not fully understand the time tables from a TO's POV. I'm just going to take your word for it that I'm wrong on this point. I apologize that I can't continue that particular discussion.

bullados is arguing against intentional draws (as am I). Eliminate them, and then you'll probably get us to listen about bringing ties back. And, like I stated in a previous post, ties must be uncommon and last resort.

Best-of-3 isn't bad. It's very appropriate for the playoffs. Nevertheless, 45-minute best-of-3 has issues. From my experience, 45-minute rounds result in too many incomplete best-of-3 matches, and as has been expertly pointed out by bullados, WILL result in increased overhead. Bringing back ties might help, but they'd fail to meet the need to be infrequent and last resort. So, to do best-of-3 justice, they need to be one hour or more, like they are at most events during the playoffs.

Sabett, because you discounted much of what a very experienced PTO (bullados) said, I tend to discount much of your debate. When you discount what "has" happened by saying that "shouldn't" happen, you're living in an ideal, yet unreal world.

Then we could easily eliminate intentional ties, it's against the rules to convince someone to concede on purpose right? Some small tournaments make you play out t4 in Magic. In the same manner, intentional ties can be gotten rid of.

If the only problem you're finding with ties are the player's intentional manipulation of it, then I could easily compromise with that. I never felt one way or the other on that.

I didn't discount what bullados said, and I didn't say those things shouldn't have happened, I said all it would be doing is adding time, not making more bad scenarios that can delay a tournament. If the computer's going to mess up, it's not going to do it more frequently because games are being played best of 3.

 

[pat460]

Im just going to input, as a mtg player, Magic games are shorter than what Ive seen in pokemon lately, so they can play 2/3 in the same amount of time that pokemon plays 1/1. Most of the time, big Pokemon events last longer then mtg events with the same number of players.

 

[Sabett]

Im just going to input, as a mtg player, Magic games are shorter than what Ive seen in pokemon lately, so they can play 2/3 in the same amount of time that pokemon plays 1/1. Most of the time, big Pokemon events last longer then mtg events with the same number of players.

Magic matches still last 10 min. longer. And no the difference in speed is not 2-3 Magic games to 1 Pokemon game.

This is besides the point though, most everyone agrees that extensively longer rounds are not the answer.

 

[Box of Fail]

Funny, I don't see the word banned at all in that second post.
Wow, now that's just gone from a pretty intelligent debate to a dumb argument. You said, and I quote, "Decks that manipulate speed shouldn't have this unfair advantage against slower decks." Saying that the current SD system is an unfair advantage that fast decks shouldn't have is DEFINITELY a not-so-subtle way of saying "ban". Your response, while meaningless because the implications of your previous post are clear, simply came across as arrogant and cocky because you effectively said "ban the current system", and yet you use that wiseguy response to avoid the topic at hand.

Donk's are fine, when you can fight them, also donk's don't reall connect to sudden death's in the way you think. The problem with sudden deaths is that Pokemon was intended to be played with 6 prizes, not 1, so playing as such shouldn't be common place.
The whole point of a donk is that you can't fight it.... no matter how skilled you are, now matter how much time and effort you spent practicing and perfecting your play style, you can lose to a bad player who built a deck the morning of due to dumb luck. And all that effort is wasted. That's why I love donks.

Anyway, the donking analogy is basically saying that one-prize wins were perfectly intended, and cards like Machamp are solid proof that PCL WANTS quick games won entirely on luck. Hence Sudden Death.

Replies are in bold.

 

[Sabett]

Wow, now that's just gone from a pretty intelligent debate to a dumb argument. You said, and I quote, "Decks that manipulate speed shouldn't have this unfair advantage against slower decks." Saying that the current SD system is an unfair advantage that fast decks shouldn't have is DEFINITELY a not-so-subtle way of saying "ban". Your response, while meaningless because the implications of your previous post are clear, simply came across as arrogant and cocky because you effectively said "ban the current system", and yet you use that wiseguy response to avoid the topic at hand.

The whole point of a donk is that you can't fight it.... no matter how skilled you are, now matter how much time and effort you spent practicing and perfecting your play style, you can lose to a bad player who built a deck the morning of due to dumb luck. And all that effort is wasted. That's why I love donks.

Anyway, the donking analogy is basically saying that one-prize wins were perfectly intended, and cards like Machamp are solid proof that PCL WANTS quick games won entirely on luck. Hence Sudden Death.

No, you're wrong, you absolutely implied all of that, I"m sorry, and I am absolutely not been this condescending as you say I have been, although it's true I was harsher to some of the posters who posted very very little. I said shouldn't, and that means shouldn't, not let's ban that, it's too broken, ban ban ban. You apparently seem to know me better than myself, but I'm sorry, I didn't mean ban. Sorry if you thought that, but that's not what I meant, and just because you thought I did, doesn't mean I did. I said that "Decks that manipulate speed shouldn't have this unfair advantage against slower decks.", and I'll tell you what that means, and it won't mean something else. It means that donks are fine, but one prize wins are not. It means that slower decks shouldn't have to lose when they haven't lost six Pokemon, and still have something on the bench, just because a faster deck was able to manipulate the situation better, because it was designed to do that. The Pokemon game was intended to have slow and fast decks, that's why there's 6 prizes, not 1 for standard games, and sudden death is a last resort. 6 pirzes creates an initial resilience for every deck to have.

Once again, you have confused donks, with sudden death. 1 prize games are absolutely an odd way to play the game, almost nothing's prized and you can lose once anything get's KO'd. Donk's were intended when making the game, sudden death was not, and they reflect upon that in the game, look at Regigigas. One prize wins are simply a makeshift means of quickly solving a match.

The donking analogy does not work, because donks are not 1 prize wins, they are 2 very different situations. and the only time they allow sudden death is when it goes to time, this is because they HAVE to continue the match in a timely basis, not because they want to stop their game, and then lay it all down on the line.

Also, when you say "no matter how skilled you are, now matter how much time and effort you spent practicing and perfecting your play style, you can lose to a bad player who built a deck the morning of due to dumb luck. And all that effort is wasted. That's why I love donks." That is not what is intended to be done for competitive play, players should all be on a fair playing field to win against the other person. People do not want their effort's wasted, people don't want to be beaten by not a good as player than them in a tournament. I can promise you that you are certainly in the minority when you say that you want to waste all of your hard work to someone who didn't work as hard.

So to recap, donks are not sudden death, and you have completely assumed within yourself all of these accusations, and that those assumptions are very unfounded, and have no been denounced by myself.