What constitutes as a "proper tournament"???

I've been wadding thru some of the dedicated games forums and it seems there's much talk on the tournament front. With the current Dynamic League tournament, they are set up in the form of a league. Now some of you guys have said that a proper tournament is one that involves elimination. However, the way I see it, there is no "proper tournament" as such since tournaments can be setup differently.

What I want to know is what constitutes as a tournament and why?

 

wow

tournaments can be setup differently depending on how it is setup

this strikes me as an incredibly undebatable premise. And before anyone asks me what I mean, re-read that sentence until it becomes clear.

Now for the question in hand. Are there "proper" tournaments and is a tournament with an elimination round one? I'm not going to say I have the answer since it clearly comes down to opinion and preference but I will state why I think elimination is the way to go. i'll likely go about this in my own unclear manner so read on so warned

definition time
<font color=white>tournament</font color=white>
<font color=white>A series of contests in which a number of contestants compete and the one that prevails through the final round or that finishes with the best record is declared the winner</font color=white>

I assume that you are operating under the premise that if you establish a league and the league plays regularly and someone keeps track of the points racked up through wins and losses that there is no need for an elimination round since a clear "winnner" will show up in the numbers (whew, big sentence). The best record scenario.

This is one way to go and I'm sure it works. It rewards the consistent dominator or at least the most consistent player but for me there is something very crucial missing. closure. I want the final match up. I want to see people work towards a definite goal (the final four) and then battle their way through that to get to the eventual top of the tier. I want the battle and I want to see it. I really don't care for a points system unless it is for seeding purposes only and is designed to get people to the elimination rounds. Elimination is where it is at because it forces people to respond to the specific challange of being knocked off. If they can accomplish the task of survival under direct pressure (and I would argue that surviving for points is different than surviving under an elimation even though the vehicle is the same) then they get to keep going. If not, well....goodbye.

I believe that tournaments need a specific conclusion and that conclusion is based around elimination. It gives out huge vibes and raises emotion among the participants and observers alike. Our storyline culture responds to it. We want to see who has the bones and who doesn't, who is technically proficient and who has a still mind.

I think tournaments that utilize elimination are different entirely than those that don't. I know that, for myself, a gathering is much different than a tournament. I do well at gathering's and poorly at tournaments and I know it is not just me that operates in this fashion.

Well, for what it is worth, there are my musings.

GodEater
<font color=white>you're just an empty cage, girl, if you kill the bird</font color=white>

 

My personal ideal for a tournament is this:

Players are paired up for the preliminary fights, i.e. everyone is arranged into groups of two, and these pairs fight each other to see who will advance to the next round. The fights should consist of a best of 5 format, meaning the first player to win three games is the winner. This winner moves on to the next round. The loser goes to a loser's bracket, where they have a second chance to defeat all challengers and eventually earn the trophy.

People who keep winning make it to semifinals, finals, and eventually a championship. People who lose once go to a loser's bracket, and if they lose again at any point they are knocked out of the tournament.

The final match of the winner's bracket doesn't determine the ultimate winner... the final match of the tournament is the champ of the winner's bracket going up against the champ of the loser's bracket (someone who lost once but never lost a second time)

When these two square off, the person in the loser's bracket must beat the champion of the winner's bracket TWICE (meaning two matches, not two rounds or two games) in order to take home the trophy. The reason for this? If the winner's bracket champ won 4 games to get where he is, and the loser's bracket champ lost one game and then won 4, then having the loser's champ beat the winner's champ would create a situation where both players have 4 wins/1 loss records. The second match exists to 'break the tie'.

I've always been fond of this sort of format, because losing once doesn't mean you get knocked out right away, and having to win three matches rather than just one or two sort of ensures that nobody is knocked out due to bad luck. This format (the general structure, not the exact figures of best-of-five, etc.) has been the tradition for both VF gatherings and lots of professional sports as well.


One last bit, the only weakness of this setup is that it relies on having a specific number of participants, it works best when the number of participants can be repeatedly divided by 2 (i.e. 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64). If you end up with an odd number of people or a number like 30, some people will get "byes" meaning they automatically advance to the next round before having to challenge an opponent. Other than that it works great and generally ensures the person who plays with the most consistency and the steadiest nerves wins. If you have a format where everyone plays everyone else and the guy with the biggest win streak or highest number of wins is the champ, then you're not really testing the player's ability to play under pressure.

 

I prefer the elimination style that GodEater and Creed have refered to for the same reasons that they have given. Closure is a big key, and the climax of an elimination tournament is a very big thing for the players in the final and the audience.

Round robin (league play) is also valid though. I'll give two examples that I think are relevent here: The English Premier League(soccer) and Japanese Suma Tournaments(Emperor's Cup). Both determine their champion by round robin play. In the EPL, every team plays a match home and away with every other team. They get 3 points for a win, 1 point for a draw, and no points for a loss. In sumo, every fighter fights once a day until everyone has fought everyone else once. They just keep track of the win/loss record. Both of these systems are "valid" and have long histories of being used in their respective sports to determine their champions. (The only modification/tweaking that I can think of is that it used to be 2 points for a win in soccer, but too many teams were playing for ties, so they increased the reward for winning games.)

All the major sports in the USA/Canada, however, have a playoff after their regular season (round robin play) with the teams ceded based on their performance during the season. This is probably why the north american residents on this forum are more comfortable with the 2 phase round robin into elimination bracket tournament.

One thing I don't like about the lack of a playoff in the EPL is that there is a chance that the top 2 or 3 teams may not face each other at all during the last 4-6 weeks of the season. Teams that are middle of the table have little to play for at the end of the season, so its annoying that a team fighting for the championship has to depend on another team that might not have its heart in a game to defeat their championship rival.

From what I understand, however, the Dynamic League tournaments are more like a normal night at the arcade. The players queue up, and start playing one after the other in line, with their wins and losses tracked. The player who gets the longest win streak is usually determined the champion. I don't like this format because there's a chance that one player may not face another player at all during the duration of the tournament, and the quality of competition is not uniform for all the participants. If someone is confused by that last sentence, I can give examples, but I don't want to put people to sleep here... I can't think of any other organization that determines there champion like the Dynamic League does.

I personally would put more creedence in the Dynamic League Champion if he was determined by a more conventional round robin tournament like they use for sumo wrestling in Japan, where every player plays every other player once and the win/loss records are then compared. Or if you have a small turn out for the tournament, everyone can play everyone else twice and then compare the records to determine the champion. There is no climax to this style of tournament, but the participants are all guaranteed to fight the same level of competition.

That being said, however, I have no doubt that Hatim is the best player in the UK right now. His track record speaks for itself. Congratulations Hatim.

Hopefully the Japanese players can make it to London to face off against the best at Casino. I'd love to be in attendance for such an event--to watch more than to play at this point. =)

 

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

One last bit, the only weakness of this setup is that it relies on having a specific number of participants, it works best when the number of participants can be repeatedly divided by 2 (i.e. 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64).

<hr></blockquote>

Although not explicitely said above, but the numbers speak for themselves: it works best when the number of players is equal to a power of 2.

 

that's the wording I was looking for, damn. It took me a minute just to come up with the alternate wording.

 

Thanks for all your views on this subject. Its time for me to put my views:

*Elimination Tournaments*
As you people have stated, elimination tourneys are a great way for people to get together and play thru a knockout structure. There are loads of pros to this format but there are also alot of cons. Here are my list:

PROS:
* Sense of pressure making matches more exciting.
* Rewarding for those who survive the stages.
* Great with loads of participates
* Pay a one-off fee if admission is required.
* Prizes can be won at the end of the tournament.
* Everyone gets to play at least one game.

CONS:
* Requires a set number of participates.
* One-off fees can be expensive to those KO'd early in the Tourney.
* Less challenging if there are a few participates.
* Waiting for your match to be called up.
* Requires one venue so players who live a few hundred miles from the venue will have to contend with expensive travel costs.
* Only games that are featured in the tournament can be played.
* May only be able to participate in just one choosen game to avoid disqualification.


As you can see, elimination tournaments can only be done and be successful if there are enough people playing in the tournament. Of course, elimination tournaments can be determined thru an NBA style format, where areas can be split up so say theres an East and West KO games, with only a few teams from either side going into the final elimination tournament. That can only work if there is enough awareness to these tournaments. Again you'll need enough players to get this format working. Which brings us to the League format.

* League Tournaments *
There are several types of league tournaments. One is the soccer set up, where players play each individual at least once to earn points. One with the highest points wins. Here are the pros and cons of this version of the league:

PROS:
* Can be spread out along several months instead of just days.
* Sense of determination to win for points.
* Prizes can be won at the end of the tournament.
* Everyone gets to play at least one game.
* Can lead into exciting tie-breaks.

CONS:
* Needs a certain amount of players for this to work.
* Can lead to unessesary tie-breaks.
* Requires players to turn up on certain dates.

This setup can fall apart if people don't turn up for their matches. So it requires players to be reliable. Let's turn our attention to the Dynamic League format.

Dynamic League Tournament
These tournaments are a "winner stays on" format where, the player who beats their opponent stays on the machine. Again, we'll list the pros and cons:

PROS:
* Players can turn up within the score logging times.
* Players can pop out once they have turned up on the doors without the fear of missing a vital match.
* Players can switch between different games.
* Assest on how often, and well you play in matches.
* Keeps to the old familiar format of "winner-stays-on".
* Can be used for "record-breaking".
* No need to turn up for every tournament.
* Spending the same amount of money with a goal to achieve.
* Prizes up for grabs to those better players.

CONS:
* Can be very expensive to those who are a bit rubbish at games.
* There maybe a long queue, so you might have to wait for your matches.
* Doesn't have the pizzaz that elimination tourneys have.

Damn.. I'm too tired to explain more.. Just post with questions if u don't understand...

 

Re: What constitutes as a

one last bit, a con to the DL style: doesn't show which player plays best under pressure.

Dynamic league style is just fucking around with some guy standing nearby holding a notepad. Winner stays and whoever shows plays? Come on, that's a regular old gathering. Put money into the mix and it's a league. But it's just not a tournament. Even my local pool league will expect people to show up and pay money, but then the best of these have a double elmination tournament at the end of the year.

You should not list as a con: "regular tournaments expect you to be there on a specific day and time" when the DL style expects someone to be able to show up on many many different dates and times (just to have the opportunity to put up a streak). It automatically handicaps people with work schedules and whatnot.


In my twisted, arrogant mind, a tournament must be limited to a specific time, place, prize, etc. just by definition. Anything else shouldn't be called a tournament.

 

Re: What constitutes as a

*Elimination Tournaments*

CONS:
* Requires a set number of participates.

Not true. If the number of players is not a power of 2 then some players just have "byes" in the first round and then the tournament proceeds normally. I think this might have been changed in recent years, but the NCAA (US colleges) Women's Basketball tournament used to have a field of 48 teams, with the highest ranking teams waiting until the second round for their first game.

* One-off fees can be expensive to those KO'd early in the Tourney.

This is why we like the 2 phase tournament with round robin play to determine ceding. You get to play everyone else in the tounament if it's a small group, or you can break the participants up into smaller groups to speed up the process. Everyone gets their moneys worth in terms of the number of games they play. The ceding from the round robin phase would also determine who would get the first round byes when there isn't a convenient number of players.

Look at World Cup Soccer. They start with 8 groups of 4 teams, then go to 4 groups of 4 teams, then to 2 groups of four teams, and then you have your final four which play a knockout elimination tournament. The worst teams are guaranteed to play at least 3 games in the first phase round robin. And the top 2 teams from each group are split up, so that they shouldn't see each other again until the final phase. This guarantees that you play the greatest variety of opposing teams.

* Less challenging if there are a few participates.

This is true of any tournament, unless you don't think this is a con for the Dynamic League style of tournament? This is why I questioned Derrick about the turn out at Dynamic League events a while back. If there's only 5-6 guys challenging and one person goes on a 20-30 game win streak, it's not really that big a deal IMO.

* Waiting for your match to be called up.

I agree here, but if you participate a big tourney, then you should expect to spend most of your time waiting around.

* Requires one venue so players who live a few hundred miles from the venue will have to contend with expensive travel costs.
* Only games that are featured in the tournament can be played.
* May only be able to participate in just one choosen game to avoid disqualification.

Uh, I didn't know we were arguing over multi-game and multi-arcade events. Like Creed said, a tounament is a self contained thing. The goal is to keep it homogeneous, as in the same for all participants. Multiple arcades is fine if you want to regionalize the tournaments, and then have the winners in the regions meet up later for a national title or something like that.


Dynamic League Tournament
These tournaments are a "winner stays on" format where, the player who beats their opponent stays on the machine.

Steve, keeping records of win/loss records and winning streaks is a great way to promote the game and rank players, but calling it a "tournament" is probably why Creed, I, and others cringe when we see your announcements about upcoming events. Your description is more of a "league" night as in a bowling or billiards league. You can certainly call someone a champion based on their stats alone, but the finality of a knock-out elimination tournament and the adrenaline rush that it can provide for the players is something that your league members are really missing out on.

One thing that has always bugged me about the Dynamic League format is that it's the lazy way out for the organizers. You just make a list of the players participating in the league for a given evening, and then keep track of wins and losses. The other formats require the organizers to do some planning before the tournament begins and it works best if you can get the machine changed to vs. play, so that every time a new game starts, both players can pick the character they want.

 

Re: What constitutes as a

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

it works best if you can get the machine changed to vs. play, so that every time a new game starts, both players can pick the character they want.

<hr></blockquote>

Have you actually told Derrick about that?

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

This is true of any tournament, unless you don't think this is a con for the Dynamic League style of tournament? This is why I questioned Derrick about the turn out at Dynamic League events a while back. If there's only 5-6 guys challenging and one person goes on a 20-30 game win streak, it's not really that big a deal IMO.

<hr></blockquote>

Of course, if you've been to the October event, you'd know that it was packed like a tin of sardines. the management at Casino complained about the overcrowding and we had to introduction an entry fee to keep players at a resonable level. We seriously do not want Casino to be fined or even shutdown because of the health and fire issues. This is why we want to move to a bigger venue.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

One thing that has always bugged me about the Dynamic League format is that it's the lazy way out for the organizers. You just make a list of the players participating in the league for a given evening, and then keep track of wins and losses. The other formats require the organizers to do some planning before the tournament begins

<hr></blockquote>

But you see, we all have day jobs or some form of education days to attend to. I have to juggle between making the magazine, doing college stuff, popping out on IT call outs and music producing. I also have to find a part time job too so its really tough right now. And I'll be doing this for the next TWO YEARS!

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

Steve, keeping records of win/loss records and winning streaks is a great way to promote the game and rank players, but calling it a "tournament" is probably why Creed, I, and others cringe when we see your announcements about upcoming events. Your description is more of a "league" night as in a bowling or billiards league. You can certainly call someone a champion based on their stats alone, but the finality of a knock-out elimination tournament and the adrenaline rush that it can provide for the players is something that your league members are really missing out on.

<hr></blockquote>

Derrick is planning some form of elimination event soon. Don't know the details as yet since he's concentrating on the ATEI and Funland right now. He also gonna do a "challenge" event as well soon if all goes to plan.

The great thing about the league is its continuous and what ever you earned during these league events you keep. So when you become a top player, you stay as a top player until Derrick decides to reset the score cause of player's demand. Sponsorship is the exception since that's contract deals. The league benefits to everyone, since its continuous. Players get to aim for top spot, sponsorship and prizes. Games both old and new get played, the venues get used more often. Companies can sponsor events and players for more than one day. Even though it feels like a normal evening, there's actually more for you to aim at than just beating your friends. Plus unlike the soccer league, you're not restricted to a certain number of players. Cause once a league starts in that format, no one can participate until it ends. With the Dynamic League format, anyone can pop down and join the league. It works for those who can't attend that particular date and it works for those late comers.

Elimination tourney's are also great since they offer things that leagues don't but they come and go. It takes more work to do a elimination tourney than a league. And doing elimination tourneys every month isn't the way to go. These are best done quaterly or annually. It makes you wonder why the World Cup, European Cup and the Oympics only appears every four years.

 

Re: What constitutes as a

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

one last bit, a con to the DL style: doesn't show which player plays best under pressure.

Dynamic league style is just fucking around with some guy standing nearby holding a notepad. Winner stays and whoever shows plays? Come on, that's a regular old gathering. Put money into the mix and it's a league. But it's just not a tournament. Even my local pool league will expect people to show up and pay money, but then the best of these have a double elmination tournament at the end of the year.

You should not list as a con: "regular tournaments expect you to be there on a specific day and time" when the DL style expects someone to be able to show up on many many different dates and times (just to have the opportunity to put up a streak). It automatically handicaps people with work schedules and whatnot.

In my twisted, arrogant mind, a tournament must be limited to a specific time, place, prize, etc. just by definition. Anything else shouldn't be called a tournament.

<hr></blockquote>

But the difference between a regular gathering and the Dynamic League event/tourney is that you're aiming for something like top spot, prizes or sponsorship. There's also the change of being in a magazine, on video, on the Internet etc etc. Plus with Dynamic League gatherings, you know you'll be expecting high class players to challenge you. Money can not be used as prizes since that a form of money gambling and there are restrictions in gambling laws here in the UK. (if you don't understand, just ask).

Your second statement is actually wrong. It doesn't handcap anyone, since you can miss these certain days and still end up at top spot depending on how well you play. If you look at Ryan Hart in some of his tables, you'll see that he's top because he hasn't lost a single round, even though he'd played say just seven matches. Anyone good enough, who is new to the tounament can get top spot if he can play without losing a round throughout the league, not just on the day, nor as a winning streak since the player can call it a day after one winning match. You can't just expect to aim for a winning streak since if you have a winning streak of 50 in one night... but then lose all your other 50 matches, you're not gonna expect to be first on the table. Winning streaks only constitutes just part of the score in the league, since its a build up. But because the play in the Dynamic League is at its highest, getting a winning streak isn't easy. If it was that easy, you'll see in the tables people with winning streaks of like 25 to 100. This adds strategy to the league. Who do you play next. Who shouldn't you play next. Whether you should put in just one credit or three? You have to study your players, you have to study the tables and you have to work out whether you should play just one game for the night or several. Its like martial arts. And that's what's missing in Elimination tournaments cause you're set to fighter a certain opponent. I should of including that in my pros and cons... but I wrote this like 7:00AM in the morning with a very sleepy brain!

One reason why I didn't put your con up there is this:

A player will be under pressure if the player has just one credit left in his machine and the opponent has three credits to his/her name. Its up to the player with one credit to beat the opponent three times to stay on the machine. The opponent only has to beat him once to take him off. And that's putting the players into pressure. If the person with one credit is a top player and the opponent isn't, it puts the opponent under pressure to beat him once or else he could lose all this credits. The Dynamic League matches are restricted to just two to three credits per match-up, so you can't put more credits during, before or after the match-up. (eg. say £1 gives you 2 credits, you can't put another pound during of the match.)

 

Re: What constitutes as a

You can't hold a tournament with a cash prize, the prize must be in some other form (trophies, a new car, sardines, whatever)?
Ouch, bummer for the UK.

Your second statement is actually wrong. It doesn't handcap anyone, since you can miss these certain days and still end up at top spot depending on how well you play.

Yes but think of it this way. I participated in a tournament in canada. I can't go to canada more than once a year and for no longer than a few days. This is the only way to get CreeD in a tournament. I don't know how far one must drive to get from one point to another in the UK, but that's besides the point. A real tournament could have Kyasao hypothetically come from japan and have a chance for the trophy. A dynamic league system can't. Sure, a player can show up one day, do really really well, and have a strong ranking according to his performance on that one day... but hopefully they can't come anywhere near the top based on a solid one-day performance, otherwise the league system's out of whack.

What if my job tells me I must switch my hours and I end up working every single day of the usual league timeslot? Or what if it were in my best interests to do so? I can always get ONE day off from work, or even a handful of consecutive days off, but I can't as easily say "I want every tuesday night off from here to eternity".

re: the credit system giving pressure:
This sort of pressure doesn't sound like the sort of pressure I'm imagining. Isn't it true that if someone has good performance all around (over a span of weeks and months) that all they have to do is hope that someone else doesn't match it? In your example the guy with one credit must beat the guy with three credits. What I'm imagining is a situation where one player has done very well over the course of several weeks or months and he is now out of credits. What does he have to do now other than sit back and relax? And hope that some guy out there with three credits fucks up? He could be eating his liver and onions at the mall food court when someone walks up to him and says "hey, you won the 'tournament' chap. Good job."
I'd much rather see a tournament where the best players are clearly defined and face each other one on one. How they get defined (over the course of an afternoon or over the course of months of league play) is not that important. It's the fact that these two best players and only these two face each other and are directly responsible for which one walks away with the sterling teapot.

What you're talking about is a league by definition and it works great as a league. I like the idea and strongly encourage you to keep doing it for the rest of your natural lives. But at the end of the league year you really ought to hold a proper double-elim. tournament. Otherwise it just boils down to "We've tallied up the results, and here's what's happened. This year ryan hart won 4,327 rounds and hatim won 3,689. Hatim gets a bonus for his win streak of 108, but Ryan's stats still come out on top. Congratulations Ryan, here's your N'Sync poster."

 

Re: What constitutes as a

Ewww. N'Sync... must you mutter such obscenities???

Oh don't worry, elimination tournaments are on the cards, but there's needs to be more thought to planning and stuff and obviously a bigger venue before any of this can happen.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

Isn't it true that if someone has good performance all around (over a span of weeks and months) that all they have to do is hope that someone else doesn't match it?

<hr></blockquote>

And this is where all your studying and research comes in. You can always challenge him in the bid that he loses to you, which means you can get the upper hand. But you don't want to run like a bull and go in head first, since that's how you make mistakes and misjudge the persons character and skill. Like martial arts, you have to look out for his weaknesses. This way you can catch him/her out and get the upper hand.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

Sure, a player can show up one day, do really really well, and have a strong ranking according to his performance on that one day... but hopefully they can't come anywhere near the top based on a solid one-day performance, otherwise the league system's out of whack.

<hr></blockquote>

If the player is good and wins a few matches with just one credit, chances are he'll be in the top 20. Regardless of which position he/she is in, this person gets rated, and so benefits from free entry to the tournament in the next meeting. If he or she gets no1 spot, then when he/she comes back for another tourney he/she could benefit with a couple of free credits. or something similar. Its true that you need to appear more regularly in the tourneys if you want to stay at the top as there are players who will over take you cause they attend the meetings regularly. But you have to remember that this is a continuous league.You can be top after one days performance but your position will degrade over time and you'll have to come back to get back to the top. There are certain games that get played inregularly in our tourneys like Marvel vs Capcom 2, so unless there are more challengers on those machines, the players who achieved something on that game will remain top.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

Yes but think of it this way. I participated in a tournament in canada. I can't go to canada more than once a year and for no longer than a few days. This is the only way to get CreeD in a tournament.

<hr></blockquote>

As I've said way back.. what we want is to host Tourneys all over the world so that you don't have to come all the way to UK to play. Plus have it so you can play at anytime of the day. Plus we can then hold National KO tournaments for that specific country and then hold an International tourney to find the World class player of the year and stuff. Like the World Cup.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

What I'm imagining is a situation where one player has done very well over the course of several weeks or months and he is now out of credits. What does he have to do now other than sit back and relax? And hope that some guy out there with three credits fucks up?

<hr></blockquote>

if he's that good, then he'd be a top player, which means he'll always have at least two to three FREE credits every month. If he's sponsored, then chances are the company are paying for his credits. he'll still be playing regardless.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

I'd much rather see a tournament where the best players are clearly defined and face each other one on one. How they get defined (over the course of an afternoon or over the course of months of league play) is not that important. It's the fact that these two best players and only these two face each other and are directly responsible for which one walks away with the sterling teapot.

<hr></blockquote>

Of course, why did you think that Derrick AKA Dynamic-League has made a challenge to VFDC? The league is only part of what we are, but the league is the main structure of the Dynamic League. We would love to host KO tourneys, Challenge tourney's, grudge matches, but that can only happen over time. We really DON'T want to be like the Tekken 4 Regional Championships, where it runs for several months and then disappears forever.

Anyway, this is straying away from my original question. Going back to the original post. My opinion is that there isn't such a thing as a proper tournament since tourney's are all different thru structure. Like there is no such thing as a "proper man" or "proper woman".

 

Re: What constitutes as a

I'm okay with everything else you said because you DO plan on having a proper tournament at the end of your league season.

Anyway, this is straying away from my original question. Going back to the original post. My opinion is that there isn't such a thing as a proper tournament since tourney's are all different thru structure. Like there is no such thing as a "proper man" or "proper woman".

You could argue that no one definition of tournament could be called THE KOSHER definition, but you can't say there's no such thing as a clearcut definition for a tournament. While a league is great, it's not the same thing as a tournament, and what you're doing is a league (which you don't deny). You can't call a league a tournament any more than you can call a car a ship. They sort of work towards the same end, but they're not the same.

 

Re: What constitutes as a

"Who do you play next. Who shouldn't you play next."

You're pretty much right there is no "proper" tournament, but that line you wrote really bugs me. If you're vying to be the best, it shouldn't matter who you play...wimping out and not playing somebody 'cause you know you're gonna get beat just to keep your record good is pretty pathetic. If that statement above is true, then you have a HUGE loophole in your league system. "Jeez, I better wait a bit until somebody I know I can beat is on the machine..."

Hell, I REALLY suck at VF but it doesn't stop me from playing anyone, and losing most of the time ;-)

the other Nelson in NYC

 

Re: What constitutes as a

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

"Who do you play next. Who shouldn't you play next."

You're pretty much right there is no "proper" tournament, but that line you wrote really bugs me. If you're vying to be the best, it shouldn't matter who you play...wimping out and not playing somebody 'cause you know you're gonna get beat just to keep your record good is pretty pathetic. If that statement above is true, then you have a HUGE loophole in your league system. "Jeez, I better wait a bit until somebody I know I can beat is on the machine..."

Hell, I REALLY suck at VF but it doesn't stop me from playing anyone, and losing most of the time ;-)

<hr></blockquote>

Thing is.. some of the players who participate in the tourneys are top class players. Plus most of them know each other anyway. There is a big drawback to choosing who to play and that is you won't expect to play many games since its usually the people that are good that stay on the machines, so the chances of you trying to pull a fast one is silm. But as I said, most of the players know each other before the tournament or know each other because of the tournament now, so they'll play anyone regardless. But for the few that do wish to take that tactic.. such as me.. who can't compete against the likes of Genjin, Ryan, Starscream etc etc... then its an option. But like I said, don't expect to play many games in the tournament. (although i don't get to play any!) There is a practise day before the tournament to check out the players. And there's always the non-tournament days where some of the players pop down to the venue just to hang-out. So you'll always get to practise and get a taste of what they're made of!

It's always more exciting to play against someone who is in the same class as you'll have a fighting chance. It's even more challenging to play against a top class player. But it's up to you to do the research and find out who is good, who is not and who is similar to you. Or else you'll be taken off the machine quicker than a slap to the face.

 

Re: What constitutes as a

I'm sure that we've mentioned the vs. option for tournaments that is available on all VF machines to Derrick before. Arcade managers should not be afraid to turn it on because it means that both the winner and loser are kicked off the machine after their match is over. You need to have 2 credits in the machine to start the next match. When we've had the cooperation of an arcade, we've had the machine set to vs. play and free play for the tournament, and given the entry fees to the arcade to pay for the time with the game.

Of course, if you've been to the October event, you'd know that it was packed like a tin of sardines. the management at Casino complained about the overcrowding and we had to introduction an entry fee to keep players at a resonable level. We seriously do not want Casino to be fined or even shutdown because of the health and fire issues. This is why we want to move to a bigger venue.

It's great to hear about so much enthusiasm Hopefully you can find a larger venue so that you don't have to turn willing players away.

Derrick is planning some form of elimination event soon. Don't know the details as yet since he's concentrating on the ATEI and Funland right now. He also gonna do a "challenge" event as well soon if all goes to plan.

Great. It'd be a real coup if the Dynamic League can get Kyasao and his friends to come to the UK again, and as I've said before, I'd like to see how Ryan and Hatim would react to a knock out elimination tourney. Use the Dynamic League standings to cede the tournament bracket. Also, I don't think a double elimination tournament is a must, expecially with the rankings provided by the Dynamic League's regular events. To keep it simple, single elimination is fine IMO, but you should have players play best of 3 (or even best of 5) games instead of just 1 game to determine the winner like Creed mentioned earlier.

The great thing about the league is its continuous and what ever you earned during these league events you keep. So when you become a top player, you stay as a top player until Derrick decides to reset the score cause of player's demand. Sponsorship is the exception since that's contract deals. The league benefits to everyone, since its continuous. Players get to aim for top spot, sponsorship and prizes. Games both old and new get played, the venues get used more often. Companies can sponsor events and players for more than one day. Even though it feels like a normal evening, there's actually more for you to aim at than just beating your friends.

Yep, like I said before, this is a great way to promote video games, and Derrick should get credit for that, despite the ragging he tends to take around here when he starts spamming the board.

Elimination tourney's are also great since they offer things that leagues don't but they come and go. It takes more work to do a elimination tourney than a league. And doing elimination tourneys every month isn't the way to go. These are best done quaterly or annually. It makes you wonder why the World Cup, European Cup and the Oympics only appears every four years.

I'm glad we're all on the same track now. Yeah, an elimination tourney is a special thing, which should be held at the end of a "season." Having tourneys more than once a month would probably be too much for the organizers and players... The World Cup, Olympics, etc. are every 4 years precisely because of the overhead required to organize such events.

 

Re: What constitutes as a

Anyone good enough, who is new to the tounament can get top spot if he can play without losing a round throughout the league, not just on the day, nor as a winning streak since the player can call it a day after one winning match.

Really? Hmm, so a player can go on a 20 game win streak and then just call it quits and hop off the machine before the end of League play on a given night so that he has no losses on his record? That doesn't seem right to me. All the "league" type organizations I've participated in force you to play everyone else that's involved in the league at least once. A player shouldn't be allowed to choose his opposition IMO.

<snip>
And that's what's missing in Elimination tournaments cause you're set to fighter a certain opponent. I should of including that in my pros and cons... but I wrote this like 7:00AM in the morning with a very sleepy brain!

You may have listed this as a pro, but I'd call it a con to Dynamic League play. Players in the league should be forced to accept any challenges from other league members during a league event. Heh, the more you explain how the DL works, the more it sounds like VFnet without the character costume upgrades and little bunnies You can challenge a top player with your VFnet card and reap the glory if you win, or you can choose to not insert your card and fight the strong player without fear of hurting your own ranking in the system.

 

Re: What constitutes as a

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

You may have listed this as a pro, but I'd call it a con to Dynamic League play. Players in the league should be forced to accept any challenges from other league members during a league event. Heh, the more you explain how the DL works, the more it sounds like VFnet without the character costume upgrades and little bunnies You can challenge a top player with your VFnet card and reap the glory if you win, or you can choose to not insert your card and fight the strong player without fear of hurting your own ranking in the system.

<hr></blockquote>

But if you're a good player, none of that would matter cause good players will play anyone and will always play people to get a good challenge regardless if they're good or not just so that they can improve their gameplay.

Thing is choosing that tactic will mean... losing your credits on your machine, not able to play many games and so ends up being an expensive tactic. I mean, those Street Fighter machines only accepts £1 coins giving you three credits. Its bad enough losing a credit in the machine because of the machine, but by choice? i rather play those credits and get my games worth cause there's no way i'm gonna get those credits back and if there's a big queue and took that tactic, chances are, i'll only get to play one game out of the whole evening, even if i do win that match.

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

Really? Hmm, so a player can go on a 20 game win streak and then just call it quits and hop off the machine before the end of League play on a given night so that he has no losses on his record? That doesn't seem right to me. All the "league" type organizations I've participated in force you to play everyone else that's involved in the league at least once. A player shouldn't be allowed to choose his opposition IMO.

<hr></blockquote>

Usually, people who do hop off the machine after winning a good number of games, are hopping off for a break. A hopping off means losing the extra credits you have in the machine. It does have its advantages. It means a different person can get to fight in the tournament so you don't get this senario where you have to beat the person with a winning streak in order to play other player.

But what do i mean by choose:

I mean its the choice whether you should choose to play against the play on the machine. You can't do, "i'm gonna fight this person instead of the player on the machine" since its a winner stays on format. There's also a queue so placing yourself in the queue means you're accepting the challenge. If you choose not to play him/her, then that mean losing your place in the queue, which means you won't get to play many games if not any at all. That's the risk you have to take.

If you're on the winning streak position, its like do you choose to quit while you're ahead and losing your seat? Or do you forge ahead and aim for a bigger winning streak? Like war, do you send in your troops after an air raid or do you call it a day to avoid any unnessesary casualties?

We shouldn't force you to play people you can't beat. We shouldn't force you to become a better player either. We should let you choose to become a better player and not by force. If you choose to practise against a great player, then that's a choice you have to make. If you want to choose to go up by class, then its up to you to do your research and play and practise against the people lower down in the league. And once you are that better player, you can take on those top class players. And if you do become that top class player? well then it wouldn't matter if you choose the tactic of choosing your opponents since you'll be able to beat anyone in the game!

These are what the league tables and results are for. They're not just to tell you who top and bottom. Another area is to pop down on non-tournament days and practise against some of those players and talk to them. You can learn alot by listening to them and playing against them.

 

Re: What constitutes as a

Hey Steve, thanks for explaining the specifics of the Dynamics League's system thru this thread. It was good to have a constructive discussion about the different types of tournaments. I may not agree with a few of the details on how you run your league, but I have to admit that it is a great way to promote arcade games. I wish I could go to the UK to take part in the competition.

Later.