The Intentional Draw System Is Unfair and needs to be Balanced Out!!

[RaNd0m]

The ONLY way I would support abolishing the ID system is if the following happened:

1. Ties never could happen. Sudden death matches would occur whenever a tie occured when time was called.

2. They came up with a better tiebreaking system other than opponents' winning percentage, because when you drop ID's you're going to have more people tied.

Frankly, the best idea I saw was the prize differential thing. Again though, you would have to abolish ties... but with the prize differential thing, people wouldn't even want to ID most of the time because it would be too risky.

OR... we could keep it the same since it is a fair system...

 

[SteveP]

Let's just do what YuGiOh does (at least here in Colorado Springs). Replace Swiss with single-elimination. That would abolish ties.

 

[Magnor]

Yeah, but nayone who gets abad starting hand will be waaaaay behind...and its no fair to some people who cant get set up fast enough...

 

[davechri]

And the question is how?

No draws. 3 points for a win, 0 points for a loss. If things are tied when time is called, play until the next person takes a prize.

 

[Raikou]

Yea, but as has been pointed out...that leaves more players tied.

Its more fair for players to CHOOSE to ID rather than depend upon sometimes UNFAIR and crappy opponent win %. Lets say you encounter crappy people both round one and two and they go on to lose the rest of the tournament. You were paired randomly and didn't choose to play them, but your percentage suffers nonetheless letting you take 9th instead of 8th place for the final cut.

Chosing to ID should remain and should be a privledge to those who actually do well in a tournament, whether due to skill or by an FTKO luck. At this point in the game, its more skill than FTKOs. =\

Players shouldn't be punished because of who the computer pairs them with.

If you're gonna take away IDs you better find a good system other than this crappy opponent win % to take over. As random said, the pts. according to the prizes left seems ok, but I just believe IDs have been there for a reason and should remain there. It seems whenever something new comes up, people complain. But this isn't something new; it's been there forever and now people are complaining becuz the new players are finding out about IDing and doing it. =/

 

[SteveP]

Chosing to ID should remain and should be a privledge to those who actually do well in a tournament...

And thus we see the flaw inherent in the system. IDs benefit the privleged few.

I got a kick out of watching the womens Olympic high jump finals tonight. The lone remaining US jumper choose to bypass a lower height. In doing so, it dropped her down the rankings (from 3rd to 4th place -- out of the medals), yet assured her to make it to the next round. After watching this, I'm wondering if this similiar thing could be applied to the ID system. You take a pass, or an ID, but somehow it drops you down in the rankings, possibly below those who've actually played their games. I'll have to think about this idea for a bit.

 

[NoPoke]

I wasn't aware that I had to be priveledged in order to ID.

Maybe I'm suddenly l33t and didn't know it LOL

 

[dld4a]

No draws. 3 points for a win, 0 points for a loss. If things are tied when time is called, play until the next person takes a prize.

No draws. 3 points for a win, 0 points for a loss. = No draws. 1 point for a win, 0 points for a loss.

Not sure if it would be 'fair' (still don't like the word, but sometimes I'm forced to use it) to a person who has made a hard fought come back to tie it and has taken control of the game when time runs out on their opponents turn to have them make some super sacrificial move, that would have normally cost them the game, to win.

And thus we see the flaw inherent in the system. IDs benefit the privleged few.

I'm not seeing the flaw. Those who stand to gain from an ID have earned the right to take advantage of the possible gain from an ID by winning early (2nd & 3rd round games) that are potentially more difficult.

Replace Swiss with single-elimination. That would abolish ties

I remember when it was single elim. It stunk really bad to pay $10.00 (the Mall Tour) only to lose a quick game in the first round. That's why they went to swiss.

 

[SteveP]

Right. Leaders don't have to endure to the end. They just have to build a lead, then not play the final round or two.

To say that players who built a lead can fend of late-surgers by NOT playing is just plain insane in a competitive sport.

They instituted the shot-clock in basketball to prevent teams from NOT playing (stalling) to sit on their lead. Likewise, Pokemon players shouldn't be able to sit on their lead by NOT playing (ID-ing).

 

[Martin]

I'm going to put this very simply; People who complain about ID's are in general bad players who would not make the X cut regardless. If it is that bad of a problem, just do a system where a draw cannot possibly occur. Awarding zero points is just God forsaken if both players played out the game. It is nearly going to be impossible to establish the difference between staged draws an factual ones if you did not allow prematch ID's.

You people are overcomplicating the issue. This isn't about ethics, it's about winning a tournament.

 

[Whicker]

I agree with Martin to some extent
but I can also see SteveP's side of the story

just know that there is no perfect system and whatever one we choose will come under attack just as the current one is

 

[annisarich]

Right. Leaders don't have to endure to the end. They just have to build a lead, then not play the final round or two.

To say that players who built a lead can fend of late-surgers by NOT playing is just plain insane in a competitive sport.

They instituted the shot-clock in basketball to prevent teams from NOT playing (stalling) to sit on their lead. Likewise, Pokemon players shouldn't be able to sit on their lead by NOT playing (ID-ing).

Steve ,
you phrased what i was thinking perfectly.

lets just run the Indy 400 next year....
Whoever is leading that lap will be declared the winner.
Think of all the gas we will save

 

[mewsmom]

There is no stopping ID even if it was forbidden. What's to stop the two players from making sure they draw from playing out the game. They play the game out, make it a draw on purpose, the only thing that could stop is to drop draws of any kind from the game.

My opinion, people id last round just for the sake of not going into the cut with a loss. Going into the cut with 5 wins and a draw is better on the record then the loss. Yes some do it to keep players out of cut but most of the time it's just to keep from getting the loss and actually not having to worry that last round.

ID & draws are here to stay or we'll just have to extend the time on games because that's the only way to rid of draws.

To say one was screwed out of top because of someone's id is poor sportsmanship, you should have pulled off what you needed before the last round. It's all in the game, you get what your dealt and play with it.

 

[yoshi1001]

I encourage you all to look at the pro-ID posts and notice how many justify using the ID instead of the existence of the ID. Very interesting.

 

[Pooka]

Okay, the more and more I argue about this, it always comes back to this.

If a person does not like the idea of an ID, they cannot be persuaded otherwise.
If a person does like the idea of an ID, they cannot be persuaded otherwise.

So, the solution to this is... keep things the way they are! Leave the OPTION of Intentional Drawing. It's not like you're forced to do it. You can't make everyone happy. That's life.

 

[dld4a]

Right. Leaders don't have to endure to the end. They just have to build a lead, then not play the final round or two.

To say that players who built a lead can fend of late-surgers by NOT playing is just plain insane in a competitive sport.

They instituted the shot-clock in basketball to prevent teams from NOT playing (stalling) to sit on their lead. Likewise, Pokemon players shouldn't be able to sit on their lead by NOT playing (ID-ing).

Apples and oranges.

Physical vs. Mental tests

I’m not saying that there is no mental aspects to sports, but that the considerations taken into deciding the rules are different and there for not comparable.

Yes they instituted the shot clock in basketball, but it was not to make things more ‘fair’ to the combatants, merely to make it more interesting for the spectators. Either way (stalling w/o a shot clock or not being able to stall because of a shot clock) can be considered a legitimate type of competition. Lest you say at this point “well I just prefer it w/o the stalling (I.D.’s).”, there are different considerations that need to taken into account.

 

[NoPoke]

SteveP in many sports this is exactly what the leaders do. Build a commanding lead and then switch tactics to protect that lead. I fail to see how comparisons with other sports vastly different to TCGs help. Kind of like proverbs: you can always find a proverb that states the opposite. eg Two many cooks spoils the broth and many hands make light work.

If you are 6-0 or 5-1 going into the final round then you have made the cut . It does not matter if you receive one or zero points for the ID. So what of those players on 4-2? In my example http://www.pokegym.net/showpost.php?p=115844&postcount=15 there are two players on 6-0, 12 on 5-1 and 30 on 4-2. with a T32 only 18 of the 30 4-2s will make it I think it would take a very brave pair to ID under those circumstances. So for this particular example only those who have already made the cut can safely ID in the last round. I know that there are circumstances under which an ID will guarantee you a position in the cut (and a loss wont) but the majority of IDs have no impact as the IDing players are already in!.

Did anyone at worlds on 4-2 after round 6 take an ID and risk the tie-breakers?

 

[Prof Clay]

I have kept out of this one..as I made pretty good arguments in a previous thread. I think that the powers that be will be getting rid of ID's in the future simply because they are anti-competitive. Have I IDed, sure. My daughter IDed in her last round of swiss at worlds because she could. I won't lose any sleep if tournament play gets rid of them. It will just make the final round of swiss more competitive.

Will people try and get around it ...sure...but if no ties are allowed, then we will all adapt. Sudden death sucks, so you'd better do your darndest to get that last prize ahead before time. Will stalling be a problem? Sure, but we will deal with that too.

poke_dad

 

[Lawman]

Those that say.."no IDs" are not just the "crappy" players as someone stated earlier. I don't like them bc the game is meant to be played. You dont play 3 quarters in football, or 8 frames in bowling. Sometimes the outcome is evident after 3/4 of the game, but you finish the rds, frames, etc. Heck, I would LOVE to watch some of the last rd battles BEFORE the cut bc they might be the BEST battles all day. There is NO guarantee that 1 vs 2 will occur in the elim. rds. You can see that battle in last rd of swiss! (usually). I went unbeaten and took 1st in the prerelease Sat. I finished tied for 1st (took 2nd on tiebreaker) at HL Pre. I played in the ECSC and got a DRAW (shoulda won, just ask Chris, he got a stalled out tie) ag'st TTar 666 (Fulop) who just happened to finish 2nd at ECSC and at WORLDS! Also had to play Eric Craig in swiss in ECSC...he won the thing w/ a shiftry deck that set up faster than mine in the swiss rd. BC of the "tie", I didnt have the "option" to ID in the last rd while almost everyone else in the front table ID'd. Real fun rd eh?? I like the idea of awarding more points for a win on prize differential. That makes ppl play out their games vs. conceding halfway thru bc of poor set-up, match up (weakness), etc. Then, you can keep your IDs, get your 1 point, but someone else might get that 6-0 shut-out for great points and jump you

Keith

 

[davechri]

I don't agree Lawman.

Anybody who doesn't want to keep IDs is a crappy player because, uh, uh, I said so! LOL

While this discussion is interesting, it is also irrelevant.