Sign in to follow this  
CoachMac

Tournament Format

Recommended Posts

Unknown.jpeg

 

Edited by CoachMac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a great idea, Coach.  Like you I have 0% chance of winning the whole thing, but in the 2nd tier I would be competitive.  And I did feel at the Vegas tourney I, and 90% of others, forked over a lot of $ considering we had no chance of winning.  (Never mind travel and hotel cost.)

I would love to play more games.  Especially against new guys, and people with different styles, especially guys I have a chance against.

I wanted to say more, but my wife is booting me off the computer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I understand the reasoning to break the tournament into to two groups but I'm not sure if I agree with the reasoning when I dig deeper.

I think this format would be suggested for only GENS tourneys? SNES has had 3 different winners come out of nowhere to win each major King of 94 event. I would hate to break up their bracket and eliminate the unknown factor.

I'll try my best to be concise here but here are some bullet points I'd like to throw out there

-The weekend before King of 94 III, I went to Green Bay to play in a Tecmo Super Bowl tournament. I'm maybe an average player in that game, even then I might be giving myself too much credit. I knew I had no chance of winning with the likes of JoeyGats, The Retro Sports Gamer, Nelson79, Justin Peters, DPS, etc. attending the tournament. That said, I didn't want to avoid playing any of them, in fact I wanted to play as many of them as possible because if I'm going to travel and lose a tournament, I may as well get my moneys worth and play the best guys there. You never know what may happen on any given day, the eventual winner of the tournament Nelson79 is someone I beat in Green Bay earlier this year at the edge of 94 Tecmo tournament. You never know when a top player will just lay an egg and let an average player like me steal a game from them.

- If you don't play the best, how do you ever measure you're game if improvement is an important factor as to why you play. Maybe King of 94 III isn't the year for Chris O, Darik A, Leif Eriksson, Dave S, or any number of other guys. Perhaps the time they spent playing a top player in that tournament propels them in a future King of tournament. Maybe it motivates them to work on their game that much more after a really impressive showing. I don't want to discourage players by not allowing them to play in what is considered to be an elite tournament.

- Also, I think making the entire tournament inclusive is awesome. It's like the World Series of Poker, everyone wants to play Phil Hellmuth, Johnny Chan, Phil Ivey, etc. because those are the guys they see on TV and yeah they will probably take your money but there is always the chance you can bust them. Same with the US open for golf, it allows amateurs and people who win a play in tournament to compete against tour pros. Every once in a while a no name makes a run and thus creates a name for themselves. If I'm going to pay money or travel to play poker, I want to play a big name. Otherwise I'll just stay home and play online or in a home game. 

- I also don't want to be handed anything nor do I want to only be playing a handful of other people all the time. One of the best games I had during the tournament was against Dave S, I don't even think I laid an egg that game but he played great and only lost 4-3. Who's to say something doesn't going wrong for me in that game and I end up losing it? Nothing is a gimmie in my mind. That's why I play every game 100%. I don't think any of us expected EA to lose in group play but he got upset by a guy named Francis in group play. Sometimes stuff happens and I'd hate to see the chance of that sort of thing removed. 

- I think the consolation tournament for guys don't do well in pools is our way of meeting people in the middle. So you had a rough tournament, now you can play some good games against guys within your skill level. I'd hate to see guys shuffled off to the side before the word go. 

I think I covered the main points. If I'm wrong about a lot of this and there is a major push for something along the lines Coach drew up, then that's the way it should be. I don't want us to offer a product the people don't want. If the general public has no interest in playing a top player, then I wont fight it. I think part of the allure for the unknowns or mid tier players is the idea of giant killing and ruining a top players day.

Ask any of the guys who won SNES, they didnt expect to come in and win. They just wanted to have fun and play some '94, it just so worked out that they won. I understand GENS has been different, but I want to see the pack catch up and the other great players come to the live events. I also think there are unknowns out there who can be good. I don't want to take away these players chance to make a name for themselves by discouraging them at the door.

Edited by angryjay93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

16 hours ago, angryjay93 said:

 

16 hours ago, angryjay93 said:

 

16 hours ago, angryjay93 said:

 

 

16 hours ago, angryjay93 said:

 

 

 

Edited by CoachMac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You certainly do not dodge anyone Coach, I would never suggest that. You've never been anything but an amazing host every time you have had me over. You are an amazing bud. I think I need to steer my thoughts a little bit more towards what you are addressing here. 

I personally feel the triple elim. is very similar to needing to win 3 games in a pool to move forward. The triple elim in Toronto consisted of 4 16 man brackets with the top 4 in each bracket moving onto a final 16 bracket. The initial 16 man brackets were still seeded and it was a very difficult thing to seed with so many unknowns at the tourney. I feel one of the main purposes of the King of 94 rankings is to make seeding easier as we move forward and learn more about the participants. 

Let's say in New York next year we have 64 buds, and we do a true blind triple elimination, it could get very messy very quickly. For example its very possible to have AJ vs Raph and Icestorm vs KGman as 1st round matchups, it is also entirely possible that the losers of those matchups face off in the 1st round of loser bracket. This would assure one of those 4 players being tossed into Loser-Loser bracket from the jump. 

Both formats obviously have downsides, but I'd personally rather try to be a bit more scientific about than just putting the whole thing in a blender and see what comes of it.  The more info we get on people, the better the science will be, I think currently we are still trying to smooth some things out.

When it comes to the guys who lost in the round of 16, I do personally think they should have been sent into a loser bracket. Maybe with a few more setups and more time available, that issue can be rectified. 

Regarding the mercy part, I don't enjoy doing that to everyone but I personally desire that exposure to other players. If I'm playing the same 5 guys all the time things will get very stale for me very quickly. I like talking to different people at these tournaments and online about 94. I like being able to help people who are open to it. More than anything, I just like being a part of this group as a whole, I dont want to seem like I'm trying to be elite about it and stay within my own little group. 

I don't think I truly answered the competitive portion of your question but if me playing the majority of players is a deterrent in terms of people signing up or enjoying the tournament, then I'll just have to swallow that pill I guess. I just hate the idea of suggesting people should go into a different tournament at the door. The idea of a blind triple elim. tournament is also a bit scary because you really never know what you will get in that format. I think the seeding will eventually get better, it's just been rough for some people in the mean time and I get that it can be very frustrating to be placed in that situation. 

Edited by angryjay93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, angryjay93 said:


 

 

15 hours ago, angryjay93 said:

 

15 hours ago, angryjay93 said:

 

15 hours ago, angryjay93 said:

 

15 hours ago, angryjay93 said:

 

15 hours ago, angryjay93 said:

 

 

Edited by CoachMac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FIRST:  Let's define what problem are you trying to solve?  Is it length of time of tournament?   Is it that (Genesis) favorites are likely to win?  Is it not enough games played for people who lose?  Is it improper seeding?

Defining the problem will help focus this conversation. Having said that, here are some of my thoughts:

Genesis favorites likely to win:  I do not think you should change tournament formats just because AJ (or other top known players) happen to enter the tournament and are likely favorites.  Ideally we would have many guys of that caliber in every tournament (and maybe one day we will), but there shouldn't be a separate "pros" group.  SNES is the perfect example, it's a good point AJ made earlier.  I'm jealous of the competitive landscape of SNES!  I won't go through everything said earlier, but if it doesn't work for SNES it shouldn't work for Genesis.  

Length of time of tournament:  The primary factor in tournament length is setups to # of players.  Ideally you want to have at least 1 setup for every 4 players (realistic).  I have found that 3 to 5 round robin games (low end to high end imo) have proven to be extremely efficient ways to seed and separate large number of entries and even eliminate many players early.  Note: in the LI tournaments I run, it doesn't make sense to keep people around since they want to explore other parts of the gaming expo, so I pretty much remove half or more after RR, but if I were to have dedicated event like KO94, you can allow people to continue to play games.

Triple elimination adds a ton of extra time, waiting for people in 1 and 2 loss brackets to finish, as well as complexity to a tournament and I don't see any benefit from doing this.

Improper seeding:  To my earlier point, RR seems to be very efficient and accurate.  When you can separate top players so they don't randomly end up in the same RR group, it becomes even better.  I think a small pre-ranking and random RR draws will get you 95% of the way there.  The more RR games you can play, the more accurate the seeding becomes, but that is limited to how much time you want to spend figuring out seeds.

My personal preference would be to always end up in a 16 person double elimination bracket.  However you get there depends on how many players and how much time you have to figure out 1-16.  I also like best 2 out of 3 for all rounds, again depending on time.  You have to make some decisions, such as loser bracket being 1 game (I am also fine with that). 

Toronto had 1 game and triple elimination, which just added a boatload of waiting and complexity.  Had we done RR seeding, I am pretty sure we would have ended up with that same 16 on top, perhaps with small variations, in about half the time.  Playing best of 3 instead of triple elimination would have also shaved a ton of time.  If you remember, we couldn't even finish Toronto, it went for like 14 hours.  It was our first tourney and pretty inefficient.  Lots of lessons learned.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have time to read through all the points and counter points right now, but I'll try to get to them some time this weekend.

 

In leagues where we created an A & B playoff format, even when we were all in the same league/conference,  the B coaches LOVED it, it required extra setup and follow up for me, but seemed worth it for them.  Anyone who is not strong enough to have a 1 in 100 chance at beating an opponent KNOWS they cannot win on the big stage for sure.  Traveling and spending money to just get your brains beat in is NOT as appealing for those who fall into that category of I can't win.  I think if you had something like the Round Robin style play-in, with that used to set up A & B tourney finals, would be a little of "best of both" ideas, but that's extra games/extra work for those running it.

 

I do not think that SNES & Gens is even the same game.  I think some video games lead more to upsets than others.  If playing the new Madden,, I'd probably beat almost about anyone on this site, something like 70-0 (I've backed this up with a few guys).  IF you played it long enough, most games would be like 35-7, but at some point and time, EA's built in goofy code allows for the games to have a lot more random things happen.  EA owns a patent on this actual game code design to "rig" the game, so it's not some mythical thing.  Google that on your own time, but it's out there.

My point being, it doesn't seem to exist in Gens as much, so the best players don't lose.  In Madden, I see it at the higher levels.  In SNES, I felt it was there WAY more than Gens.  So, IMO, using "what works in SNES" as an argument doesn't hold water.  I know there are guys here who would argue against it but to me, setting up a Gens tourney should be based on what works for a Gens tourney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn, coach! Why delete your posts? Makes it hard to follow this thread, and people are really taking the time to write some well thought out stuff. 

:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats Aj and Fed!

I had fun in toronto triple elim.  I had fun in vancouver group play.  Pros and cons for both set ups.  For future tourneys, maybe let the paid entrants vote for the set up.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aqualizard said:

Damn, coach! Why delete your posts? Makes it hard to follow this thread, and people are really taking the time to write some well thought out stuff. 

:(

:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I have some time to put some thoughts together now.

First and most importantly: I appreciate what Halifax does (and Mikey, Smozoma and anyone else who helps) and will be coming to NYC 100% no matter what!  We are lucky that any live tourneys happen, and I know they are a ton of work. :)

Also, I was at Toronto and Vegas, but did not go to BC, so don't have the "full exposure" that Coach and others did.  But, here is what I personally would like:

1. a very low entrance fee
2. almost no prize $$... rather the entrance fee go to growing the community (paying for websites, paying for advertising, paying for better venue, etc.)
3. I would love to have a Gens A and B group (which I think is the gist of what Coach was saying, but he deleted it all, and I may be wrong)
4. but most important of all, I would just love to play as many "real" games as possible, even if there is only 1 group <--- this "most games" idea is the thing I want the most by a landslide

That is it. And you can stop reading any further, but for you keeners, I will elaborate on a couple points based on AJ and Raph's points.  First, you can't compare NHL94 on GENS to Poker or even SNES. I mean you can, but it is very different.  In poker luck is a huge factor, and in the bigger tourneys, like the WSOP Main event, it is rare for a well known pro to even make the final table.  And in SNES, well, the variety of Champs -- who are non-online dudes, too -- indicates there is greater parity (or less depth in the game) versus GENs.  It is obvious based on the tourney results that there are only a few guys that are liable to win GENs. 

Fact is, in many competitions, and events, there are different levels.  Juniors, minors, over 50, seniors, etc.  And this is also reflected in Gens online leagues.  Why not have this carry over for the Ko94?  Now, I actually like playing the best guys, and getting my ass handed to me -- online! --but in person, in a live tourney, I would prefer to actually be competitive.  (And I am a bit surprised to hear Raph and AJ both say the prefer to play everyone live.  I thought for sure their competitive spirit would mean they want to play the best, and not "waste time" with the amateurs -- just like the A tier in online play!  But whatever, everyone sees things different, and I appreciate their view. Just surprised me.)

My relatively low IQ and advanced age won't allow me to comment much on double elimination versus triple elimination etc., etc.,  but I will say what ever format means the least waiting around for most people, even those that are not top tier, would be my preference. (Maybe the dudes that make the final 16 but get eliminated can play a losers tourney?  Is that possible, or doesn't even mathematically make sense?)

Anyway, that is my $.02 worth...

Edited by aqualizard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, aqualizard said:

Fact is, in many competitions, and events, there are different levels.  Juniors, minors, over 50, seniors, etc.  And this is also reflected in Gens online leagues.  Why not have this carry over for the Ko94?  Now, I actually like playing the best guys, and getting my ass handed to me -- online! --but in person, in a live tourney, I would prefer to actually be competitive.  (And I am a bit surprised to hear Raph and AJ both say the prefer to play everyone live.  I thought for sure their competitive spirit would mean they want to play the best, and not "waste time" with the amateurs -- just like the A tier in online play!  But whatever, everyone sees things different, and I appreciate their view. Just surprised me.)
..

I'm not sure what you mean here.  In every tournament, I (and AJ) DID play the best that there was...just later in the quarters/semis and finals.  Are you saying we should bypass the RR seedings for known players?  I would rather play against 3-5 new guys than just tell them I advance because I'm a known ranked player.  

And as far as I can tell, tournies ARE competitive for everyone.  At some point you will face someone near your skill level to advance.  Perhaps I'm wrong here, I have a very skewed perspective.  It would be interesting to hear from others, but I generally get the sense that most people enjoy the format, especially trying to knock out the top guys!

I think Brutus and you mentioned having two separate brackets after group play.  And that's what Vancouver did -- KO94 bracket and consolation bracket.  Tecmo does Gold/Silver/Bronze after group play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, kingraph said:

I'm not sure what you mean here.  In every tournament, I (and AJ) DID play the best that there was...just later in the quarters/semis and finals.  Are you saying we should bypass the RR seedings for known players?  I would rather play against 3-5 new guys than just tell them I advance because I'm a known ranked player.  

I am not sure what I am saying, just thinking out loud. :P

But, if there were 2 tiers, for GENs, you could make it based on where the entrant wants to play.  B (minors) or A (majors) level, and never have them play in the other bracket at all.  I would love that, and stand a chance at doing well.

2 hours ago, kingraph said:

I think Brutus and you mentioned having two separate brackets after group play.  And that's what Vancouver did -- KO94 bracket and consolation bracket.  Tecmo does Gold/Silver/Bronze after group play.

Ahh... that sounds awesome.  Yeah, if we do one group (not A and B groups) which I figure will happen again, yes, the "consolation bracket" would be awesome.  

Edit: I just read the format for Vancouver here: http://www.kingof94.ca/format.html
This looks great to me, with lots of games for anyone making it out of round robin?  Was there a problem with it? Can someone who was there elaborate? 

Edited by aqualizard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, aqualizard said:

Damn, coach! Why delete your posts? Makes it hard to follow this thread, and people are really taking the time to write some well thought out stuff. 

:(

Unknown.jpegThis is why I deleted my post.  I should have kept this private.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very open to hear ideas and talk about this topic, so it's unfortunate that Coach removed his post. I understand it is opening up a can of worms, but this is an important conversation to have as a community. I'd hate to see people get discouraged to have a discussion in attempt to make things better for us as a whole. Even if we can't agree, I think the healthy discussion is extremely important. The more people that speak, the more we know and the better we can make educated decisions instead of ones based on perception.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah @CoachMac I thought you brought up some ideas, I don't think you should delete them because some don't agree. When it comes to these tournaments, you are never going to please everyone with the format chosen, but it's good for people to voice their ideas! As you noticed, every year the format has been a little different, it's not set in stone, so any idea should be welcome for discussion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hello!  i guess i should chime in, though not sure where all this started and may be off base.  One of my favorite matchups of Vancouver was vs Darik whom i had never played before, as he impressed.  if i am getting the jist of this, at live tournaments we need more games (if possible) and more even matchups, specifically later in the day.  sounds like this is getting better each time.  would something like this work & alleviate concerns:

  • you start with the round robin session and the top 16 players advance.
  • the top 16 play a double elimination bracket, best 2 of 3 on the winners side and a single game once you drop to the other side.
  • everyone that did not make this 'championship' bracket will play in a one game single elimination bracket for the "B" group title. 

seems like time and systems can be an issue with this outkasts bracket from taking place, but if everyone that didnt make that championship bracket plays just one game in a single elimination style, you shouldnt really be waiting on anyone, and this should advance rather quickly.  would something like this work, would something like this support coaches questions(?) are there problems with this?

 

Edited by corbettkb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I liked the format, round robin seems like a good way to seed everyone and the fact that there were first round byes (in SNES at least) meant you really wanted a top seed going into the elimination bracket.

Only thing I would do differently is make it double elimination from the beginning of the elimination round, or at least from the last 16. I would also like to see best of 3 in loser's as well. I know it's due to time constraints, but I think everything actually ran surprisingly quickly in Vancouver and we could have gone even faster if we had a few more setups and more people helping hali and smoz. So I think it'd be worth trying to make the knockout round as fair as possible and increase the chances of someone getting knocked down to loser's early on making a big run to get back into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The normal format sounds cool, and I hope it doesn't change before attending my first major tourney...NYC!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/3/2018 at 8:25 PM, CoachMac said:

Unknown.jpegThis is why I deleted my post.  I should have kept this private.

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need a reasonable entry fee for a few good reasons:

  • It weeds out no-shows
  • It tempts high-end players to travel/attend
  • Too high, and you won't get mid-tier players

As for a consolation tournament, or B-side. I don't think this should be the responsibility of the tournament organizers. However, if there are a few guys willing to volunteer their time, and the organizer is willing to allow the use of the equipment - I don't see an issue. 

As for not getting enough games - I didn't find any issue finding games, side games, 2v2, whatever at either of the tournaments I attended. Tournament play is fun, but the games that happen the day before, night of, day after are just as fun. 

Jer

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2018 at 11:34 PM, jer_33 said:

 

Tournament play is fun, but the games that happen the day before, night of, day after are just as fun. 

Jer

 

Yeah cuz you beat me in the hotel friday at the Toronto tourney :D

My confidence was shot after that lol, I was questioning my ability to use a dpad

Im starting to think im a bit fragile

Edited by TomKabs93
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember it like it was yesterday.

Get your game on TomKabs, NHL94 tournament next summer somewhere around Oakville - and then an NHL95 tourney in Toronto 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahaha me too. I'll keep my eyes on the oakville one. Im just so rusty

Uncle seth ended my career in 2015 with his crushing cb checks

At this point im just a dark horse :( (who could knock anyone out I still have the fire deep down :angry2::angry2::angry2: grrrrr)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we just announced our february 2019 tournament if you feel like joining us in the midwest.  We ended up drawing a lot of local casuals, but had a nice traveling turnout this year.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 25 Guests (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online