Well we don't have control over the WBBA (TT), but we do over the WBO. I'd say we improve the WBO.

Now, I don't think any parts need to be banned right now (only because Sparking is now changing the meta, but otherwise I would like to have seen a meta with Xtend+, Bearing, Lord, and Judgement banned. Think that would be interesting).

Specifically, what type of improvements should the WBO make?

You said we can’t controll TT and I agree.  So the only thing WBO can control are WBO rules and WBO bans I think?  Or maybe there is something that I missed.  What do you think we should do now?  You just said you don’t think anything needs to be banned right now.  So that leaves rule change?  What improvements can the WBO make?

Well, I meant that Burst Standard format did not need any banlist changes. However, there's also changes necessary that would fall outside rules and bans.

First of all, the WBO needs to create criteria on what constitutes a part being banned. Without banlist criteria, discussion about banned parts and banning a part become extremely difficult because we have no standards. There's also a lack of accountability when parts get banned or don't get banned because there's no standard for Committee members to be held to. A specific example of nonsense with banlist management was Outer, which was unbanned for becoming more widely available and NOT because it was proven to be no longer overpowered (or else it probably would have been unbanned earlier), otherwise the announcement of its unban would cite some testing showing it is balanced. This leads into the next point after this. Now, while a part being rare as a reason to ban might be considered disagreeable, never were Level Chips or the Goku layer weight banned for being rare. I know the reason Outer was banned is because it was overpowered upon release, but it seems completely backwards to unban it on the basis of no longer being rare.


Secondly, the explanation of part bans and unbans need to be more in-depth. Like I said, there's no accountability with the current set up on how Committee decides on whether parts gets banned/unbanned. Even if we had a criteria for a banlist, we would still need some explanation on how that criteria is met. Bans/unbans should cite testing. An example where WBO lack of explanation leads to things not making sense is the ban of Assault' in Burst Classic, where the part was banned after only a few tournaments while Trans', a driver that performs similarly, saw more tournament results and more representation in winning combos.

Thirdly, the WBO should be more proactive in trying to use the banlist to keep the metagame healthy. I can only argue from hindsight on this one since the meta has already passed, but aH-hS-rP meta should have had those layers banned to reset the meta into a more healthy state.

Lastly, parts should not be banned or unbanned without testing to prove so. My specific example is Atomic-Slingshock and Destroy' being banned in Classic. Atomic-Slingshock was banned completely without any performed testing. Destroy' was banned under the presumption that because Accel'/Zephyr'/Blow' were overpowered in tornado stalling, that Destroy' (much worse at it) should also be banned. Also banning parts to "simplify the banlist" just seems dumb to me, but I guess that's a personal preference.


So what banlist and rule changes would I actually like to see? I think a test of the Knockout rule this thread is all about should be tested. I'd like to see actual testing to prove banning or not banning Destroy', Atomic-S, Assault', and Trans' in Classic. The systematic changes I listed above are things I'd like implemented.

---

Give us Assault' re-release, Iron', and Charge'. Give a non-limited re-release of Cho-Z Achilles.
Legend Spriggan on tall attack drivers for Burst Limited is fun.
Against layer powercreep in Burst Limited.

So what banlist and rule changes would I actually like to see? I think a test of the Knockout rule this thread is all about should be tested. I'd like to see actual testing to prove banning or not banning Destroy', Atomic-S, Assault', and Trans' in Classic. The systematic changes I listed above are things I'd like implemented.

I think you're misunderstanding the actual point of this thread... The point of this thread was to get rid of the bounce back = KO rule not about banning parts, if anything what you're wanting would be an entirely different thread.

---

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzL8dVb...subscriber

So what banlist and rule changes would I actually like to see? I think a test of the Knockout rule this thread is all about should be tested. I'd like to see actual testing to prove banning or not banning Destroy', Atomic-S, Assault', and Trans' in Classic. The systematic changes I listed above are things I'd like implemented.

I think you're misunderstanding the actual point of this thread... The point of this thread was to get rid of the bounce back = KO rule not about banning parts, if anything what you're wanting would be an entirely different thread.

Its just the direction the discussion went. I did mention the Wall Bounce KO rule as something that should be tested.

---

Give us Assault' re-release, Iron', and Charge'. Give a non-limited re-release of Cho-Z Achilles.
Legend Spriggan on tall attack drivers for Burst Limited is fun.
Against layer powercreep in Burst Limited.

Well, I meant that Burst Standard format did not need any banlist changes. However, there's also changes necessary that would fall outside rules and bans.

First of all, the WBO needs to create criteria on what.....

Thank you for sharing at length.  From what I can digest:

Correct me if I am wrong.
The improvements to WBO are not about bans (From you previous post), instead it is about: 
1) How to go about banning/unbanning something 
2) Why ban/unban something 
3) Which to ban/unban for a healthy meta 

I do think this discussion no longer belongs in this thread.  Also, as WBO is a volunteer run organization, would you considered volunteering some of you time to propose these improvements in the form of proposals for people to discuss.  Kind of like how this thread is a proposal for KO rule change.

I gotta say, there's a lot of stuff I simply don't care about. For banning parts, take that discussion elsewhere. I regularly play with over 40 beys and there is nothing that feels as if it needs to be banned.

As for "testing" the wall bounce rule, I've discussed this at length earlier. The entire Japanese meta is the testing. To keep asking for testing feels like an underhanded way to squash this debate, as it makes it seem as if people don't have any understanding about how beys operate. It's a foolish notion to ask for testing when most people during casual play, including the entirety of the WBBA and almost every youtuber who plays, plays by allowing beys to come back inside. We know what will happen, and the reality is that things will be the same only matches won't need to be needlessly reviewed frame by frame via recording. The game will feel more honest, there will be more bursts, and at the end of the day people will still be happy to be playing with spinning tops.

---

I'm not a miracle, I'm a heaven-sent instrument.

https://youtu.be/K7ZfH9tXWaI
Is this in or is it out under the current WBO rules?
I posted a video like this when the thread first started with Imperial. As soon as I saw Brave I thought it might do the same.

https://youtu.be/K7ZfH9tXWaI
Is this in or is it out under the current WBO rules?
I posted a video like this when the thread first started with Imperial.  As soon as I saw Brave I thought it might do the same.

The Driver nor any part of the Bey didn't actually touch the ground just under the pocket right? I think this should still be considered "in", especially since the tip of the Driver most probably is still touching the stadium edge.

---

Ore wa tsuyoi da

IG: @kinghadoukenbeypla
(I try to post daily for things like Beyblade and Gunpla)

I hate when spin stealers bounce back with low stamina then start doing their job.

---

"The mark of my dignity shall scar thy DNA!" Gill, Street Fighter. Sub to Nitrogenic! Nitro is the heat and Nitrogen the cold. 

https://youtu.be/K7ZfH9tXWaI
Is this in or is it out under the current WBO rules?
I posted a video like this when the thread first started with Imperial.  As soon as I saw Brave I thought it might do the same.

The Driver nor any part of the Bey didn't actually touch the ground just under the pocket right? I think this should still be considered "in", especially since the tip of the Driver most probably is still touching the stadium edge.

I may be wrong, but I don’t believe the current WBO burst rules state that a bey has to touch the ground in the pocket for it to be considered KOed?   As a matter of fact, this thread is focused on those beys that hit the pocket walls and bounce back in to the play area.  Most of those would have not touched the ground and many of them would be ruled out I think.

The Driver nor any part of the Bey didn't actually touch the ground just under the pocket right? I think this should still be considered "in", especially since the tip of the Driver most probably is still touching the stadium edge.

I may be wrong, but I don’t believe the current WBO burst rules state that a bey has to touch the ground in the pocket for it to be considered KOed?   As a matter of fact, this thread is focused on those beys that hit the pocket walls and bounce back in to the play area.  Most of those would have not touched the ground and many of them would be ruled out I think.

Ahhh I see. In that case, does WBO ruling explicitly state that as soon as the Bey hits the pocket walls (not the walls in between the 3 pockets) it is already considered KO'd regardless if it bounced back into the center?

I think the clarification should have already been made at least on rebounding Beys from pockets, as it is what would usually happen when THICC attack types collide in battle. 

For other situations where a Beyblade gets stuck on the pocket, I think it should already be obvious that it already lost the round via KO (or spin finish, which doesn't really matter since both only amount to 1 point each) as long as the opponent is still moving INSIDE the stadium. In the event that both Beys in a round get stuck into pockets, it will probably boil down to which Bey finished spinning last as the point winner.

---

Ore wa tsuyoi da

IG: @kinghadoukenbeypla
(I try to post daily for things like Beyblade and Gunpla)

This is the rule as it is currently written:

A Beyblade is knocked-out when it exits the play area. Beyblades stuck on an element of a stadium are still considered in-play.

Beyblades that bounce back into the stadium after exiting the play area are still considered knocked-out. However, if a Beyblade exits the play area and bounces back in before touching the opposing Beyblade in any fashion, the round will continue.

https://youtu.be/K7ZfH9tXWaI
Is this in or is it out under the current WBO rules?
I posted a video like this when the thread first started with Imperial. As soon as I saw Brave I thought it might do the same.

Under the current rules, that it is still in-play. It has not exited the play area, especially given that part of the Beyblade's tip is still touching the central area of the stadium. Right now, we never call a Beyblade that hasn't touched the back wall of a pocket and effectively fully exited the stadium KOed.

I do realize however that things have become murky because of how big things like Imperial are. You could argue that when Imperial gets stuck in the pocket and doesn't touch the floor that it is still in-play/not KOed because "Beyblades stuck on an element of a stadium are still considered in-play" and because part of it would still be touching the central play area. And as I mentioned before this is how it was ruled while I was in Japan, for what it's worth. Personally I think this is fine because OS/KO are worth the same amount in the WBO's Burst Format, but in Japan although it did benefit me because we were playing 5G Battle Format where KOs are 2pts, it did feel strange.

As I mentioned before however, we're going to clarify more precisely the definition of the "play area" soon. Because without that it is impossible to explicitly outline when a Beyblade has officially exited it. I've been working on a definition for that, an updated definition for "knocked-out" as well as a new response to the conversation taking place here regarding the "back-wall" KO ruling in question that I hope to post soon.

---

But then again the show is not accurate like at all

But then again the show is not accurate like at all

Uh... how does this have to do with the show?

---

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzL8dVb...subscriber

He said in his thread about the show

Under the current rules, that it is still in-play. It has not exited the play area, especially given that part of the Beyblade's tip is still touching the central area of the stadium. Right now, we never call a Beyblade that hasn't touched the back wall of a pocket and effectively fully exited the stadium KOed.

Maybe in the tournaments you host or attend they haven't, but the WBO hosted tournaments over here have regularly called matches where the bey doesn't even get close to the actual back wall. People have argued with me when I judged that the opponents bey was out when it hit the side wall before the lip even curves inward, the circled areas in the picture.



The reality is that beys aren't what they used to be when this rule was made. The rule is outdated and does nothing but hinder play, create confusion in some circumstances, and leaves people unsatisfied that a match is over when it's crystal clear that it is not. It's obvious to anyone who cares about the game. The only people who seem to staunchly defend this obsolete rule just seem to be in it for points that they equate to some sort of bragging rights. It really feels as if they don't even like watching tops spin with how fast they desire matches to be over.

---

I'm not a miracle, I'm a heaven-sent instrument.

This is the rule as it is currently written:

A Beyblade is knocked-out when it exits the play area. Beyblades stuck on an element of a stadium are still considered in-play.

Beyblades that bounce back into the stadium after exiting the play area are still considered knocked-out. However, if a Beyblade exits the play area and bounces back in before touching the opposing Beyblade in any fashion, the round will continue.

https://youtu.be/K7ZfH9tXWaI
Is this in or is it out under the current WBO rules?
I posted a video like this when the thread first started with Imperial.  As soon as I saw Brave I thought it might do the same.

Under the current rules, that it is still in-play. It has not exited the play area, especially given that part of the Beyblade's tip is still touching the central area of the stadium. Right now, we never call a Beyblade that hasn't touched the back wall of a pocket and effectively fully exited the stadium KOed.
......

Thank you for the explanation Kei, and I am glad you are working on this.  I think you already understand what I am trying to say, but I am going to try to state my concerns more clearly, to the best of my ability.  This may seem redundant but I think it is worthwhile. I want to be clear about how the current rules confuse me, personally.  

In the short clips I already posted in this thread,  I am trying to show that with a tall enough driver and a large enough layer, a Beyblade can hit pretty deep on the side pocket wall and still have its driver tip on/in the play area.  I agree with you that would make the beyblade still “in” given the current rules.  However, if that same Beyblade hits the side wall just a tiny bit deeper, then the tip of the driver would have left the play area.  Further more, a Beyblade can hit the back wall and still have portions above the play area.  So my concerns/confusion with the current rules are:

1) How much of the Beyblade has to leave the play area for it to be out?  Is it the tip?  Can we really be trusted to determine if the tip has exited, predictably and accurately, even with the help of recording? 

Is this out? (Hitting back wall, parts of Beyblade in play area, tip is definitely out)
https://i.imgur.com/CILB0pp.jpg

Is this out? (Hitting side wall, tip is just barely out, parts of Beyblade in play area) 
Is this in or is it out #2?
https://youtu.be/sOWR6lEgu2E

I thought I had seen in at least one of the rule books something about the tip (or long axis?) having to be in the play area for the Beyblade to be “in.”  For some reason, I can no longer locate this.  My memory fails me often.  I could have imagined this.  

2) Now, if we call the back wall “out” (since hitting clearly on the back wall means the tip has left the play area currently), then when does the back wall begin and the side wall end?  Where is that imaginary line?  Should this imaginary line exist?

3)  If this imaginary line that separates the back wall and the side wall exists, then is it in or out?  (Like tennis or like basketball). 

I hope this is clear to everyone that is interested in this thread.  Truth be told, I don’t mind the “wall bounce” being out. I don’t want to nerf attack.  I even started appreciating the 1 point KO.  I am only trying to point out where the current rules may be confusing to me, and perhaps some other people.

PS.  This is just for fun.  But it is possible for a Beyblade to hit the middle of the back wall and still have it’s tip in the stadiums.  I do believe this Beyblade would just land out.  

https://imgur.com/gallery/IZV8R1b

Hey guys, thanks for your patience. This topic and my latest response to it evolved to become quite comprehensive, so I took the time to publish it formally as an article on my Beyblade blog, BeyBase.

Read Now: Redefining “Play Area” & “Knocked-Out” in Beyblade (And How This Changes The Game)

This debate about our existing ruling on knock-outs has been ongoing for sometime. It's something I have been wanting to address and finally settle.

In this article, I discuss:

1. Whether there is “right” or “wrong” ways to play Beyblade.
2. Why the WBO uses its own ruleset which differs in some ways from the WBBA.
3. What it means to play competitively versus playing for fun.
4. Defining what the “play area” actually is in Beyblade.
5. Proposing a redefinition what “knocked-out” means in Beyblade.

I’d love hear what you guys think of my proposed new definition for “play area” and “knocked-out” for World Beyblade Organization tournaments. Please scrutinize it carefully! I’d love if we can come to an agreement on a universal set of descriptions for these concepts that can be applied to any Beyblade format in existence.

Be sure to check out the comments on the article as well. Thanks to SupaDav03 and Shindog for their feedback so far!

---

Rule wise, If we're not following the WBBA rule settings we might as well change WBO to Western Beyblade Organization because we're not following the world's rule setting.
Which then we can have "World" rules which is just the current G5 rules and "Western" rules which are WBO.

Example: If you think of Magic the gathering in 2010 they removed mana burning from the core rules. As of today I don't know anything that pushes mana burning. And when someone brings it up everyone just mentions its no longer a thing because its the official rules. But theirs also Standard and Legacy but fans made EDH which became Commander IRL and even tho fans started EDH they still follow Commander Rules and Ban list.

Just read the whole thing, it's pretty good overall honestly. This will be a little more broken up because it will be easier to discuss smaller points in that style instead of having a mass of text about different points.

I like the idea of the new naming system a lot - Extended Play Area. It's a good idea to remove all negative subtext from the pockets and extend the area of the stadium wall to that of a type of "Play Area". If the name catches sticks, which it should as Extended Play Area is a good name, it will undeniably be easier to sway some people. Being able to say "The bey is still within the Extended Play Area" will reinforce the idea of continued play, and that's exactly what I want.

Sample 4 - I like this a lot as well, perhaps one of the smallest things that makes me smile. I haven't had a Beyblade catch the rim of the stadium cover yet in tournament play, but I had concerns that in WBO tournaments I attend that the game would be called as a Knockout in this circumstance. Too many people came off wanting to win more than just play, so I feel like having this addressed in an actual rule is nice. It's one of the most exciting moments in Beyblade when the bey leaps out of the stadium, catches the stadium cover's rim, and just goes crazy with spinning on it. Extremely infrequent, but awesome nonetheless.

Sample 6 - I like this one as well as it applies to some of the more unusual stadiums. There was another thread about using a Hasbro stadium for Hasbro tournaments, but people are mostly against it with one big issue being that people can shoot into these pockets and out-stamina an opponent. This ruling solves that, because if you fire into the pocket for stamina, you lose because your Beyblade has no feasible way of returning to the primary Play Area. Good stuff.

Sample 7 - I just want to preface this by saying I don't play MFB because it's lacking the noteworthy madness Burst offers, however, this is sort of awesome in and of itself. The idea that I could shoot onto those extended platforms is honestly extremely appealing and something that may make me look at MFB going forward.

I want to say again though on the matter of testing, don't even bother with it, just change the rule. We have people who regularly refuse to enter unranked tournaments because of points, you can read it in the comment sections of unranked tournaments, so the sample size would be skewered and as it's been discussed at length, we already know the results. It's crystal clear that testing isn't necessary as testing is the entirety of Japan's meta, along with everything done on YouTube and free-play for the most part. If people push for testing, all we get is organizers not doing it as they want to run their ranked tournaments, and people not attending the unranked test tournaments. All asking for testing does is endlessly pushing back the potential for this necessary rule change.

If you look at Shindog's comment on BeyBase, he mentions presenting the pocket as a "penalty zone". If you look back in this thread, it's basically the rules we play with by me, the concept of "Danger". It's a little bit of a mixed bag that a Beyblade can score an outspin victory even if it's stuck in a pocket with a viable method of return, if it never does manage to get back. In my heart it would feel like a knockout since the still spinning bey never again grasped the primary Play Area, but as this is done in Japan's meta with basically the same results it's honestly not the worst ruling. Beys typically don't last too long when they're spinning inside of the Extended Play Area so it's not a viable strategy to shoot them there, and if they do get stuck it's usually a loss, however there would still be instances where the bey spinning in the Extended Play Area can get an unnatural outspin victory. Like I said, a mixed bag, but I can get used to it. I can't get used to 2-4 second matches that need frame-by-frame adjudication via camera.

Overall, I'd say I support what's going on. I just want to enjoy WBO tournament play as much as I enjoy playing with friends and the current rules don't allow that. Hopefully when tournaments start up again the new rules will be installed and the game can be played to its fullest conclusions.

---

I'm not a miracle, I'm a heaven-sent instrument.

Rule wise, If we're not following the WBBA rule settings we might as well change WBO to Western Beyblade Organization because we're not following the world's rule setting.
Which then we can have "World" rules which is just the current G5 rules and "Western" rules which are WBO.

Example:  If you think of Magic the gathering in 2010 they removed mana burning from the core rules.  As of today I don't know anything that pushes mana burning.  And when someone brings it up everyone just mentions its no longer a thing because its the official rules.  But theirs also Standard and Legacy but fans made EDH which became Commander IRL and even tho fans started EDH they still follow Commander Rules and Ban list.

We’re not following the WBBA’s rule settings because even the WBBA is inconsistent depending on where you are located. The rules, stadiums, and Beyblades the WBBA uses are different in North America/Europe/etc versus Asia, for instance.

The WBO is in a unique position because:

1. The rules for WBO events allow for a mix of both Hasbro and TAKARA-TOMY. Meaning, our game is quite literally different than the WBBA in any region around the world. We also support all Beyblade generations within our Organized Play structure, something the WBBA/Hasbro/TT do not.

2. What we ultimately want to work towards is universal acceptance and proper support for all types of playing Beyblade on the WBO in one way or another. Hence, the need to create universal definitions for fundamental concepts of the game like “play area” and “knocked-out” that can support this.

While many of our events right now are based in the west, we most certainly do not view ourselves as a western-exclusive community. We have had Organizers host events around the world in places like the UK, Italy, India, and Malaysia in the past. We want to position ourselves in the future to encourage and promote more events of all kinds worldwide.

I’m not too familiar with Magic, so I can’t quite follow your example, unfortunately!

I like the idea of the new naming system a lot - Extended Play Area. It's a good idea to remove all negative subtext from the pockets and extend the area of the stadium wall to that of a type of "Play Area". If the name catches sticks, which it should as Extended Play Area is a good name, it will undeniably be easier to sway some people. Being able to say "The bey is still within the Extended Play Area" will reinforce the idea of continued play, and that's exactly what I want.

Yeah, I think the names I chose work well. They explain the general concept of what they represent without having to read the definition and are easy to reference.

Sample 6 - I like this one as well as it applies to some of the more unusual stadiums. There was another thread about using a Hasbro stadium for Hasbro tournaments, but people are mostly against it with one big issue being that people can shoot into these pockets and out-stamina an opponent. This ruling solves that, because if you fire into the pocket for stamina, you lose because your Beyblade has no feasible way of returning to the primary Play Area. Good stuff.

Exactly. As I talked about with Shindog in the comments on the article, we want to avoid situations where strategies of launching directly into the Extended Play Area can be realistically viable in almost all scenarios. The rules should encourage Beyblades to meet in the Primary Play Area.

I want to say again though on the matter of testing, don't even bother with it, just change the rule. We have people who regularly refuse to enter unranked tournaments because of points, you can read it in the comment sections of unranked tournaments, so the sample size would be skewered and as it's been discussed at length, we already know the results. It's crystal clear that testing isn't necessary as testing is the entirety of Japan's meta, along with everything done on YouTube and free-play for the most part. If people push for testing, all we get is organizers not doing it as they want to run their ranked tournaments, and people not attending the unranked test tournaments. All asking for testing does is endlessly pushing back the potential for this necessary rule change.

I do think unranked test events are useful and have done many of them in the past for various things (3on3 Battle Format, testing variants of WBO's Deck Format when it was first in development, etc). Even if they are not as potentially large as ranked events, the data garnered from them is still valuable (and probably easier to observe properly in a more relaxed/small event than a large one) as long as you properly account for the inherent differences in intensity that ranked vs. unranked can evoke.

In any case, I am generally in agreement that we don't necessarily need to test this particular change. But we'll see what everyone else says.

Overall, I'd say I support what's going on. I just want to enjoy WBO tournament play as much as I enjoy playing with friends and the current rules don't allow that. Hopefully when tournaments start up again the new rules will be installed and the game can be played to its fullest conclusions.

Thank you for your feedback! If accepted, I hope to have this change among some other minor rule/Organizer's Guide changes implemented within the next month or so.

---

Hey guys, we have been discussing potentially implementing my proposed definitions for "play area" and "knocked-out", or some variation of them. As part of this discussion we have been trying to ensure we are accounting for all possible scenarios and that the results we want to see will be encouraged/permitted by whatever definitions we implement.

As part of this, we reviewed the battle at 0:07 in this footage I shot in Japan earlier this year. The battle between Imperial and Zwei.

I wanted to pose this question to the community just to see what the general consensus seems to be with regards to what we feel the result should be.

Who do you think the winner should be in this example? And most importantly, why?

---

Well, I would say that Zwei should win this one.

Both beys spin in the pocket and eventually run out of steam, and neither return to the main play area.
But it is very clear that Zwei was within the main play area when Imperial entered the pocket.  It could be argued that Zwei has knocked Imperial into the pocket. But who caused the pocketing isn't really relevant; what matters is that a bey entered a pocket (except contactless self-KOs in finals deck format, not the case here).
In this case, both beys entered pockets!
It is true that while in the pockets, Zwei runs out of gas first, because it is smaller and can't hug the rim and cover as much as Imperial can. However, when Zwei entered the non-primary area of the pocket, Imperial was already in the non-primary area. Imperial should not receive credit for a KO it had nothing to do with, unless it can re-enter the main play area on its own.

Because of this, I would suggest the following rule:
"Only a bey that was within the Primary Play Area when the opposing bey enters the Hazard Play Area and became knocked out,
or that successfully returns to the Primary Play Area on its own before or after the opposing bey enters the Hazard Play Area and is knocked out,
may receive a point for the knockout."

In this situation, Imperial is knocked out. Zwei was "in bounds" when the Imperial pocketing happened. Imperial was "out of bounds" when the Zwei pocketing happened. Although Zwei ran out of steam first, Imperial was unable to re-enter the main play area boundaries. Point to Zwei.

If you rule as the WBBA did, that Imperial gets the point because it did not run out of spin and fell out of the pocket before Zwei did, then you promote a meta where Life After Knock Out (LAKO) is a new important function of every layer, and maybe even disc or tip.

---

-----
Hey, parents! Here are all the answers to any questions about WBO Tournaments you might have! Thread-Guide-Hey-Parents-Answers-to-your-WBO-Tournament-questions

Please consult this guide linked below on how to arrive at tournaments before they start! https://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-How-to-arrive-at-tournaments-and-other-events-on-time

In the Battle Imperial entered the pocket first. However, it was still technically spinning on the edge of the stadium after Zwei left the stadium entirely. I would say with extended play area Imperial should be the winner. That's just my opinion though.

---

Click here and all will be revealed

Spoiler (Click to View)

all

This may not be anime accurate...
Why was Shu happy?

Spoiler (Click to View)

Because Wakiya 4 glaive (forgave) him.

Zwei definitely. It KOed imperial way before it self KOed. If imperial hit the back wall and came back in before Zwei self KOed it would be a different story, but as it stands is it even a topic whether Zwei won or not, it seems pretty clear to me.

Zwei 100%. Zwei knocked out Imperial. So far, it’s looking like a KO in Zwei’s favor. But if the pocket is still considered part of the play area, as a penalty zone, then Imperial wins.

---