"Point Restriction" tournaments

[White Moose]

Well... Rule number 3 of the handbook:

At least 50% of the spots available must be for open/public sign-ups, and not filled with special invitations.

Btw, that rule is included in all point restriction tournaments. Since it's open to 100% of those who meets the requirements

[Marfski]

I originally thought that having an occasional tournament for cooks, or lieutenants etc wasn't a bad thing (mostly because it gave them a way to play with players of their level not because of the point issue but as a way of developing skills in the game)but I have changed my mind. I think that they would be better not done at all to avoid the abuse of floods of them being created for a certain group of players. I don't think as many people will want to come look in the Create/Join a tournament thread if it is glutted constantly with tournaments for upper ranked players.

[Hath]

i dont see a problem.

some "higher ups" (like me) dont want to play cooks in tourneys the pt lose is far too big if i get some really bad dice.

PS: Blitz make a feudal 1v1 one plz

i dont see a problem.

some "higher ups" (like me) dont want to play cooks in tourneys the pt lose is far too big if i get some really bad dice.

PS: Blitz make a feudal 1v1 one plz

Typical.

I've lost to cooks. I lose the points. I move on and get them back. I've been #1 seed in a tournament and gotten OUTPLAYED (i'm not ashamed to admit it...there are some really good low rank players) by the #16 seed. Just because someone's new or doesn't have a lot of points doesn't mean they can't offer tough competition. Get off your high horses and play in a few with everyone and you may be surprised at the "quality" of competition you find.

[khazalid]

bunch of vicious bastards you mediocre players are

[negoeien]

well what a heated discussion this is!
Well I'm a real tourney whore and have been in more then 50 tourneys.
I like all tournies, doubles, standard , terminator and so on.
But I like the evry big tournies the most, which last several rounds and several months to see who is the best. And yes there is a lot of irrational play in these tournies but It's also skill to learn how to play these guys (not as easy as you think), but it gets filtered out and in the alter rounds skill will compete and not irrational play.
And blitz, I really do respect you, you know that, but you are clearly missing the points and your blatant facts irritate me.
No way the top 350 on cc are 90% the best players, maybe 60% or less.
If I'm pure objective I know why you even set up these tournies . There are only 16 players so you ahve a great shot at winning those games cause you are a good player, and If I'm correct you're still not in the top 5 on tourny wins am I right . ( that's why you make these ridicolous quad tournies to )You intend to be the best, but gaining medals and tourny wins on this scale is a little ridiculous and not good for a top player like you. I really think tournies like that shouldn't even count as a tourney win .
Anyways for the rest I agree with hath and Optimus Prime and amazzony and all those great tournament creators!!
Keep up the good work you know I'll be joining!

[Bones2484]

Good call, Neg!

[MEK]

why do 90% of the people that win tournies feel good when the top 10% in scores are never in them, do you feel like you really competed agains tthe best players on the site? cause you have not, so many of the same players join every single tourney hoping to win one, let me join 100 so i cna win a few, and against who? low scores? and you win one? lol

Blitz Blitz Blitz, this is quite rude You have entered an existing tournament community made up of all ranks and types of play. If you want to join a community you should do it with some respect for the players and organizers who have been involved before you.
To suggest that those who have won tournaments should not feel good about their accomplishment because they didn't do it against the high ranks who are hiding in their triples and quads games is just flat obnoxious.

[SuicidalSnowman]

Let's follow the CC rules, must be open 50%, etc.

Why not just have private unofficial tournament in callouts if you only want the top 250 people.

Also why don't you just say "I will accept the people with the top 250 scores from everyone who applies?"

Tournaments should be fun.

[Lufsen75]

Hold on to the rules. 50% must be allowed to all players or they shouldnt be in this forum.

I have a tournament that is only open for swedes but that is also held in the swedish forum and nowhere else.

I agree to all that will disband this type of tournament without allow all players, and if you must you have to do it in a way like League of xxx are.

[max is gr8]

I think if you really want a tournament for high rankers make it like an example I made in excel:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pIGg5asehIosmZdOQsXThJw

After the end continue like a normal bracket allowing all ranks, but meaning best players will not face cooks early on

[BaldAdonis]

And blitz, I really do respect you, you know that, but you are clearly missing the points and your blatant facts irritate me.
No way the top 350 on cc are 90% the best players, maybe 60% or less.

All we know is that they're 100% of the farmers. Nice company to keep.

[jpcloet]

Interesting topic. I could go either way as I've run a tournament with point restrictions.

However, if you allow point restricted tournaments, you should allow point restricted games then as well to be consistent.

On a side note, I haven't played Blitzaholic in a while, likely due to point differential. He still hasn't beaten me yet.

[Kotaro]

It's spam is all it really is. Each of these tournaments is made in the exact same format, but with different maps. It seems like he's just picking his favorite maps, favorite settings, and making a shit-ton of tournaments based off that.

[Bones2484]

viewtopic.php?f=90&t=71001

Adding another one to the list on post 1 that popped up today, this one courtesy of JR.

[BaldAdonis]

Well... Rule number 3 of the handbook:

At least 50% of the spots available must be for open/public sign-ups, and not filled with special invitations.

Btw, that rule is included in all point restriction tournaments. Since it's open to 100% of those who meets the requirements

I think what he means is that the tournaments aren't against the letter of the law (because he isn't holding 8 spaces for specific people), but it is against the spirit of the law (because it isn't available to the public).

[JOHNNYROCKET24]

It's spam is all it really is. Each of these tournaments is made in the exact same format, but with different maps. It seems like he's just picking his favorite maps, favorite settings, and making a shit-ton of tournaments based off that.

Yep. 16 person single elimination tournaments that are only against a select few people, with nothing special at all added to the design. It's a complete joke.

viewtopic.php?f=90&t=71001

Adding another one to the list on post 1 that popped up today, this one courtesy of JR.

Also would like to add, since the higher ranks care so much about their points, one problem a host does not have to deal with is absentee. Take notice I only ask for 3 alternates since I strongly believe none will be needed. Also, I do have plans to make tournies for other ranks to join. im just getting my feet wet with these.

thanks,

JR

[Bones2484]

Also would like to add, since the higher ranks care so much about their points, one problem a host does not have to deal with is absentee. Take notice I only ask for 3 alternates since I strongly believe none will be needed.

That should not be a concern, especially in such a short tournament. Tournament players are generally very well respected and will not leave you hanging, especially with no notice. But you wouldn't know that, would you?

And besides, rank has nothing to do with dropping out. Games played might, but not rank.

[Gilligan]

I'm late to the party, eh?

I believe that these tournaments are just stupid... Not the restriction, but the tournaments that he started. Not anything new to say. He started ELEVEN TOURNAMENTS in TWO DAYS under the SAME EXACT FORMAT just DIFFERENT MAPS. Not to mention that that's what all of his medals are of now. I also go through every tournament awaiting players on Mondays/Tuesdays, and this puts much more work on my shoulders. The same exact format under a different name. On some occasions, he did a Galaxy Wars and a Solar System Quads. THEY ARE EXACTLY THE SAME TOURNAMENT. Exactly. Go find a different quality of it. Same thing with his North America. Only this time his spoils changed! How subtle!

I don't mind point restrictions. But starting eleven damn tournaments in two days is just annoying and stupid! Space them out, and maybe you could use your brain to come up with a different format instead of eleven identical tournaments, except for maps.

You say it is not worth being happy to win a tournament? I pity you. POINTS MEAN NOTHING WHEN IT COMES TO YOUR TRUE PLAYING ABILITY. Hell, I was in the top 130 at one point, but now I'm a sergeant first class. Must mean I'm horrible, eh? Join a tournament without a restriction. Go ahead, actually do it. You'll see what reality is like. If you high rankers are so great and us players and winners are so bad, why so scared to join normal tournaments?

[ahunda]

I have not yet played any tournament. Partly because I am not sure, if I´m up to the commitment / game-load, partly because there are not many tournaments in the format / settings I prefer.

I prefer 6-8 player Escalating games and having played both public games and private games with point restrictions, I have to agree with khazalid here: Because of the skill & experience difference of the players involved in those two (public / private), they are in effect two entirely different games.

A huge percentage of public Escalating games with low ranked and/or unexperienced players is decided by mistakes of players, i.e. setting someone up for elimination, throwing the game one way or the other. Sometimes you are the one to benefit from it, sometimes you are the victim of it. It has a touch of Russian Roulette.

Now I also agree with the statement, that you can try to adapt to these conditions and change your strategy accordingly. Nevertheless there is a huge random factor in those games. And although I still play the occasional public game (Russian Roulette has its own appeal after all), I prefer to play with skilled people, who know what they are doing. The strategy factor in those games is much bigger, and I am here to play a strategy game, isn´t it ?

So I am indeed very hesitant to join an Escalating tournament with lots and lots of games filled with low ranked and/or unexperienced players. I would however be really interested, if - as khazalid put it - there would be some "checkpoint in ability level". If you tell me, that this is not the right spirit for tournaments here at the site, ok. Why you would generally forbid it, is beyond me, since I really don´t see the harm in it. But fine, I can live with that, or rather: I can live without tournaments then.

What I don´t really get, is why people get so heated up about the issue. If someone starts some tournaments with point restrictions, that doesn´t mean, that there are fewer tournaments open to everybody, or am I missing something here ?

Maybe it would help, if Blitz would just put all those tournaments in one thread ? So it doesn´t appear to flood the tournaments forum ? One thread called "Blitz 1v1 tournaments" or something ?

And since it has been mentioned, maybe you could create new rules / criteria for a tournament to be considered worthy of a medal for the winner ? For example a minimum number of participants / games, or even a "medals only for open tournaments" rule ?

Just trying to understand, what the fuss is all about. I can´t see, where there is any harm in those little fun tournaments of Blitz ...

[Serbia]

I'll jump in here too. I've noticed the "majors and above" tourneys that AndrewB runs, and never had a problem. But now it's gotten out of hand. It's merely a way for Blitz and those like him to boost their egos by getting involved in so called 'tournaments'. White Moose, BaldAdonis, goggles paisano, knighthawk, amazzony, to name but a few, are all very good players, and I'd take any of them over these higher ranked players in tourneys. If you're so good, and so confident of your abilities, then play against the 'lesser' players in the tourney community. The real joke here is thinking that you're all that, because you have a ton of points. Most of us will never come CLOSE to your point level, and that's because we're willing to play against anyone, anywhere, anytime.

But anyway, we're talking about point restrictions here. I think that Blitz has kind of ruined it for everyone, with his abuse of the system. Running one at a time, probably no one would have noticed, at least not for a long time. But starting them all at once has just left a bad taste in the mouth of the collective community. So I'd say now that because of this, unless it's something like ZZ's Table Tennis tourney, that point restrictions should NOT be allowed.

Also Blitz, I'd say that until you've proven you can beat the top TOURNAMENT players, in PUBLIC tournaments, open to everyone, and on a consistent basis, then I don't believe you can say you're the best on CC with any credibility.

[Mageplunka69]

well whatever you decide, im in

[BaldAdonis]

Also would like to add, since the higher ranks care so much about their points, one problem a host does not have to deal with is absentee.

Weren't you just in a tournament that went all loopy because two high ranked players dropped out in the final round? And then the remaining ones couldn't sort out proper replacements for their teams? Hmmm......

[Serbia]

Also would like to add, since the higher ranks care so much about their points, one problem a host does not have to deal with is absentee.

The whole reason I play tourney games is so I don't have to deal with absentee. Sure it happens sometimes, but much less frequently than with open games.

[Gilligan]

Also would like to add, since the higher ranks care so much about their points, one problem a host does not have to deal with is absentee.

Are you saying that high ranked players are more likely to join their games rather than lower ranked players?

[Incandenza]

Okay, I think people are getting a bit too bent out of shape about all this.

Restrictions are common in tourneys, whether by points of by premium. For blitz to have restrictions in his 1v1 tourneys is not unreasonable.

There seems to be a pervasive elitist sentiment amongst some of the tourney regulars who've posted here. Ironically the crux of their argument is that blitz is being elitist. And BaldAdonis, for you to call 100% of the top 300 point-farmers is not only incorrect, it's pretty asshole-ish. Yes, there are some skilled players out there that have never broken through the 2500-point barrier, but there are an awful lot of skilled players above it, and anyone who thinks that ALL the people on the first page have only gotten there through farming noobs is smoking crack.

Here's the main point: when people start throwing out ideas for restrictions on tournaments, you're starting down a very slippery slope. One of the great things about the CC tourney system is that ANYONE can start a tournament, and he/she can run it just as long as enough people sign up. Too many restrictions can be deadly. Don't like blitz's tourney? Then start your own with a lower point requirement. Simple as that. But don't start impeding the ability of people to start tournaments that they themselves would want to play in.

Besides, did anyone stop and think about the fact that blitz's wave of 1v1 tourneys may have a positive benefit for the tourney forum, by bringing in high ranks that might never have joined one before?