Menu
By:
Filters
What's new

Tournament Standard? (settings)

THTB

THTB

Arez | Booya | Riu48 - Rest Easy, Friends
2/3, 90 seconds on timer is the usual, I believe...not sure on the timer.
 
Shock

Shock

Administrator
Administrator
Founder
Premium Supporter
General standard would be 2/3 for everything but winners and losers finals, and then grand finals 4/7. The more the players, the earlier we could start 3/5s, but probably never earlier than winners and losers semis.
 
D

DrDogg

Noob
Shock said:
General standard would be 2/3 for everything but winners and losers finals, and then grand finals 4/7. The more the players, the earlier we could start 3/5s, but probably never earlier than winners and losers semis.
Click to expand...
Why would you want to do 3/5 for winner's/loser's semis? I've never seen that done in a tournament. Recently it's almost always 3/5 for winner's finals, loser's finals and grand finals. Sometimes you'll see 4/7 for grand finals, but that's rare these days.

MK9 matches don't seem like they'll take too long, but I don't know if I'd want to sit through 4/7 grand finals... especially if it goes into a second set.
 
9.95

9.95

Warrior
DrDogg said:
Why would you want to do 3/5 for winner's/loser's semis? I've never seen that done in a tournament. Recently it's almost always 3/5 for winner's finals, loser's finals and grand finals. Sometimes you'll see 4/7 for grand finals, but that's rare these days.

MK9 matches don't seem like they'll take too long, but I don't know if I'd want to sit through 4/7 grand finals... especially if it goes into a second set.
Click to expand...
We've been running 4/7 GF's for UMK3 for about 3 years now. The speed of the game is very conducive to it though.... for MK2 we do 3/5 and I know they did 3/5 for MKDC at NEC. If the speed of MK9 is anything like MKDC or MK2, I would expect 3/5, but if it's close to UMK3, I see no reason why 4/7 couldn't be used.
 
D

DrDogg

Noob
Why don't you guys do 3/5 rounds in UMK3 if the game runs so quickly? I always wondered the same thing about ST and HDR as well. The rounds are over super fast, but 2/3 is still the tournament standard.
 
Evil_Riu48

Evil_Riu48

Kombatant
this is why i think tourneys are not the best way to show who is better than who a best of 3 prove nothing it take out one of the most importante elements and skills of fighting games the ability to adapt to your opponent. some people will win a best of three 2-0 and lost on a race to 10 4-10 to the same person because their game is Monotonous
 
D

DrDogg

Noob
Riu48 said:
this is why i think tourneys are not the best way to show who is better than who a best of 3 prove nothing it take out one of the most importante elements and skills of fighting games the ability to adapt to your opponent. some people will win a best of three 2-0 and lost on a race to 10 4-10 to the same person because their game is Monotonous
Click to expand...
What about the skill required to adapt quickly? Given how fighting games work, I would think that's more important than being able to adapt after 10 games.
 
THTB

THTB

Arez | Booya | Riu48 - Rest Easy, Friends
If your playstyle is monotonous in a race to 10, it's gonna be monotonous in a best of 3.
 
9.95

9.95

Warrior
Riu48 said:
this is why i think tourneys are not the best way to show who is better than who a best of 3 prove nothing it take out one of the most importante elements and skills of fighting games the ability to adapt to your opponent. some people will win a best of three 2-0 and lost on a race to 10 4-10 to the same person because their game is Monotonous
Click to expand...
Because it didn't work that way in the only place fighting games originally counted... the pay to play arcades where it wasn't your honor or your rep on the line... it was your money... lose and you have to pay again... losing your money because you weren't good enough was a big enough motivator for me to learn how to adapt in one match, let alone 3...
 
Evil_Riu48

Evil_Riu48

Kombatant
yea sure but still a race to ten is a better way to show who is better than who than a first to 3 i do not think anyone here will dissagree on that.

yes tourneys is where people prove themselve but i just do not like the best of 3 thing in tourneys do not get me wrong if lose in a tourney in a firt to 3 will not go on saying yea you only beat me because it was a first of 3 many time the best player is the one who wins the best of 3 but not all the time.

the best way to prove who the best between two players is not by putting them to fight in a tourney a best of three is by doing a money match between them in a raceto ten.
 
D

DrDogg

Noob
Riu48 said:
yea sure but still a race to ten is a better way to show who is better than who than a first to 3 i do not think anyone here will dissagree on that.

yes tourneys is where people prove themselve but i just do not like the best of 3 thing in tourneys do not get me wrong if lose in a tourney in a firt to 3 will not go on saying yea you only beat me because it was a first of 3 many time the best player is the one who wins the best of 3 but not all the time.

the best way to prove who the best between two players is not by putting them to fight in a tourney a best of three is by doing a money match between them in a raceto ten.
Click to expand...
But in a race to 10 I can switch characters as much as I want to. What if I choose a counter character? What if I choose a character you happen to have minimal experience against?

You needed more time to adapt, how does that make you better? There was no pressure (or less pressure) since it wasn't a tournament match.

There are always exceptions to anything that determines the superior player, but the current tournament format is how skill is determined, so if you really want to prove you're the superior player, you need to learn how to do it in that environment.
 
Krayzie

Krayzie

Co-founder
Administrator
Founder
Riu48 said:
yea sure but still a race to ten is a better way to show who is better than who than a first to 3 i do not think anyone here will dissagree on that.
Click to expand...
I disagree. And imo, if you cant adapt to a 3/5 setting, then you're just not good enough.

First to 10 doesn't make it any more clear that you are better, it just gives the "Loser" more chances to take the win, considering that both players are just as good.

Shoryuken beat me in winners finals, but I came back with a money match, and took it 3 - 0. You see, I don't feel like I need 10 games to win, all it takes is for you to read your opponent, before you play, while you play, and after you're done playing him. I think thats a reasonable amount of time to adapt.

Riu48 said:
yes tourneys is where people prove themselve but i just do not like the best of 3 thing in tourneys do not get me wrong if lose in a tourney in a firt to 3 will not go on saying yea you only beat me because it was a first of 3 many time the best player is the one who wins the best of 3 but not all the time.
Click to expand...
If the said better player doesn't win. Then that gives the player something to think about.

Riu48 said:
the best way to prove who the best between two players is not by putting them to fight in a tourney a best three is by doing a money match between them in a raceto ten.
Click to expand...
The best challenge is getting put in a situation where you have to adapt not only to one person, but many other opponents in a ladder to the top.

I can care less about a money match against a person who is not able to make that ladder. I'm more interested in making it to the top, against players who can adapt with versatility to many other styles. That my friend, is the ultimate player.
 
Evil_Riu48

Evil_Riu48

Kombatant
Krayzie Bone said:
I disagree. And imo, if you cant adapt to a 3/5 setting, then you're just not good enough.

First to 10 doesn't make it any more clear that you are better, it just gives the "Loser" more chances to take the win, considering that both players are just as good.

Shoryuken beat me in winners finals, but I came back with a money match, and took it 3 - 0. You see, I don't feel like I need 10 games to win, all it takes is for you to read your opponent, before you play, while you play, and after you're done playing him. I think thats a reasonable amount of time to adapt.



If the said better player doesn't win. Then that gives the player something to think about.



The best challenge is getting put in a situation where you have to adapt not only to one person, but many other opponents in a ladder to the top.

I can care less about a money match against a person who is not able to make that ladder. I'm more interested in making it to the top, against players who can adapt with versatility to many other styles. That my friend, is the ultimate player.
Click to expand...
well my friend i am not talking about me here if there is something i have going on my game is adapting skills i am not trying to change the way tourney are play. . . they are played like that for a reason

by the way diego from sf4 most be a scrub because he happens to agree with me
 
Tom Brady

Tom Brady

Warrior
rules WILL be 2/3 rounds, default time, random stage select, winner must keep the character they won with and loser can switch.
 
D

DrDogg

Noob
Riu48 said:
well my friend i am not talking about me here if there is something i have going on my game is adapting skills i am not trying to change the way tourney are play. . . they are played like that for a reason

by the way diego from sf4 most be a scrub because he happens to agree with me
Click to expand...
You can just stop right there. No one said anything about you, or anyone else, being a scrub. We're simply debating how to determine who is the skilled player.

I'm also going to assume you're referring to Daigo, not diego. But I'd love to see what he had to say about the subject if you have a link.
 
Lucky Day

Lucky Day

Noob
What Tom said. It's the standard for every game.

If we're planning on having a decent turnout for MK9 tourneys there's no reason to go over 2/3.

As for the argument on whether long or short sets make you a better player, it's not really valid. Comparing the two is like comparing a long distance runner and a sprinter and saying one way proves you can run better.

In fighting games, a long set might indicate your ability to adapt, but seeing as how most of the best players all know each other and are familiar with other playstyles (or will be eventually) you'll see the best players rise to the top in 2/3 sets anyway.

It doesn't really matter in the end, because we can't afford to run the tourneys in a reasonable timeframe and bump up the amount of sets.

by the way diego from sf4 most be a scrub because he happens to agree with me
Click to expand...
Oh shit, take back everything I said. Let's do FT15 every match, every round.

btw, I believe Daigo has said he prefers the American style of a longer set than SBO (which is one match and done) and the ability to counter pick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.