Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Top 4 Cut

Status
Not open for further replies.
Diaz

Diaz

New Member
jrwaxman said:
Top 4 cuts for events with 40-100 players is not good for the game.
Click to expand...

Above is a quoted segment of a post from a different thread, but I think it warrants its own discussion.

I believe a primary motivator for the implementation of the top cut restrictions on events was the implementation of rating based invitations to worlds. Now that ratings are being de-emphasized, should removing restrictions be considered? I think so.

Yesterday, I went to a BR with 65 masters. This was enough to give a nice championship point kicker, and, I believe, would have been enough for a top 8 cut. I went 6-1 and made cut, but a number of players with strong records (5-2) missed cut. I think it would have been better for the integrity of the event, to have these players compete in a top 8 cut.

I understand that there are other reasons to only cut to top 4, like time issues. However, for a city championship, a generally similar sized event, top 8 cuts work well, and times isn't a huge issue.

Thoughts?
 
I'd have to agree here. If you are going to be giving out a kicker to the T8 when a BR reaches 64 players, shouldn't all those who have earned a kicker be allowed to compete for the event title? I mean 8 out of 64 players is still not the 25% that was the goal a few years back. It's only 12.5%. 4 out of 70 players means that while 8 players get kicker points, only 5.7% of the field made cut, which is just too low a number.

Drew
 
what are player thoughts on going the opposite way: results based on Swiss only?

The problem is that Battle Roads are structured to be a smaller event than a City Championship, in more ways than one.
Not just the prizing is reduced, the resources of the TO to compensate a store or venue is also reduced.
So, with larger attendance this year, it's already a strain on the TO/store relationship. Adding even more time with bigger top cuts will add to that strain.
 
I agree with swiss record-based point giveaways. I went 3-1 last Saturday (starting 3-0), and still ended up 5th, missing the top 4 cut (16 players).

Yesterday I went 4-1 and ended up 5th yet again, missing cut and any shot at points. If it was structured so that head-to-head was more important than opponent win%, it would make a lot more sense I think, as that is a controllable factor. How your opponents do is not a controllable factor.

If the structure was like this, it would make more sense, and be a lot less discouraging:

1st: 2 points

4-5 rounds X-1: 1 point
6+ rounds X-2: 1 point

Going on Pokepop's statement, it would eliminate the need for a top cut as well, since attendance is growing due to the new points implementation (most of our numbers have near doubled).
 
Does the head office want more players or not? I already hearing players saying it is not worth traveling to a tournament when they know after one early loss they have no chance at placing. Might as well travel to the local card store and play pick up games. We used to look for the big events and now we look for the smaller ones. I know the system is in a "test" year but as cities approach we should learn from what we see in BR's. In Florida and at the GA Marathon we will see City fields of over 100 players and T8 is too small for those events as well.
 
If a BR 1st place is going to give 1/7th of the points of a Nats win, they are no longer going to be seen as friendly, entry-level tournaments for a local player base.

So yes, players will be resentful of a restricted top cut, and the attendance will start to become unmanageable.
 
PokePop said:
what are player thoughts on going the opposite way: results based on Swiss only?
Click to expand...

Personally, I think that would be great...if it weren't for the three trophy cards now given at BRs. With those, I feel that the two losers from Top4 need to face off to fairly determine the winner. Besides, top cut is where all the other players have the opportunity to watch the games and see what is winning in their local market. It allows you to learn and build for your meta. Without that opportunity it creates an environment of a 'stacked deck' wherein the same people will have a greater chance at winning as the meta is kept more secret, and that would eventually turn people away from Pokemon.
 
Last edited:
I agree, if BR's are going to stay this competitive, the top cut limit restrictions need to be lifted. For any and all events IMO.
 
PokePop said:
what are player thoughts on going the opposite way: results based on Swiss only?

The problem is that Battle Roads are structured to be a smaller event than a City Championship, in more ways than one.
Not just the prizing is reduced, the resources of the TO to compensate a store or venue is also reduced.
So, with larger attendance this year, it's already a strain on the TO/store relationship. Adding even more time with bigger top cuts will add to that strain.
Click to expand...

I don't think that adding time to a tournament will strain the relationship between venue owner and TO. If anything it will make it better. For the purposes of collectors stores/gaming stores, the addition of time only means one thing; more money!

It is a business, and the more you have customers/players inside your store, the better likelyhood of temptation rolling in and taking over thus giving the store some more profit.

All I know is a top 4 Cut for 65 Masters seems horrendous. Its like Gym Challenge all over again.
Posted with Mobile style...
 
Vegeta ss4 said:
I don't think that adding time to a tournament will strain the relationship between venue owner and TO. If anything it will make it better. For the purposes of collectors stores/gaming stores, the addition of time only means one thing; more money!

It is a business, and the more you have customers/players inside your store, the better likelyhood of temptation rolling in and taking over thus giving the store some more profit.

All I know is a top 4 Cut for 65 Masters seems horrendous. Its like Gym Challenge all over again.
Posted with Mobile style...
Click to expand...

Only if that store supports Pokemon mainly/only. If that store has other games/TCGs....they may need that space too. Magic, Yugi-ugh, War Hammer, and other games play on the weekends too. Store owners have to keep them happy too.

I ran a BR yesterday in the smaller of my 2 areas. The moment the store opened, I walked in with my laptop, printer, prizes, etc to run the tourney. I go to the table near the plugs and some other fella (with 2 others there) are standing nearby by. They say they have a tourney there too that day (another TCG). I find another plug on the other side. My tourney drew 3-4 times the players of the other TCG, but they still warranted space in the store too.

Just bc players are in a store doesn't = profits for the store. The players still have to buy stuff. (The store also needs a good supply of pokemon related items too) Many stores charge the PTO a head count. BRs are smaller scaled events and the PTO's arent comp'ed the same as a CC or up.

Keith
 
jrwaxman said:
Does the head office want more players or not? I already hearing players saying it is not worth traveling to a tournament when they know after one early loss they have no chance at placing. Might as well travel to the local card store and play pick up games. We used to look for the big events and now we look for the smaller ones. I know the system is in a "test" year but as cities approach we should learn from what we see in BR's. In Florida and at the GA Marathon we will see City fields of over 100 players and T8 is too small for those events as well.
Click to expand...

I think this is a good point. Hearing how large some of these BRs are, and points are only for top 2? top 4? It's going to be hard to make a good amount off BRs...EXCEPT if you live in a small area. In the past, the advantage of playing in a small easy area were somewhat offset by big tournament winners getting more rounds, and winning more points off of high ranked players. It is too skewed to small tournaments now.
 
PokePop said:
what are player thoughts on going the opposite way: results based on Swiss only?
Click to expand...

If we do swiss only. I think we would have to think about new tiebreakers. Opponent's and Opponent's Opponents Win % isn't totally fair. The only reason being that people drop and then it screws their opponents who do well. It doesnt feel good thinking that because someone dropped, I get stiffed from the Top Cut.
 
I think a lot of the current issues are things that P!P is working out over a couple seasons to fully explore what benefits both players and staff (along with the company itself with costs and whatnot) in the long run. I'm willing to give them the time it takes to see what changes need made vs what processes should remain.
 
This new system will not be perfect at the beginning, and will need event results and player/ organizer feedback to iron out some of the larger issues. (top 4 for a tourney being one of them)The major issue seems to be the influx of ppl attending brs this season. Last season we had very minimal attendance for brs as opposed to cc and state champs. This season, more is on the line at these smaller tournaments. As such P!P should restructure the bracket setup to reflect this. It's kind of like the rule change. The old cards didn't fit the new rules. The old tourney structure doesn't fit the new point system.
 
Why couldn't they continue with restriction to top 4 cut but reward 4-8 with points depending on attendance for battle road?
The store is happy in that they are not required to allot more time for battle road and players get points.
 
dave628 said:
Why couldn't they continue with restriction to top 4 cut but reward 4-8 with points depending on attendance for battle road?
The store is happy in that they are not required to allot more time for battle road and players get points.
Click to expand...

That's what's currently in place.
 
jrwaxman said:
Does the head office want more players or not? I already hearing players saying it is not worth traveling to a tournament when they know after one early loss they have no chance at placing.
Click to expand...

I feel exactly the same way. I went 5-1 at BR (lost round 1) and still came in 5th. Either way I'm sure TPCI will make changes where changes need to be made (hint topcut kicker points). I myself will probably just stick to BR locations close to home.
 
Last edited:
It seems like the kicker should raise the first place points as well.

1-31
1st: 2
2nd: 1

32-63
1st: 3
2nd: 2
3-4: 1

64+
1st: 4
2nd: 3
3-4: 2
5-8: 1

I know that this inflates the points and each one would hav to b worth progressively more (Nats win=64 or something like that). This obviously isnt perfect, But this would reflect how much harder it is to win a 68 person BR then a 14 person one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top