Prof Championship
- Thread starter Magnechu
- Start date
Just like a PR, this format is luck based. It was fun, but if you and the draft partner pull jank, the decks will fail. I had the priviledge of pulling Fulop and his photographic memory as a draft partner. I drew junk and Chris pulled a Zam GL X. Of course, he had a 2 Zams GLs too. Add in the fact that Turtwig GL is a common and he had a damage swap/heal tank deck for swiss. He target the 1st 2 Zam's to hit the table and when the X hit the table, it was his turn to go 1st. DOH. We each got a few Turtwigs, but his worked sooo much better.
I disagree with the Tracy K situation in top cut. How is it SotG to allow a player to draft ALL the good cards?? There were prizes on the line and this, IMO, is a poor example of SotG. How can we expect others to show SotG and a Prof in top cut cannot show the same to their fellow competitors?? Sorry, but that cuts me to the quick. Nice prizes too....DS Lite and Wiis. I hope that an incident like this doesn't cost us the Cup in the future.
Keith
I disagree with the Tracy K situation in top cut. How is it SotG to allow a player to draft ALL the good cards?? There were prizes on the line and this, IMO, is a poor example of SotG. How can we expect others to show SotG and a Prof in top cut cannot show the same to their fellow competitors?? Sorry, but that cuts me to the quick. Nice prizes too....DS Lite and Wiis. I hope that an incident like this doesn't cost us the Cup in the future.
Keith
Keith, I feel that stems from my interpretation of spirit of the game as a player who is competitive. If there are loopholes that are 100% not covered under the rules, it should be the players right to do what it takes to win outside of blatant cheating. You also cannot FORCE players to draft well. It falls under the same idea as if 2 players play in a tournament and one wants to scoop because his friend would have a better matchup next round. All they have to do is play poorly, its impossible to issue a penalty for poor play. If you don't want ANY form of cooperation, than redraft every round after top cut starts, which is honestly perfectly legitimate IMO. OR change how they pair. If 2 friends draft, but get paired vs random others, they both have incentive to try and make it out of the next round, negating this issue. Its a VERY simple issue to fix, and the only flaw I saw in this format.
Also, for the issue of it being luck based, with a 16 pack cardpool, the VAST majority of decks should be quite playable. Its hard to get a genuinely BAD deck. I feel that much of it comes down to how you construct your deck post-draft. I playtested a TON for this format, and my only loss was to Tracy's super deck. Theres alot a player can do to improve their odds.
Also, for the issue of it being luck based, with a 16 pack cardpool, the VAST majority of decks should be quite playable. Its hard to get a genuinely BAD deck. I feel that much of it comes down to how you construct your deck post-draft. I playtested a TON for this format, and my only loss was to Tracy's super deck. Theres alot a player can do to improve their odds.
Absolution
New Member
I wasn't going to bother responding to the negativity surrounding this event, but I feel like this should be addressed because I don't want anyone to think less of Tracy or myself.
First off, the event was a lot of fun, probably the best Professor Cup format I've experienced. Round one I got a great drafting partner in James Proctor, someone I'd never met before but quickly made friends with after our combined success throughout the tournament (he would advance to Top 8 himself.) Tracy also got to meet and draft with JohnnyBlaze round one, a friend of mine from Lafonte - so she also had the benefit of cooperation in the initial drafting phase. I'd like to note that greed is obviously a factor during these drafts! My original intention was to just yank all the good cards for myself, but as James and myself went on we quickly started doling out solid lines to each other, and splitting up the trainers pretty evenly. It was a learning experience for both of us as we'd never really done Solomon draft before, but it worked out pretty nicely - James took me out in Game 1, but we both ended up making top cut.
Tracy also made top cut - partially because Chris decided to concede to her last round, although I'm fairly sure she'd have cut anyways after winning a pair-up. Chris also noted at the time he did not want to play Tracy in top cut - both because they're friends and she's a tough opponent.
When pairings went up and Tracy and I saw we had to play each other, we were initially very upset. We always get paired up at the most inopportune times, and here, with prizes and a potential win on the line, it had happened again.
Our initial thought was to just return our decks to each other and play them as is (which is an advantage in its own way, yes?) - but it was Chris who pointed out that we could pool our cards together and make the best deck possible for the remainder of the event. Since there was no redrafting, we could turn a negative situation into a positive one. I don't know about the majority of (competitive) players, but I would certainly rather lose and see a friend win an event than to both lose and go home. We can't help that we got paired against each other - but we certainly would have drafted cooperatively with other players had they come up differently.
To keep it fair, Tracy and I left it to chance on who would pilot the deck, and she won the roll. Additionally, we still played the matches out - I still could have donked her after all that! Regardless, I'm proud of her and her accomplishment, and I assure you there was no ill-intent in our actions.
Chris, if you were upset about the manner in which the tournament was structured, I think you should have gone through the proper channels. It's unfair to single the two of us out since you were the one who alerted us to the "loophole" to begin with. Sorry that you had to be paired with Tracy in Top 8, but as we found out at this event, some things are left to chance.
If anyone needs to discuss anything about the matter further with me, please send me a PM, thanks.
-Justin
First off, the event was a lot of fun, probably the best Professor Cup format I've experienced. Round one I got a great drafting partner in James Proctor, someone I'd never met before but quickly made friends with after our combined success throughout the tournament (he would advance to Top 8 himself.) Tracy also got to meet and draft with JohnnyBlaze round one, a friend of mine from Lafonte - so she also had the benefit of cooperation in the initial drafting phase. I'd like to note that greed is obviously a factor during these drafts! My original intention was to just yank all the good cards for myself, but as James and myself went on we quickly started doling out solid lines to each other, and splitting up the trainers pretty evenly. It was a learning experience for both of us as we'd never really done Solomon draft before, but it worked out pretty nicely - James took me out in Game 1, but we both ended up making top cut.
Tracy also made top cut - partially because Chris decided to concede to her last round, although I'm fairly sure she'd have cut anyways after winning a pair-up. Chris also noted at the time he did not want to play Tracy in top cut - both because they're friends and she's a tough opponent.
When pairings went up and Tracy and I saw we had to play each other, we were initially very upset. We always get paired up at the most inopportune times, and here, with prizes and a potential win on the line, it had happened again.
Our initial thought was to just return our decks to each other and play them as is (which is an advantage in its own way, yes?) - but it was Chris who pointed out that we could pool our cards together and make the best deck possible for the remainder of the event. Since there was no redrafting, we could turn a negative situation into a positive one. I don't know about the majority of (competitive) players, but I would certainly rather lose and see a friend win an event than to both lose and go home. We can't help that we got paired against each other - but we certainly would have drafted cooperatively with other players had they come up differently.
To keep it fair, Tracy and I left it to chance on who would pilot the deck, and she won the roll. Additionally, we still played the matches out - I still could have donked her after all that! Regardless, I'm proud of her and her accomplishment, and I assure you there was no ill-intent in our actions.
Chris, if you were upset about the manner in which the tournament was structured, I think you should have gone through the proper channels. It's unfair to single the two of us out since you were the one who alerted us to the "loophole" to begin with. Sorry that you had to be paired with Tracy in Top 8, but as we found out at this event, some things are left to chance.
If anyone needs to discuss anything about the matter further with me, please send me a PM, thanks.
-Justin
Last edited:
Justin, I think you took the intent of my post the COMPLETELY wrong way. I didn't want to single you out: a good number of people had already had concerns that events such as that could happen. I figured it was common knowledge. I assumed you guys had at least considered it previously.
I didn't mean to try and get anyone upset with you two. I was rooting for Tracy to take the whole thing after she beat me. I'm just pointing it out as an example of a flaw in the system in hopes that, since I find this format so fun, that it can be improved and used again. I'll be up front and honest, had I been paired with a friend in top 32, I'd have done the same thing. So I'm far from upset about it.
I don't want you guys mad at me, its not like I suddenly made it known to the world that something secret happened. I don't know anyone whose mad at you for it. The only one I could see who would be may be Tracy's top 16 opponent, seeing as how I was her t8 opponent, and she lost to Vince in t4. Its not anyones fault, PUI never came out with anything but vague guidelines as to what was supposed to be done in regards to cooperation. I'm sorry if you guys are mad that I posted anything about it. I'll delete the posts if you guys want me to.
I didn't mean to try and get anyone upset with you two. I was rooting for Tracy to take the whole thing after she beat me. I'm just pointing it out as an example of a flaw in the system in hopes that, since I find this format so fun, that it can be improved and used again. I'll be up front and honest, had I been paired with a friend in top 32, I'd have done the same thing. So I'm far from upset about it.
I don't want you guys mad at me, its not like I suddenly made it known to the world that something secret happened. I don't know anyone whose mad at you for it. The only one I could see who would be may be Tracy's top 16 opponent, seeing as how I was her t8 opponent, and she lost to Vince in t4. Its not anyones fault, PUI never came out with anything but vague guidelines as to what was supposed to be done in regards to cooperation. I'm sorry if you guys are mad that I posted anything about it. I'll delete the posts if you guys want me to.
Chris: I was not mad at you either. Simple fact though, this event is staged for those that GIVE almost the entire year to the game and are not the "competitve" players. Due to my work schedule, running league, running events and judging others, I didnt get a single time to practice a solomon draft. That is on me! OK, I made a poor selection at times. It happens to most of us. BUT, in an event where the TOP ethical judges, organizers and PTOS are playing, one would expect a "friendlier" experience and to not have someone allow "all" the "good" cards in the pool to be given to X player (a roll of the dice decided if it would be Tracy or Justin getting the cream of the crop?? Really??? Wow, real sporting of ya champs! /end sarcasm)
Yes, the rules were a bit vague, but anyone posting and reading in the Prof forums surely noted the response Mike L gave, in that he expected people to try and draft/counter draft good decks! That is all I'm saying.
Keith
Yes, the rules were a bit vague, but anyone posting and reading in the Prof forums surely noted the response Mike L gave, in that he expected people to try and draft/counter draft good decks! That is all I'm saying.
Keith
Absolution
New Member
Chris, we aren't mad at you - and we hope you're not mad at us. Like I said, I think you should have just e-mailed PUI with your thoughts about the event instead of airing them out here, but it is what it is.
Keith, what you're insinuating about us is way off-base, but PM me if you have a problem.
Keith, what you're insinuating about us is way off-base, but PM me if you have a problem.
Justin: It is the above in red that I, as a Prof and a PTO, have an issue with. You posted it in a public forum. I responded in a public forum. I'm not the one anyone is throwing the "C" word around. (And yes, there were folks using "collusion" in discussing this later that day).
You see, after I played, I went back to work as STAFF. I didnt get to see the redrafting. I heard about this issue later that night. You typed that there was no 'ill-intent' by the 2 of you. Sorry, but when you "roll" to see who "pilots" the "better" deck, yeah.....that doesnt sound so "cool" to those that truly solomon drafted as one should.
One last Q..... did Tracy keep all the "swag" she "won" with the so called "super deck" (Chris' words, not mine!) or was any shared with you?
Keith
Absolution
New Member
To put it to rest - yes, Tracy kept the swag and the trophy. She gave me three extra packs after our trip because she felt bad about winning the roll (although the point is moot since we share cards anyway), but besides that I received no compensation.
And Keith, I asked for a PM because you don't know either of us personally. It makes no sense to make accusations about someone's character in a public forum if you haven't met or talked to them ever before. We do a lot to help kids in our area as league leaders and occasional judges, and anyone from our area (judges and PTO included) can vouch for our SotG. Reserve your venom for someone who deserves it.
-Justin
And Keith, I asked for a PM because you don't know either of us personally. It makes no sense to make accusations about someone's character in a public forum if you haven't met or talked to them ever before. We do a lot to help kids in our area as league leaders and occasional judges, and anyone from our area (judges and PTO included) can vouch for our SotG. Reserve your venom for someone who deserves it.
-Justin
TheDarkTwins
Active Member
This is all I wanted to hear. As long as you didn't split the prizes or get some compensation, I have no qualms about it. However if I heard that one of you got the Wii and the other got the DSi, I would of had some issues with it even being your friend and all. I think that this was blown way out of hand and if any of the TPCi people had an serious issue with it they would of done something if something had been done that was wrong.
Drew
FWIW, this Prof Cup was flawed. The above threads just confirm it. I can't believe "professors" decided who would get the 16 packs worth of cards on a coin flip.
I say this in a public forum since you posted it in a public forum. NO WAY should someone get a 4-3-4 (?) Beedrill in a solomon draft, no way. Sour grapes? No. Pissed off and disappointed in "professor" behavior? Yes. And Drew, giving packs is collusion - it doesn't have to be a significant value. Packs WERE part of the prizes.
My feedback will be provided to TCPi.
I say this in a public forum since you posted it in a public forum. NO WAY should someone get a 4-3-4 (?) Beedrill in a solomon draft, no way. Sour grapes? No. Pissed off and disappointed in "professor" behavior? Yes. And Drew, giving packs is collusion - it doesn't have to be a significant value. Packs WERE part of the prizes.
My feedback will be provided to TCPi.
It wasn't a 4-3-4 Beedrill line. The closest I could tell, it was like, 3-2-2, or 2-3-2. And a 2-2-1 Flygon I believe. Perhaps a 2nd one. I believe 2 Aerodactyls.
Let me summarize it with this. Can you be disappointed that such cooperation occurred? Sure. Yet when 95% of the pairs in swiss cooperate to build decks, what sort of precedent does that set in the first place? A format shouldn't HAVE these lapses in it to begin with. The entire format changes its integrity once the redraft each round gets removed. Things should have been dealt with once that change was made to compensate. Thats a simple, easy to fix oversight.
As I was saying, if you feel people should be "above" what happened, sure, go for it. But PLEASE do not claim it is black and white, and don't throw out holier than thou accusations. Of all of the people who were potentially "wronged" by this I could be the one complaining most. Theoretically it cost me a wii and a trophy. Yet I'm not sitting here holding anything against anyone. Also, collusion? COLLUSION? If you don't like how things were handled, fine, complain on those facts, but to than try and use collusion as a way to trump charges because you dislike how something else was handled is pretty weak. They go to every tournament together. They share a card pool. They aren't just making this up. If I had an invite to Worlds, and played my brother in top 16 of Nationals, and scooped so he could get an invite, and he adds the packs he won to my card pool I've colluded? Please, lay off the witch hunt. Complain if you don't like how the format was handled, but really, thats just a pretty steep stretch.
And "FWIW" the Cup was "flawed". Yet those flaws can easily be rectified with a few simple changes. I still stand by the fact that this format has the potential to be fantastic once some kinks are worked out. Having not played in Nationals, I spent a good portion of my time playtesting Solomon Drafts, and they are fantastic. I complained on the boards awhile ago that Pokemon had no Limited format that was viable. Shortly there after, Mike and the rest of the guys promptly proved me wrong with this great format. I'd hate to see its use thrown away because a few precautions weren't taken.
Let me summarize it with this. Can you be disappointed that such cooperation occurred? Sure. Yet when 95% of the pairs in swiss cooperate to build decks, what sort of precedent does that set in the first place? A format shouldn't HAVE these lapses in it to begin with. The entire format changes its integrity once the redraft each round gets removed. Things should have been dealt with once that change was made to compensate. Thats a simple, easy to fix oversight.
As I was saying, if you feel people should be "above" what happened, sure, go for it. But PLEASE do not claim it is black and white, and don't throw out holier than thou accusations. Of all of the people who were potentially "wronged" by this I could be the one complaining most. Theoretically it cost me a wii and a trophy. Yet I'm not sitting here holding anything against anyone. Also, collusion? COLLUSION? If you don't like how things were handled, fine, complain on those facts, but to than try and use collusion as a way to trump charges because you dislike how something else was handled is pretty weak. They go to every tournament together. They share a card pool. They aren't just making this up. If I had an invite to Worlds, and played my brother in top 16 of Nationals, and scooped so he could get an invite, and he adds the packs he won to my card pool I've colluded? Please, lay off the witch hunt. Complain if you don't like how the format was handled, but really, thats just a pretty steep stretch.
And "FWIW" the Cup was "flawed". Yet those flaws can easily be rectified with a few simple changes. I still stand by the fact that this format has the potential to be fantastic once some kinks are worked out. Having not played in Nationals, I spent a good portion of my time playtesting Solomon Drafts, and they are fantastic. I complained on the boards awhile ago that Pokemon had no Limited format that was viable. Shortly there after, Mike and the rest of the guys promptly proved me wrong with this great format. I'd hate to see its use thrown away because a few precautions weren't taken.
Absolution
New Member
Collusion would be agreeing on compensation ahead of time, which did not at all occur. Is it collusion that one of Drew's opponents gave him all 9 packs after he won in top cut?
And I pulled a 3-2-2 Beedrill line in my initial first-round draft - my opponent and I cooperated to build decks. It's not unheard of to pull big lines out of 16 packs.
TheDarkTwins
Active Member
How is him giving me 9 packs and me winning and getting a DS lite at all anywhere close to anything immoral. I was going to offer him 6 packs actually but didn't get the chance as he gave me all 9.
Drew
