Hello fellow WBO members and tournament goers! I hope this thread finds all of you in good health.

As you all may know, roughly six months ago, the WBO released a series of optional ban lists (ranked clauses) that organizers may use to customize their tournaments as they see fit. While I believe this was a step in the right direction, I also believe ranked clauses are a band-aid on a much bigger problem.

There are two main points to this proposal. The first is the establishment of acceptable banlists for all standard formats. I know that sounds confusing, but allow me to explain. Metal Fight Limited format will be used as an example. As a base format without any ranked clauses, Dark Knight, Libra, and Gravity are legal, but the SP230 spin track is not. Out of all the Metal Fight Limited tournaments hosted since the establishment of ranked clauses, only a small fraction of them have used this base ban list. Most organizers have opted to ban Libra & Gravity and unban SP230. With this information presented, it isn't a stretch to say that the base format isn't considered to be the "best" banlist for the format. If we're going to replace the ranked clause system, acceptable banlists for the base formats should be present. An added bonus of widely accepted base formats is that it becomes much easier for new players to get into these formats.

The second point of this proposal is essentially the title of the thread. I am proposing the abolishment of ranked clauses and instead allowing organizers to host with any list of bans & stadium they wish (within reason). The WBO requires that a tournament have a minimum of eight participants to qualify for ranked status; that being said, organizers would need a minimum of eight people to stake their rank on an event with a custom banlist for it to even qualify. This serves as a preventative measure against completely ridiculous and unreasonable banlists/stadium choices. Additionally, it's worth noting that this would indirectly legalize the use of reproduction stadiums such as the Shin TA, Summit, and Ali-10 stadiums for ranked play in every format, something (most) members have wanted for awhile now.

As it stands, the list of ranked clauses is quite long. Recent proposals have suggested the addition of several more. While they technically serve their purpose, how many ranked clauses is considered too many? It is completely unreasonable to have dozens of pages worth of ranked clauses.

Thank you all for your time, and I look forward to hearing thoughts on this proposal.

---

"If I ignore a friend I have the ability to help, wouldn't I be betraying him?" -Killua Zoldyck

Absolutely based. This is a change we desperately need.

---

Imagine not running triple attack. Skill issue.

While I agree that organizers should have flexibility based around their active participants likes/dislikes, people also want beyblade to be considered a competitive sport. There has to be rules and a structure in place to then achieve any sort of rank. The rules also make it clear what the rules are, because organizers can't possibly list their own document for ever even that participants can be expected to read and be ready for. That's what open play is for. How do you respect any sort of ranking list, or what is the point of one, if each event has their own set of individual rules? That's not how ranking anything works.

While I agree that organizers should have flexibility based around their active participants likes/dislikes, people also want beyblade to be considered a competitive sport. There has to be rules and a structure in place to then achieve any sort of rank. The rules also make it clear what the rules are, because organizers can't possibly list their own document for ever even that participants can be expected to read and be ready for. That's what open play is for. How do you respect any sort of ranking list, or what is the point of one, if each event has their own set of individual rules? That's not how ranking anything works.

Agreed, for Beyblade to be ranked it should be played with everyone on relatively the same field. Giving the organizer complete freedom to do what they want while keeping it ranked skews with the type of game that is actually being played. Of course in unranked you could change it to your liking but that isn’t the case here.

---

Blader for 8+years, CA Organizer, hoping to improve at the game and meet more people along the way. Let It Rip!

While I agree that organizers should have flexibility based around their active participants likes/dislikes, people also want beyblade to be considered a competitive sport. There has to be rules and a structure in place to then achieve any sort of rank. The rules also make it clear what the rules are, because organizers can't possibly list their own document for ever even that participants can be expected to read and be ready for. That's what open play is for. How do you respect any sort of ranking list, or what is the point of one, if each event has their own set of individual rules? That's not how ranking anything works.

Hi! Thank you for your input. I understand where you're coming from. However, currently, the Burst Classic and Burst Standard formats are ranked on the same rank ladder. Two very different formats directly affect the same rank... the same can be said for the metal fight as well. This, along with all of the different clauses available for each of the individual formats, is the reason why many believe the rank ladder has lost any meaning it previously had.

---

"If I ignore a friend I have the ability to help, wouldn't I be betraying him?" -Killua Zoldyck

While I agree that organizers should have flexibility based around their active participants likes/dislikes, people also want beyblade to be considered a competitive sport. There has to be rules and a structure in place to then achieve any sort of rank. The rules also make it clear what the rules are, because organizers can't possibly list their own document for ever even that participants can be expected to read and be ready for. That's what open play is for. How do you respect any sort of ranking list, or what is the point of one, if each event has their own set of individual rules? That's not how ranking anything works.

Hi! Thank you for your input. I understand where you're coming from. However, currently, the Burst Classic and Burst Standard formats are ranked on the same rank ladder. Two very different formats directly affect the same rank... the same can be said for the metal fight as well. This, along with all of the different clauses available for each of the individual formats, is the reason why many believe the rank ladder has lost any meaning it previously had.

I would love to see separate ranks for each, or seasonal resets while keeping historical data somewhere, but that is one of those "this is a volunteer lead organization and that's an added layer of management no one has time for" sort of issues lol. I wish there was more support for WBO's efforts in keeping these companies who make beyblades making bank.

While I agree that organizers should have flexibility based around their active participants likes/dislikes, people also want beyblade to be considered a competitive sport. There has to be rules and a structure in place to then achieve any sort of rank. The rules also make it clear what the rules are, because organizers can't possibly list their own document for ever even that participants can be expected to read and be ready for. That's what open play is for. How do you respect any sort of ranking list, or what is the point of one, if each event has their own set of individual rules? That's not how ranking anything works.

Agreed, for Beyblade to be ranked it should be played with everyone on relatively the same field. Giving the organizer complete freedom to do what they want while keeping it ranked skews with the type of game that is actually being played. Of course in unranked you could change it to your liking but that isn’t the case here.

This is where major events would make a lot of sense.  Things like the invitational/qualifiers.  Those events would play a consistent ruleset. For example, the majors in tennis. The surface and environment they play on is different at different majors, but within that tournament, it stays consistent for the most part.  However the tennis ranking most ppl look at includes diff types of tournaments.  I don’t think this approach tennis takes is somehow wrong.  Golf works this way too.  Each golf course is made to be different, and to present different challenges to players, by design.  Ppl still rank golf players.  I think both golf and tennis are pretty competitive sports, as well.  Ppl seem to play it competitively for millions of dollars.  

I cannot really look at the WBO rankings to determine who is the better player anyway now, not really.   Most WBO players don’t play that many other WBO players anyway.  Unless we start doing that, I don’t know that the competitive ranking means all that much.  Regional ranking might mean something, but ppl don’t seem to really keep up with that anyway.

im fully aware of Shin's points, but to me it's like... we aren't as popular as Tennis or Golf yet. as a small competitive hobby (not even a sport yet) we should focus on having a basic structure and ruleset/format first

tho a little flexibility is still good (i.e. ranked clauses)

---

very active singapore beyblader, and official GM (game master a.k.a judge) for WBBA events.
i like weiland i think he's the best artist of all time
(yasin.pdf) and (beyblader101_) on insta, he/him.

I only used sports examples because competitive sports were brought up.  We can look at another hobby that also involve competitive customizing.  Let’s take RC car racing, a smaller competitive hobby. There are differences in rules and regulations in that hobby as well.