I’d like to discuss an issue that I have been seeing a lot lately. When there is a launch error and the result is a loss to the person who did the error, why are we rewarding the person who did the launch error with a relaunch? There should be no relaunch. This should be discussed because it can potentially be abused and it’s sad to win like this.

Why are we rewarding the person who lost and did a launch error with a retry? If they win, okay. Relaunch. It doesn’t make sense and I believe it is ruining the sport.

This has come up multiple times and I think it has legitimate merit to be changed.

Because the point of launch errors isn't to punish the person that made the error, its to go "oh oops you accidentally messed up your launch so we're going to redo this battle" because its difficult to launch correctly every single time, especially for children, and it would suck even more to lose a match because you just slightly messed up your match.

There's penalty points for two in a row to encourage people to focus and prevent matches running long, but that's an administrative aspect of the game, not part of the intended gameplay.

There might be potential for it to be abused, but in those cases its up to the judge to call it out and the organiser to take action. Its not something that needs a rule change.

Its not like you can only commit launch errors on battles where you lose because you don't know if you're going to lose, at best you could only tell the judge you committed a launch error if you lose. But situations like that could be addressed by not allowing players to point out launch errors, so the judge makes the call uninfluenced. Which is something for organisers to implement on their own if needed, not the WBO.

Because the point of launch errors isn't to punish the person that made the error, its to go "oh oops you accidentally messed up your launch so we're going to redo this battle" because its difficult to launch correctly every single time, especially for children, and it would suck even more to lose a match because you just slightly messed up your match.

There's penalty points for two in a row to encourage people to focus and prevent matches running long, but that's an administrative aspect of the game, not part of the intended gameplay.

There might be potential for it to be abused, but in those cases its up to the judge to call it out and the organiser to take action. Its not something that needs a rule change.

Its not like you can only commit launch errors on battles where you lose because you don't know if you're going to lose, at best you could only tell the judge you committed a launch error if you lose. But situations like that could be addressed by not allowing players to point out launch errors, so the judge makes the call uninfluenced. Which is something for organisers to implement on their own if needed, not the WBO.

---

I and others disagree. If you perform a launch error and lose the round, it shouldn’t count against the person who won. The person who slightly touches the stadium or some form of launch error then gains launch strategy on you for the retry. It happens quite a bit. I think it should be discussed further.

If you have players in your area abusing the errors system, report them to the Tournament Organizer. They can take further action from there.

Realistically a specific player should not be causing launch errors, such as touching the stadium on launch, more than once in a while. If the same player is repeatedly doing so, report them.

If the launch error is not obvious and the play continues to a finish is the scenario I am specifically talking about. When you look at the replay and the person who loses slightly hits the shroud or some slight other launch error (and here every launch is reviewed with a microscope) why should the person who errored get a relaunch? This just doesn’t make sense. If you launch into a pocket, we are not reshooting?! Now, if you did a shroud hit and win, then it should be redone.

Since I’ve been involved with this, you guys have done a good job tweaking the rules and the evolution has been really good. BEYBLADE is growing and this is a problem I see. You guys seem to be shutting it down, I think there should be more to discuss. Maybe this can be an option organizers can select?

[...] But situations like that could be addressed by not allowing players to point out launch errors, so the judge makes the call uninfluenced. Which is something for organisers to implement on their own if needed, not the WBO.

I'm just trying to get reacquainted with the rules after being out of the loop for several years. The Judge's Guide currently instructs judges to:

"Watch both bladers’ launch carefully for other launch errors, obstructions, or other illegal actions. If any occur, the battle must immediately be voided."

Does that mean a judge must call the void as soon as the launch error occurs (like a player requesting a reshoot), or does it mean they must call the void as soon as they become aware that the launch error occurred (like reviewing footage of a completed battle)?

EDIT: Answer received on Discord: https://discord.com/channels/62028975917...5353589841

---

Spoiler (Click to View)

This is what we all want, Brad.

[...] But situations like that could be addressed by not allowing players to point out launch errors, so the judge makes the call uninfluenced. Which is something for organisers to implement on their own if needed, not the WBO.

I'm just trying to get reacquainted with the rules after being out of the loop for several years. The Judge's Guide currently instructs judges to:

"Watch both bladers’ launch carefully for other launch errors, obstructions, or other illegal actions. If any occur, the battle must immediately be voided."

Does that mean a judge must call the void as soon as the launch error occurs (like a player requesting a reshoot), or does it mean they must call the void as soon as they become aware that the launch error occurred (like reviewing footage of a completed battle)?

EDIT: Answer received on Discord: https://discord.com/channels/62028975917...5353589841

Can't see the answer on here so I want to ask the same question as well.