Most of this was typed early last night, so some of the points have already been addressed, but nevertheless:

Ever since BEYBLADE CRUSADE when some people apparently complained to Brad that I had won my own tournament, I've been wrestling with this issue. Prior to BEYBLADE CRUSADE, I had never realized that there might be a problem with hosts competing in their own tournaments. Likely because for me personally, I never felt 'different' than anyone else who was competing. I just happened to be the person organizing it all, often alongside many other people.

It's funny because this whole thing only becomes problematic when the host wins the tournament, not when he or she simply competes and doesn't win the entire thing. It's like, "Sure, you can play! ... just don't win". However, this goes beyond simply being a problem of hosts competing in their own tournaments; it's the problem of older Bladers competing with younger ones in general. Since having things put into perspective after BEYBLADE CRUSADE, there has certainly been a voice in my head that has been repeating "You shouldn't win. You shouldn't win" or "You shouldn't play. You shouldn't play". Like Deikailo said, I know that if I do win, I lose in a sense as well. As you might expect, this makes it extremely difficult to perform well, and to perform well and feel good about it. It's an impossible situation. This is part of the reason why I chose not to participate in two tournaments this past summer. I'm not going to say that hosts should necessarily do this–they have every right to compete–but if they're a highly skilled Blader, it probably would be best for them to step back every so often at their own discretion for the sake of other players.

Unfortunately, we can't go ahead with the easiest solution to all of this and impose age divisions or else many regions might not meet the minimum for their tournaments. The WBO was kind of founded on the idea of no age limits between Bladers as well, so we would be going against our philosophy if we did something like that. I can perfectly understand why it looks bad from a parental perspective if a host constantly wins, but what parents don't fully understand is that, like Kai-V mentioned, we are not paid for this; we do it because we love Beyblade, because we love competing, and because we love bringing people together to do something we all enjoy.

What could improve this issue slightly is the implementation of the Swiss Format. This weekend, we will be testing it out at Project Beyhem (2.5) before legalizing it across the WBO. From what I understand, Swiss allows competitors with similar records with each tournament to compete against each other. This way, the best Bladers will face the best, and the weaker Bladers will face Bladers of a similar skill level. Perhaps this won't stop older Bladers from winning tournaments, but at the very least it will allow weaker or younger Bladers to compete on a more even playing field for most of the tournament.

---

Kei, I couldn't agree with your sentiments more.

I'm also glad to hear that the Swiss format is getting a Trial. It's another good alternative to double elimination that gives an equitable distribution of matches. The only caveat is that while Swiss works great for fields that don't exceed 24-26 bladers, the number of matches increases very quickly above that level. In fact, at 33 bladers and above you begin to get into the range of 6 rounds and about 100 battles by following the format exactly. To that end, are you doing a modified Swiss where you do 1 round less than the applicable power of 2 and take the current undefeated players for a final? That cuts the main body of matches down to around 80 (for a tourney with 33 bladers) - which is still pretty big, but better than 100.

Hm, I have a lot of posts to read...
Before you read this, there still are some really nice parents.

But, I see what you saying. To me, and other frequent players, we say stuff like this as a joke. But, we really never have problem with it. In my last tournament, I think I saw some parents have that thought, but they didn't want to say it out loud. Again, some new parents weren't sure of this, as they bring their kids to play a game, not to play Shogi or something. This hasn't always been a problem, as the population of bladers grows, so does the parents. And I think this is starting to become a real problem. I not sure if Arupeao noticed this, as, I'm a very, very observant person. I take notes of people, their actions, and a lot of other stuff.(I'm not saying nobody else does this, but I'm a very observant person.) It seems that, there is a lingering atmosphere in the newer tournaments, that some people might not like you because your older. As, I'm about to turn fourteen, this might be a bigger problem. And not only is it that we are older, it is that sometimes, people don't think its fair that we have TT parts. As people think that we have more money, more resources, ect. But, this might be a game, but if I mirror matched every Hasbro user, I think I still have a good chance of winning.( It is a good strategy btw, if you have a good launch, and their using a ripcord )

In fact, it is not just a kids game. I may not be as old as most of you heavy hitters, but I can completely understand where you coming from. (This only applies to teenagers)Shouldn't parents understand, that they would let their child play if they were my age. And for the people who play that are adults, people should understand that those adults have the right to do what they want. And, its not like their here to crush kids dreams or something. I don't believe that any of the adults on this forum are in the tournaments to do that, the adults are all pretty nice people.(Except someone, who recently got band.)

And so, I don't think that the bladers themselves are really effected by this. In the end, unless their if there parents band them from tournaments.(Has that ever happened?) If I were a parent, I would do what is best for my kid, so I would let them have fun. Its not like tournaments are a bad environment anyways.

---

:D for the committee

One of the main disadvantages of the Swiss Format is when a player has already a significant lead, the outcome of the tournament is determined before the finals are done, thus lacking the excitement for the finals.

But, I'm game as long as hosts can compete. Frankly speaking, I host because I want to compete. There's zero incentive as it is for hosting other than the +1 credit (which is trivial in comparison to the responsibilities required). Taking this away will result in a negative incentive. Like Kai-V said, "there will be less and less hosts after a while."

I basically became involved in WBO's Organized Play is due to the 'No age limitation" principal. Living in a TT country, populated with weekly age-limited WBBA Tournaments, my only outlet of competitive playing is by having unofficial tournaments and compete in them. For these to be sanctioned by the world's largest beyblade community is great. There's a sense of justification.

Simply said, if hosts are not allowed to compete in their own tournaments. The adults (potential hosts) where I live would no longer host, and the children within the age limit would go back to their WBBA routines, which results in a decline in terms of WBO's income.

Honestly, what do those parents expect? Hosts to be bad bladers? Hosts should not win? It's ridiculous.

Can't we put them in groups based on Bey Points?

---

GT: KJ Dayo

One of the main disadvantages of the Swiss Format is when a player has already a significant lead, the outcome of the tournament is determined before the finals are done, thus lacking the excitement for the finals.

But, I'm game as long as hosts can compete. Frankly speaking, I host because I want to compete. There's zero incentive as it is for hosting other than the +1 credit (which is trivial in comparison to the responsibilities required). Taking this away will result in a negative incentive. Like Kai-V said, "there will be less and less hosts after a while."

I basically became involved in WBO's Organized Play is due to the 'No age limitation" principal. Living in a TT country, populated with weekly age-limited WBBA Tournaments, my only outlet of competitive playing is by having unofficial tournaments and compete in them. For these to be sanctioned by the world's largest beyblade community is great. There's a sense of justification.

Simply said, if hosts are not allowed to compete in their own tournaments. The adults (potential hosts) where I live would no longer host, and the children within the age limit would go back to their WBBA routines, which results in a decline in terms of WBO's income.

Honestly, what do those parents expect? Hosts to be bad bladers? Hosts should not win? It's ridiculous.

I completely agree.
The WBO is different from the WBBA, and I'm sure everyone here would want it to stay that way. It is unique to itself, and I really enjoy the tournaments. I'm pretty sure that the WBBA US age limit is 17, and that really cuts off some of our top bladers. (As Uwik said)And, since we do not have a age limit, we don't limit our group of bladers.

I'm saying this website aims at anyone who wants to get back into beybalde, and it shows people that other poeple their age still enjoy and participate in this hobby.
When I'm older, still want to do this, honestly. I mean, after I have degree, I can help more people, and my knowledge has greatly advanced.

---

:D for the committee

New York City area (or the Northeast for those just outside) is a lot of things. It's a lot of things in a hurry. Just the way it is. To be real honest here, I haven't seen any parental hassle at the few we've been to. Kai-V, have you been down here?

I was referring to all of the United States. We have been getting several feedbacks mentioning parents who were impatient and angry only in the United States. Every single other region seems to have absolutely no problem with that.

If I take the eight states that hosted Summer Spin Showdown events, these are those for which we definitely observed such a problem : Illinois, Georgia, New York (some of them), Maryland, and perhaps others I forgot complaints from.

I can imagine why some parents would be mad. Most of their kids were used to the Hasbro stadiums, and they just couldn't shoot correctly in BB-10 Attacks. In fact, the majority of the kids were disappointed when they learned that only the BB-10s could be used. Another big factor was the use of TT Beys, where one of my opponents was using an uncustomized Burn Phoenix against my Hell Kerbecs BD145CS. :\ <off-topic, kinda

But, I've been considering if I should participate in the upcoming GA tourney. Long story, I just keep tossing around 'You should' and 'You shouldn't' in my head.

---

Wrath|My YouTube Channel|My Selling Thread|My Facebook Page

Kcpj, in order for that they would have to look at ALL the participants beypoints...

Can't we put them in groups based on Bey Points?

Kcpj, in order for that they would have to look at ALL the participants beypoints...

I know the beypoints of every blader who competes in MD regardless of where they come from. As a matter of fact, I know what their beypoints actually are today as I calculate the beypoints long before the tournaments get processed. For example, I actually have 1247 beypoints.

All that to say, yes, competitors could be separated by beypoints into multiple groups if we so choose.

Can't we put them in groups based on Bey Points?

Kcpj, in order for that they would have to look at ALL the participants beypoints...

I know the beypoints of every blader who competes in MD regardless of where they come from. As a matter of fact, I know what their beypoints actually are today as I calculate the beypoints long before the tournaments get processed. For example, I actually have 1247 beypoints.

All that to say, yes, competitors could be separated by beypoints into multiple groups if we so choose.

Hahahaha, Arupaeo, we are both mad. I, too, know the beypoints of the Indonesian participants. I, too, calculate them long before the tournaments get processed. Hahahaha, I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one doing that. lol

So yeah, grouping according to beypoints is doable.

I'm pretty sure that the WBBA US age limit is 17, and that really cuts off some of our top bladers. (As Uwik said)And, since we do not have a age limit, we don't limit our group of bladers.

It is actually twelve-thirteen years old.

One of the main disadvantages of the Swiss Format is when a player has already a significant lead, the outcome of the tournament is determined before the finals are done, thus lacking the excitement for the finals.

You do have a point, but to help remedy this situation, it might be OK to do a small single elimination bracket of the top-ranked Bladers after all of the rounds of Swiss. This way, the winner won't necessarily be determined before the tournament is finished.

---

One of the main disadvantages of the Swiss Format is when a player has already a significant lead, the outcome of the tournament is determined before the finals are done, thus lacking the excitement for the finals.

You do have a point, but to help remedy this situation, it might be OK to do a small single elimination bracket of the top-ranked Bladers after all of the rounds of Swiss. This way, the winner won't necessarily be determined before the tournament is finished.

That does the trick I think, and will keep the number of matches to a more reasonable level as well for the larger fields.

One of the main disadvantages of the Swiss Format is when a player has already a significant lead, the outcome of the tournament is determined before the finals are done, thus lacking the excitement for the finals.

You do have a point, but to help remedy this situation, it might be OK to do a small single elimination bracket of the top-ranked Bladers after all of the rounds of Swiss. This way, the winner won't necessarily be determined before the tournament is finished.

This is actually how Swiss is done. You are supposed to take an amount (either 4 or 8, depending on the size) and do a single elimination among them after the set amount of rounds have been completed. What did you guys think Swiss was?

This is actually how Swiss is done. You are supposed to take an amount (either 4 or 8, depending on the size) and do a single elimination among them after the set amount of rounds have been completed. What did you guys think Swiss was?

What you are describing is a modification of the Swiss format, not the actual format as described.

<Reference Overkill Alert>

Wikipedia
"A Swiss tournament goes for a predetermined number of rounds, with all of the players taking part in each round. In each round two players compete head-to-head. All players participate in the entire tournament – none are eliminated. The winner (and top places) of the tournament is based on the final scores of the players. The final score is based on the number of points they accumulated for each round. In some competitions, one point is awarded to the winner of a round; in others, a number of points can be earned each round."

Star City Games .com
"Q: What is a Swiss-style tournament?

A: Swiss style tournaments allow all participants to play in every round, pairing each player based on their current records. This ensures that players with similar records are playing other players with similar records. Sometimes, it is not possible to pair players with exactly the same records. In these cases, you may be paired up or down. This means playing against an opponent with a slightly better or slightly worse record than you.

In modified Swiss tournaments, after the regular rounds (determined at the beginning of the tournament based on the number of players), the top eight players typically go on to play a single-elimination playoff. When a player wins in the quarterfinals, they advance to the semi-finals. The semi-finalists then play to determine the two finalists, who then play to determine the winner of the tournament. Once you lose in the top 8 you are out of the event. "

Sensei's Library
"Players with the same score are paired against each other using any of the Group Pairing methods. The process is repeated till only one player has a perfect undefeated record provided there is a sufficient number of rounds"

PrintYourBrackets.com
"What is a Swiss Tournament
A Swiss Style tournament allows all participants to play in each round of a tournament. Unlike Single Elimination Tournaments and Double Elimination Tournaments, no team or players are ever eliminated from the tournament."

I don't think Swiss should be fully discussed here, but as it was explained to me, modified Swiss seems to be the more widely used format in TCG. I'm not a big TCG player, but that's how Alex from Kings Games explained it to me. He's won MTG Grand Prix four times so I think he knows what he's talking about when he explained the better version to me.

I don't think Swiss should be fully discussed here, but as it was explained to me, modified Swiss seems to be the more widely used format in TCG. I'm not a big TCG player, but that's how Alex from Kings Games explained it to me. He's won MTG Grand Prix four times so I think he knows what he's talking about when he explained the better version to me.

I agree with you 100%. Modified Swiss is the way to go.

BTW, after considering our previous (collective) conversation I have decided that I won't accept prizes in tournaments that I host. I wish I had thought more about that earlier, but now is still a good time to start!

I believe Snipe won his tourney Woodland Park Top of the Rock. My son has beaten him in past contests so it doesn't bother me, but it was mostly small children who attended. He tried to get me to compete (once again, this is KSpin's dad lol) but I didn't want to be known as the "oldest" person to compete in a WBO event! LOL Although, I would have kicked his (rhymes with grass)! HEH HEH

My son wants to hold an event. We are still gathering all (most) things needed. I showed him this and at first he said, "no way! I want a prize if I win." LOL Can't blame him. Later he stated that he would indeed award 2nd thru 4th as he put it, "I have enough Beyblades." I'm definitely to blame for that last part.

---

SELLING ENTIRE Massive Beyblade Collection! MUST SEE!
eBay listings here:
http://www.ebay.com/sch/58-les-paul/m.ht...ipg=&_from=
Rare Bey video here! Check out other Bey related vids while you're in there!
http://bit.ly/1Ppyg1J

Well, am I allowed to post my views even I have never attended a tourney? If yes, then-
I believe that hosts must be allowed to play in the tourneys. My point of view may differ from the others, but at least in India (where the shortage of enough members forces us to drop the idea of tourneys at times), hosts need to play.
If hosts aren't allowed to play, it takes out all the fun! I guess some people might even develop the thought- "What's the point of hosting a tourney if all one has to do is collect money from the attendees and just stand around and watch".
This might be really unfair to all the hosts who work so hard to get the tourney going. But, what the OP says clearly indicates that most other parents might feel the opposite.
IMO, prize-giving is usually problematic. Some REALLY protective parents might not like to see their child lose, and on seeing the host take the prize, the anger increases.
How about redefining the term- "prize"? We may think of the host as some king/queen who has challenged people to a tourney. The winners get a bey, but if the king/queen (host) wins, then he/she retains the bey. Thus, it would significantly reduce those frowns and sharp glances in tourneys, and also make the tourney more fun!
Well, I don't know if I am derailing this thread (I apologize if I do so), but reading certain posts related to prize-giving makes me say this. I am also sorry if people who haven't attended tourneys aren't allowed to post.

---

Team IB Revolutions

Thanks to N0body for the avatar and Synth for the signature!

Well I think that hosts should be able to play and so should judges. I judged at Ink.'s to tournaments and watched to judge and played. We had 3 judges though me Ink. and OblivionX so we had two tables and alternated. One of us placed at both tourneys. It was fair though because we had enough judges and could play fair. I did see Ink.'s little brother and I did get to play him. I won but I felt kinda guilty but I did not see him getting so upset. Now that I think of it I did play kids under 7 most the time and won, but out of all them I only got one that was kinda upset. However back to the point if you have enough judges you should play in your own tournaments to show your skills.

---

Proud Member of Team Desert Lightning

Hmm... I have mixed feelings about this as well, maybe after the tournament the winner should go against the host and if they beat the host then they get a extra prize? Like a beylauncher grip, or even a beyblade thats just a little worse then the prize of winning the whole tournament.

Im happy in a battle even if I lose which I've done a lot in my last tournamentss
also lossing ,to older or yonger, bladers not dose make make you feel weaker but drives you to train and become a better blader
the point is it just depends on your sportsmanship for this answer
they should
p.s. I hosting my first tournament next week posibly and I don't think that I will place so one thing is that so it depends also on the skill of the blader/hoster that wins not the juddges cheating

I apologize for the Necrobump, but this topic came up on the WBO Facebook, so I'd like to post some thoughts here.


Now, if you look at public record, you see that I have not hosted any WBO sanctioned tournaments. Indeed, I've actually had one tournament I was planning stripped from my, because of my own rashness, and I admit to it. However, that should have no bearing on the following opinion.


Having judged for multiple games (Some on the organized level), including YuGiOh, Magic, Dungeons and Dragons (Causal), as well as Tekken, Smash Bros Brawl, and Halo 3, I find that, no matter the game, the judging staff, with few exceptions, has the same mindset.

Judges do NOT compete in a tournament they are judging.

I've seen a few interesting arguments in this thread, but the one that comes up most is time and money. Judges are NOT paid for their time in Beyblade judging.

Alright, I see the point. Judges take time out of their own day, sometimes their own resources to host a tournament.
Let's reel things back for a second.
As I understand it, one of the WBO's goals is to make Beyblade a competitive hobby for all ages, and all skill levels. It's to increase the awareness of the game, and it's acceptance among other competitive hobbys. (If I'm wrong please correct me)

As such, I think it's appropriate to look at a well known example: Magic the Gathering, and the DCI Judging System.

Wizards of the Coast certifies all judges, in a rigorous process that can take months or longer to break through the lower levels of. While a Level 1 Judge isn't TECHNICALLY that difficult to do, just the practice test to be CONSIDERED for QUALIFICATION for the Level 1 test is difficult as all get-out. Trust me, I've taken it several times.
These judges are expected to, on their own time, with their own resources, then seek out another judge, and apprentice under them for weeks/months/longer at times.
Then, they MAY qualify for a Level 2 Judging Test.
Etc...etc..

The binding factor with the judging program is that, with rare exceptions (maybe none) Judges do so on their own time, for love of the game and for competition. They are not compensated. They also are NOT allowed to compete anytime the register as a judge in the Tournament System. This is WotC policy. To break said policy constitutes "Conflict of Interest" and lessens the atmosphere of fairness. Judges have direct access to brackets (if applicable) seeding, statistics, and data on each player and game. No matter how honest a Judge is perceived, they still choose to step back when they submit themselves as judges. This isn't considered a "punishment" or "payment" or anything. It's considered a privilege to be a judge for the game they love. It means they know the game, it's rules, it's.... so many things. It's a badge of honor.


Another example here is the grassroots movement of competitive video games.
With few exceptions, judges are not paid for their time. They spend their time and their resources to hold a tournament.
With little exception, a judge will not enter his own tournament, for the reasons above. Indeed, with the prevalence of Double Elimination Bracketing and Pools/Seeding in even MINOR tournaments, having a Judge will full access to every aspect of data in the tournament is a major ethical issue.



What I'm purposing here is that a judge shouldn't consider others in their decision to play in a tournament they run. It's just etiquette. Even though the majority of tourneys I've paid attention to in Bey run a Swiss Format, if the game grows as it will, Swiss will no longer be a viable format to run. I believe that, to further the game and prepare for it's future, the WBO's Rules Committee should step in and make a concrete decision on the issue. I believe that a precedent has been set with other games/hobbies, and that the precedent should be followed should the game continue to evolve.

Don't get me wrong. There's nothing wrong with a Judge playing friendlies. Just nothing where there's a major prize up. Heck, have money matches for all I care. It's your money on theirs, and you'll have a middle man. Go for it.

Remember, judges. It's not a punishment to step back from your own tournament, it's a privilege.

(It's past midnight here and not all my thoughts are here. I reserve the right to add to this without changing the original message WHEN I'VE HAD SOME SLEEP >.> )

Good for those organisations. However, our tournaments are not run or organised by a body of staff, they're run and organised by members.

Here's my main point: I'm pretty sure a lot of us wouldn't bother hosting if it wasn't the ONLY way we got to compete, ever.

It's not a conflict of interest unless it's exploitable. The most they could do is rig the blocks or tournament order, which would become quite obvious after a couple of tournaments.

As long as no-one is judging any matches they are competing in (which is something I DO disagree with), and there are enough people looking on to call out anyone who makes a bad decision, it really isn't a big issue. Not big enough to justify the huge drop in tournaments we would see.

Sorry Fragbait, but we're not Wizards of the Coast, and as far as I can tell, you've never competed in a WBO tournament, let alone Organised one. I'm sure some people enjoy that, but it's the fun of being able to play a game we love that is the reason most of us end up hosting, and for a lot of people, the entire motivation for hosting their first tournament is just so that they are able to compete at all.

And before you point out (again) that you have judged tournaments, there's a big difference between judging and organising. Were the question "should people be judging their own battles" I'd certainly be on the No side, but for hosts competing in their own tournaments, at the very least you've ignored the practical aspects in a tradeoff for what you're "used to".

---

th!nkBlargh|H-Code Product List