What to do?

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Arcy

Guest
I've been attending a new local tourny house for several weeks. I've noticed that there is one or two people who attend on a regular basis that constantly win. Normally this is not a problem but attendance has dropped drastically from 30 to 10 persons per tourney. People come in and see these people who "always win" and turn around and leave.
Would suggesting to the store that they not allow people to win two tourneys in a row or something like that be fair to all?
 
Not fair at all. In fact, it should encourage others to bring their "A" game and step up to the plate to beat these people. Competition can be a great thing to bring out the best in people. Don't be discouraged if someone beats you consistently. Instead, take it upon yourself to learn from those experiences and make yourself (or those others) better.

EDIT: And by the way, be sure to drop by our Introduction area and introduce yourself to the other members. We look forward to hearing from you :)
 
This is tough to deal with. The store where I play at used to have this problem- and we dealt with it by putting the players into Judging shifts- a few weeks they would judge, and then they could play.... of course it helps when the players in question are judges-

Something else we did...while they were judging, we got them to help teach everyone else- so while they were helping out the tourney, they also were creating new skilled players--- this continued for a month or 2, and finally there was some other players that could give them a good run for their money---

Just some thoughts-
 
I would simply prevent the top two, three or four winners of an event from competing twice in a row. If you win saturday, you canot compete next Saturday or similar. Or possible even split the tournies up into a morning and afternoon event where you could not enter both that day.
 
It would be unfair for the store to tell its patrons to not come and play. After all, you pay to play in the tournament. The two good players win on a consistent basis because of their skill. If the other players don't wish to play, then more power to those two. It's up to the other players to become better and provide healthy competition instead of simply giving up and leaving. If turnout drops to a point where tournaments are not feasible anymore, eventually, every player (including the top two) will play at different local stores.
 
Alternative tournament formats. If the store runs Advanced try alternating with Traditional Format. They may want to run some Sealed Draft events. Or even get creative with a "no Limited Cards" format.
 
In the mean time....while others are building their library of experience and learning that it takes to win on a consistant basis....talk to the store owner about doing a booster draft or sealed tournament once a week or even once a month. This type of tournament tends to even out that experience level and depends upon the talents of the deck builder and using what is given you to the best of it's abilities. What you'll often see is those same "experienced" players high tailing it out of the store instead...afraid they might not have what it takes to win in such a tournament. Most netdeckers couldn't put together a good draft deck if their life depended on it (no offense guys...just my opinion)

The other thing to do is use those seasoned players to your advantage. It's obvious they know the ropes...and a truly confident player doesn't mind sharing their knowledge. You might even ask them to put on a seminar....it's an ego boost to them to be asked <s>
 
Im sure that if the current winners of tournement stop winning them as often people may just start coming back to the tournements. as John said they most likely not bother with the tournement if it was changed to a booster draft tournement instead.
 
Sealed booster drafts all the way. Its an exciting way to play. Julia Hedberg finished a series last month on the different styles that can be played in a tournament.

You get to play, test out new (or old) cards and sets that you might not normally have spent money on. The influencing factors of who has what in their deck changes dramatically. Luck is higher on the initial opening, and decision making is tested for each pass of the pack. Finally your skill really gets pushed to the max.

I introduced the basic draft to my store owner a couple of weeks ago, when Julia finished the first article in that series, and after translating it for him, the idea took off like wildfire. He was able to start pushing old sets that were stagnating on his shelves and players more than stepped up when they realized they didn't have to face the same old Chaos Emperor Dragon and BLS decks over and over (I live Advanced in a Traditional world....eww)

I wouldnt yet encourage the winners to try judging yet, unless you know they are sincerely interested in it for the right reasons. You don't want it to turn into some elitist status.
 
If they are winning constantly, they should not be allowed to enter the very next tourney next week. It is unfair to the other players who cannot even get some glory once in awhile because the same 2 duelists or whatever are winning all the time. Not that they are better than everyone there, because does it really take rocket science to win with a CC Deck? All that does is just tell people not to bother playing since they will lose. Striving to beat them is cool and all, but flawed. How are you going to beat them when you cannot beat them? Let others get the limelight I say.
 
That's another great thing about booster drafts...it gives the store owners a chance to finish off old stock that isn't selling the best....haven't met a store owner yet who isn't game for getting stale stock off their shelves.
 
AtrusOfKrondor , that's a great thing you did, kudos all the way!

In my experience, it's the younger players that quit because they
can't win.
Make a tournament <13 years every now and then.
(or maybe < 10, whatever your meta demands)
 
And thus, the Cookie Cutter Deck was born because players got tired of trying to win with their own decks...

Anyway, I used to have the same thing occur at a couple of the stores I played at. The great thing was, only a few resorted to Cookie Cutters, and the rest just kept reworking their decks. Eventually, there was a changing of the guard, even if it was for one or two weeks, it showed that hard work pays off. Running your "winners" off is not a good thing. All it does is tell people that if you work hard to win, the prize is "you get to not play". You did all that work, only to be banished. How is that teaching good sportsmanship? Where else would you see something like that happen?

I know some sports include Handicapping, but this shouldnt be one of them. If people are not returning to the store, then the TO should do more than just take peoples money and count his cashflow. He's as much at fault for not making things exciting and different. He has the power to create alternative forms of Tourneys. If he's just in it for the money, then that alone should entice him to try something new for the benefit of EVERYONE and not exclude good players simply because they ARE good.

Being a "good player" means being a "good loser" as well, instead of being a "player hater".
 
Perhaps Sealed Draft is a win/win solution for both the store and the players. That could very easily work.

However, there is nothing unfair about disallowing players to compete the following week if they won the week before. If you have one or two players that are dominating each week, all this would do is make them dominate every other week. They'd still get there chance to show out, but every other week there would be the potential for someone else to shine.

Also, Sealed Draft is an acquired taste if your used to Constructed. Not everyone likes it to be frank, and it is no guarantee that everyone will take to it on the basis that they might get a chance to shine. I'm not saying it's a bad idea that you shouldn't run with. In fact, I encourage you try it. What I'm saying, is you should keep options for a Constructed Tourney open, with some kind of restriction that keeps the same two people from winning each week, like I suggested above or similar.
 
Digital Jedi said:
However, there is nothing unfair about disallowing players to compete the following week if they won the week before. If you have one or two players that are dominating each week, all this would do is make them dominate every other week. They'd still get there chance to show out, but every other week there would be the potential for someone else to shine.
Click to expand...
What your forgetting DJ is, some people actually dont have much else to do, and LIKE to play. Now, you are saying that if that is the only place they can play at, they are locked out for a week just because they are good. They didnt get "good" by playing every other week.

That's a penalty for some people who just happen to be good or not even "good" just "better" than those who come to play. I mean, what if there are a bunch of new players and out of the new players, there is a majority of them who really dont know what they are doing, and the one player is only better because he has a halfway decent deck? Prevent him from getting "better" himself, by sitting him on the bench for a week?

In a no money entrance tourney, I can see that happening without being much of a stinker. In a cash entry with prize, it can get a little discriminatory, even though the TO CAN set his own standards for entry, but there should still be an option for that player to play, even if he cant be in the same tourney.
 
Me... Personally dont think you should make your constant winners forbidden from playing at your shop. If anything come up with something else.

You dont get good by not playing... All you do if you excempt them from playing is getting their game low.

as much as people say, "just run CC youll always win" is a lie, Ive known players that have net decked other players decks and have come out of tournaments with worse records than with their own created decks.

Why do i state this becuase ive seen players some in with Phil's deck[LBC Sj top 8] Ive seen players with Emon[Columbus SJC] and ive seen players with Steven Adair [LBC SJ] decks. And to top it off ive seen them lose horribly against players that play constantly with these 3 guys. Why? because unlike people that just CC their decks, these players know the ins and outs of their decks, basically you tell them, "write your deck list" they can do it with their eyes closed, This includes any and all piece of techs that they have added to their decks over the months' of playing.

So no, CC doesnt win constantly you need 1. a good player and 2. months of playing with it so you can know whats in it, when to play it, and how to play it.

Unlike Traditional formats CCC were it was just a run for who got the best stand alone this time around its about who gets the best field presence and blood means alot more than anybody might think.

So over all i dont think you should boot your players, just encourage the other players to play a bit harder or better. and how woo and others suggested have different formats. Sealed formats are preaty good and really test out the players.

but if these constant winners still win, then all that tells you is that they are the real deal.
 
Not allowing a person to compete because they always win isn't right. I had a situation like this come up before where I was the one winning a lot of tournaments. I notice this hurt the store some. What I did was start running some fun decks and give the other players a chance to win. Of course this was at the less competive store. My other store we had a different top 8 about every week.

These people may not want to do that and its their right. There are only three fair ways I can see fixing the problem.

1. Have the TO make two tournaments. One for experinced players and one for novice players. If some one wins the lower tournament a few times make them upgrade to the higher one. This way they still play.

2. Have someone teach the lesser skilled players how to win more.

3. Switch formats around every few weeks or so. This gives people more options to win with.
 
Guys, I'm not suggesting we penalize a player because he's good. I'm suggesting we give other players a chance to win besides him. It doesn't really look like these guys are hurting in the skill/luck department. What is waiting a week going to do other then give someone else a chance at winning a prize? I'm not saying ban the guy from ever playing again. Just make the winner step aside for a time. It's not like he can't play in any other event.

I'm sorry guys, I cannot agree with you here. I sometimes cannot get to the shop for months on end. And when I do, I seldom have the measly five bucks to even participate in an event if they have one. It's hit or miss if I'm going to run into the Vs. players or the Yu-Gi players. Even so, I'm still a average duelist by most standards. I cannot even conceive how having to wait a week equates to being penalized. We talk all the time about fostering good sportsmanship and mutual respect among players. If you can't stand aside for one week at a time to let lesser experienced players have a taste of a victory, that is apparently no big accomplishment on your part, once in while, then what kind of sportsman are you? What are we suggesting when we say that not letting you win every week is discriminatory? "I'm good, so I must always have the cash prize"?
 
What does it mean to not play your best "against" the best?!! If you are going to get better, does that mean you do it against your peers, or someone who is really good?

The joy of beating someone who is your equal really isnt a joy, especially if you have already beaten them several times. The first time you beat the "Unbeatable", you have achieved a feeling you cant get just by beating someone who represents a challenge once in a while. That's what you work for.

If you want to be somewhat fair, just let them play, and then if they win the Tourney, pass down the prize to 2nd Place, just like they would do someone who already has a invite to National.
 
How is passing the prize down not a penalty, but skipping a tourney is? Isn't either option simply a way to make it fair to those who aren't going to win against these individuals by takgin away something they would ordinarily have?

I also don't undestand how making consistant champions step aside at a local tourney for 1 week on the sole basis of IF they won this week, is diminishing any bodies skill level. If anything, the poor players are going to get to play mroe often, since most of these store events are single elimination, not swiss.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top