Having seen the videos you have posted , I will have to point out that these do not replicate match situations.

While it is probably possible that the bey won't self Ko, I will have to point out that the bey does loose a lot of stamina; and on a bad combo that means the situation is even worse.

Also the damage test is assuming that the bey has already touched the ground and is spinning when the other bey is launched on top of that, which is untrue.

 If that were the case then using physics it can be shown that the launcher had to be directly above the other one or that the lauch was super late both of which are illegal. 

In reality a successful Gattyaki just involves disk to layer contact. 

Note im assuming all the current regulations to be followed.

I believe my question is what disincentivize Gattyaki.  

If you check the video in the opening post, that video of a perfectly executed gattyaki, it was hitting a Beyblade already spinning on the stadium floor.

I really do not think that we need to disincentivise Gattyaki

There are many strategies that can counter Gattyaki namely both bladers delaying their launch or changing launcher position at the last second. 

Also it takes a lot of skill to perform Gattyaki as we cannot predict where the other beyblade can land exactly.

I believe my question is what disincentivize Gattyaki.  

If you check the video in the opening post, that video of a perfectly executed gattyaki, it was hitting a Beyblade already spinning on the stadium floor.

I really do not think that we need to disincentivise Gattyaki

There are many strategies that can counter Gattyaki namely both bladers delaying their launch or changing launcher position at the last second. 

Also it takes a lot of skill to perform Gattyaki as we cannot predict where the other beyblade can land exactly.

All I am trying to say is there is this notion that Gattyaki is so high risk and it is disincentivize... well is it really true?   To me, there is little to no reason not to try it right now.  It won’t self KO generally. Shoot too early, get a reshoot. Shoot too late, get a reshoot. Shoot on top your opponent, get a reshoot. 

[font="Source Sans Pro", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]“Also wasn't the point of this thread to discuss about the legality of Gattyaki? If we change the definition then also we won't be answering the crux of the question”[/font]

[font="Source Sans Pro", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Yes and no, if we make the stadium floor the starting point, some forms of gattyaki will become illegal. [/font]

[font="Source Sans Pro", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Also, you can find a good example of tournaments footage of a gattyaki hitting a already spinning bey on the stadium surface.  The video of the perfectly executed Gatdyaki shows this in the OP at 1:38.  This can happen.[/font]

I really do not think that we need to disincentivise Gattyaki

There are many strategies that can counter Gattyaki namely both bladers delaying their launch or changing launcher position at the last second. 

Also it takes a lot of skill to perform Gattyaki as we cannot predict where the other beyblade can land exactly.

All I am trying to say is there is this notion that Gattyaki is so high risk and it is disincentivize... well is it really true? 

[font="Source Sans Pro", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]“Also wasn't the point of this thread to discuss about the legality of Gattyaki? If we change the definition then also we won't be answering the crux of the question”[/font]

[font="Source Sans Pro", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Yes and no, if we make the stadium floor the starting point, some forms of gattyaki will become illegal. [/font]

Well i do certainly believe that Gattyaki is a high risk practice as In match conditions people dont follow the ideal test results as there are a lot of variables such as opponents launch speed, launch angle, launch height momentum of launch, which cannot be determined.  
 

Over so many years of the  WBO I would like to ask has there been any major problems regarding Gattyaki? Don't you think that people would have found this loophole already and would use it unless and until it required actual high skill? 

Having been to many tournaments I can say for certain that Gattyaki is rare and only skilled people can perform it . Also if the opponent has seen you do that then he can easily make a counter strategy.

Sorry if this post comes out a bit harsh. I do think however that I am asking relevant questions.

All I am trying to say is there is this notion that Gattyaki is so high risk and it is disincentivize... well is it really true? 

[font="Source Sans Pro", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]“Also wasn't the point of this thread to discuss about the legality of Gattyaki? If we change the definition then also we won't be answering the crux of the question”[/font]

[font="Source Sans Pro", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Yes and no, if we make the stadium floor the starting point, some forms of gattyaki will become illegal. [/font]

Well i do certainly believe that Gattyaki is a high risk practice as In match conditions people dont follow the ideal test results as there are a lot of variables such as opponents launch speed, launch angle, launch height momentum of launch, which cannot be determined.  
 

Over so many years of the  WBO I would like to ask has there been any major problems regarding Gattyaki? Don't you think that people would have found this loophole already and would use it unless and until it required actual high skill? 

Having been to many tournaments I can say for certain that Gattyaki is rare and only skilled people can perform it . Also if the opponent has seen you do that then he can easily make a counter strategy.

Sorry if this post comes out a bit harsh. I do think however that I am asking relevant questions.

I would argue the OP video is an example of problem with Gattyaki.  It was illegal
Imo and got a point.

It was not caught by some of the highest ranked players in the world of the WBO.  Some of the most experienced also.

It is simply very hard to judge in its current form.

Well i do certainly believe that Gattyaki is a high risk practice as In match conditions people dont follow the ideal test results as there are a lot of variables such as opponents launch speed, launch angle, launch height momentum of launch, which cannot be determined.  
 

Over so many years of the  WBO I would like to ask has there been any major problems regarding Gattyaki? Don't you think that people would have found this loophole already and would use it unless and until it required actual high skill? 

Having been to many tournaments I can say for certain that Gattyaki is rare and only skilled people can perform it . Also if the opponent has seen you do that then he can easily make a counter strategy.

Sorry if this post comes out a bit harsh. I do think however that I am asking relevant questions.

I would argue the OP video is an example of problem with Gattyaki.  It was illegal
Imo and got a point.

It was not caught by some of the highest ranked players in the world of the WBO.  Some of the most experienced also.

In the next round the person could have changed his launch pattern to compensate. Dont you think so?

Even if this was the final round then I would have personally also launched the bey at the last possible time to prevent such instances. 

Though I can see from your point of view, I cannot seem to agree with it.

I would argue the OP video is an example of problem with Gattyaki.  It was illegal
Imo and got a point.

It was not caught by some of the highest ranked players in the world of the WBO.  Some of the most experienced also.

In the next round the person could have changed his launch pattern to compensate. Dont you think so?

Even if this was the final round then I would have personally also launched the bey at the last possible time to prevent such instances. 

Though I can see from your point of view, I cannot seem to agree with it.

Yes your are correct.  The opponent could have changed his launch.  But the gattyaki was illegal.  Why should it get a point?  Why is it on the opponent to “be better?”

The main issue that I have with Gattyaki, apart from the risk of damage to parts (as Shindog showcased here), is the inherent bending of rules that is required in order to pull it off. I'm aware that I'm probably nitpicking at this point, but I do feel that as many aspects should be considered as possible, given that we have plenty of time to do so considering the world's current situation. 

To quote the BeyWiki definition of Gattyaki: "[font="Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Normally, when the countdowns, “3..2..1.. Let it Rip!” or “3..2..1..Go Shoot!” are chanted, players launch their Beyblade at the R of Rip or the S of Shoot. For this shot, you need to shoot at the P of Rip, or the T of Shoot. If you launch any later than this, it will not be a legal launch."[/font]

This is an incredibly small window, however in Beyblade, even a quarter of a second is a major difference. I don't think most people would pick up on a launch that came a quarter-second later than the rules allow, but in the stadium it has a noticeable effect. In another video that was posted to this thread earlier, you can see the effect that even a miniscule difference in launching times has, shown here at around the 1:37 mark. 

It's primitive, and I'm admittedly not the best at math, but I counted the frames making up one second of video time. This video was shot at 30 Frames per Second. Counting the frames between when the victim starts their launch, and when the Gattyaki is launched, it comes out to somewhere between 11 and 12 frames, which is roughly equivalent to 1/3rd of a second. (If counting the frames between when the victim's bey leaves the launcher and when the Gattyaki is launched, it comes out to between 4 and 5 frames, which is about 1/6th of a second)
(Edit: While reviewing the clip, I noticed that the victim launched before the "G" of "Go Shoot", while the Gattyaki is launched sometime during the "Shoot" [Exact timing is unintelligible, as the "Shoot" is muffled by the sounds from launching and bey impact]. Regardless of this discrepancy, I'm going to leave my findings as, while technically invalidated, they still show the difference that a fraction of a second can make.)

Moving on to the topic of Risk VS Reward, Shindog demonstrated here that even when aiming for the pocket, it's not easy to self-ko while launching. They also demonstrated that in most cases, your launcher will get very close to, if not cross, the invisible boundary between bladers. I'd also like to bring attention to the shape and orientation of the Burst Standard Stadium, which, by being effectively asymmetrical, means that one player may be launching towards a wall while the other is launching towards a pocket (if performing Gattyaki). Also notable is the current size of most beys, which are a magnitude larger than the original single and dual-layer beys that the stadium was designed for. Because of the current size of both the beys and the stadium, Gattyaki is probably easier than ever to perform successfully. 

I can understand where people are coming from when they say that Gattyaki should stay, and honestly, I'd probably be okay with it staying legal, considering how much the topic has been discussed. However, I do feel that it still needs to be seriously considered, and that it shouldn't stay legal simply because "It's always been legal, so why change it now, when it was never a problem before?"


Anyway, uh, thank you for coming to my Tangent Ted Talk.

These Ted talks do be kind of long. I would read them if they weren’t so long just saying

These Ted talks do be kind of long. I would read them if they weren’t so long just saying

I'd rather make one long post where each point relates to the previous point, rather than post each point separately without context and get warned for multi-posting.

I also don’t think disk to layer contact is likely to damage beyblades during Gattyaki.  I do know that driver, specifically Charge Metal, to layer contact will damage the layer it lands on.  What I have shown in my video of the damage Cm can cause I have repeated a few times  just to be sure.  It will happen. It isn’t a lot of damage and sometimes it really looks just like chipped paint,  but sometimes small chucks of plastic will be removed by Cm. Cm is shaped like a hole punch after all and some visible “damage” will happen every  time.

Here is what I am talking about:
https://youtu.be/7lePUHDUiXE

While I support the idea of landing on the stadium surface as the starting point of the battle, I do not think we can stop this type of damage cause by Cm completely unless we ban Cm.  Also beyblades are so heavy now that other metal tips might be able to do this.  We can’t completely stop drivers from landing on layers, and  I do believe damage is part of the game.  I guess the argument here  is should we disincentivize this.  To be clear, I don’t want to see Cm banned personally.  I find this to be an acceptable level of damage.  If Gattyaki is going to be disincentivized, damage is not the reason for me personally.

But yes, as you saw in the video I used Solomon chip to drop on a Valkerie chip and not the other way around 😅

Is this only the case for Charge Metal? That would make it just another Synchrom M145 MS scenario, so while sure I guess that can cause noticeable damage I also agree with what you're saying in the second paragraph about damage just being a part of the game sometimes, especially in the case of Burst where the tops explode and can basically be hit in any place on any part of the opponent after doing so. Paint will get chipped, plastic will dent or get scratches and stress marks.

Do you believe Cm could punch through the hole in the stadium if launched hard enough? I'd be more worried about that personally, since as Vtryuga said I can't imagine a launching situation where one Beyblade's Driver lands in the center of its opponent's Layer to be very common, even in the case of an intentional attempt at sniping.

I would like to point out this as stated in the OP:

“Note: Upon further investigation, this definition is not entirely accurate historically (regarding Gattyaki).

The goal of Gattyaki is not to land on top of your opponent, but to get a one-hit KO with the momentum of your shot. “

Landing on the stadium floor and gliding across to hit your opponent is still very skillful, is it not?  Perhaps even more skillfully?   And this would still be perfectly legal even if both beys have to touch the stadium surface first.  Gattyaki will still be here either way.

Well, yes. Which is why I don't see why people would make such a big deal to distinguish a mid-air snipe from this. Are they not essentially the same technique? Why does the floor of the stadium make such a big difference? Why does it need to?

All I am trying to say is there is this notion that Gattyaki is so high risk and it is disincentivize... well is it really true? 

Well i do certainly believe that Gattyaki is a high risk practice as In match conditions people dont follow the ideal test results as there are a lot of variables such as opponents launch speed, launch angle, launch height momentum of launch, which cannot be determined.  

I think we might be seeing risk as two different things in this here scenario: you think that it's risky because in a situation with unknown variables the chances of success go down, while Shindog and I think that it is not risky because the punishment for failing is generally not worse than for having not attempted it at all.

In the next round the person could have changed his launch pattern to compensate. Dont you think so?

Even if this was the final round then I would have personally also launched the bey at the last possible time to prevent such instances. 

Though I can see from your point of view, I cannot seem to agree with it.

Yes your are correct.  The opponent could have changed his launch.  But the gattyaki was illegal.  Why should it get a point?  Why is it on the opponent to “be better?”

Ok, so it's not about whether the Gattyaki was successful or not, or whether it  could've been countered. That doesn't matter because the launch was illegal as it cross the middle of the stadium. What is the protocol for penalizing an illegal launch then? Generally, if it's a match I'm judging, I give a verbal warning the first time, and only start giving points to opponents if the player doesn't attempt to be more mindful of the rule afterwards. Of course, 'intent to Gattyaki' wouldn't be a  factor in this decision making process for me, but it would for others, so we need some way to standardize this.

This is why I think the fault system that also comes from Tennis (the game LazerBeamz referenced) would  be great for handling this situation, where players get a 'fault' from an illegal or missed launch, and if it happens twice in a row, the opponent will earn a point. The WBBA also uses a similar system, but with 3 'strikes' over the course of a match as opposed to 2 'faults' in one round (same concept, different sports analogy), and because of this they are more forgiving than the WBO is for stadium misses and what's considered eligible for a reshoot (in some regions I believe even non-contact KOs are eligible). Many of the WBO rule standardizations in the past (Swiss format, unlimited reshoots, and eventually P3C1 have pushed them towards being more "forgiving" of players, so I don't think this is particularly out of place in that aspect.

If a player breaks any of the rules of what constitutes a legal launch, or does not land in the PPA, rather than their opponent automatically gaining a point, their opponent only gains a temporary half-point. I feel like this is a fair way to punish launching infractions as well as be more forgiving to stadium misses, regardless of the intent behind them.

---

Wombat I don’t believe Cm can punch through the stadium floor from 30 cm.  Maybe Cm can dent it or maybe put a stress mark in it.  I don’t know for sure, but I also think the stadium floor has a bit more “give” than the layer/chip.

---

Okay I tried it on the stadium guard.  Stadium is quite bouncy.  Cm cannot hole punch it, probably .

https://youtu.be/C8vbbBIaPMI

---

I would like to point out this as stated in the OP:

“Note: Upon further investigation, this definition is not entirely accurate historically (regarding Gattyaki).

The goal of Gattyaki is not to land on top of your opponent, but to get a one-hit KO with the momentum of your shot. “

Landing on the stadium floor and gliding across to hit your opponent is still very skillful, is it not?  Perhaps even more skillfully?   And this would still be perfectly legal even if both beys have to touch the stadium surface first.  Gattyaki will still be here either way.

Well, yes. Which is why I don't see why people would make such a big deal to distinguish a mid-air snipe from this. Are they not essentially the same technique? Why does the floor of the stadium make such a big difference? Why does it need to?

The drivers’ interaction with the stadium floor is one of if not the most important aspects of the game to me. It is fundamental to the game in my opinion.  Keep’ wont help with KO defense much while in the air.  X’ won’t improve your attack much if you are just dropping it on someone.  

The stadium surface is also a visible, physical starting point vs the invisible starting point of leaving the launcher.

The double fault system I do think is a good idea.  WBBA utilizes a similar system:

• In the same battle, when you miss shoot a total of 2 times, your opponent will get 1 point and move on to the next battle.
  

13 - for (me, OnlyCanBeOne, AirKingNeo, kai edits, BuilderRob, Vtryuga, Lugiamaster0249, Phantomflame, NAP, Wombat, bassraven, The Blacknight, LazerBeamz, YishYash)

19 - against (BreakerDs, g2_, BladerGem, CitrusNinja3, Needforspeed, Flame-Byxis, #Fafnir, Bladerbuilder, DeltaZakuro, Cat-Daddy, Valtryek Aoi, GeneriCringe, SunBlader98, ZeroYiggs, Mikuri, eigerblader, MagikHorse, FireKingArd, andowantsfood)

12 - for (me, OnlyCanBeOne, AirKingNeo, kai edits, BuilderRob, Vtryuga, Lugiamaster0249, Phantomflame, NAP, Wombat, bassraven, The Blacknight)

20 - against (BreakerDs, g2_, BladerGem, CitrusNinja3, Needforspeed, Flame-Byxis, #Fafnir, Bladerbuilder, DeltaZakuro, Cat-Daddy, Valtryek Aoi, GeneriCringe, SunBlader98, ZeroYiggs, Mikuri, eigerblader, MagikHorse, FireKingArd, andowantsfood, LazerBeamz)

I wouldn't put me down for against. In my post I mentioned that I am all for gattyaki, but we need to define the PPA first and create parameters for what constitutes a legal gattyaki. I think the issue is definitely more complex than just yes/no, but I appreciate you capturing data!

Here are some comments (direct quotes) I got from our WBO members  who play in the WBBA system.  Just thought it would be interesting to hear their perspective:

Papabey

“I feel that a mid-air snipe is a cheap win because I place a lot more weight on the custom combos and deck preparation. Therefore, having both combos land on the stadium floor and travel a noticeable amount would "legitimize" the work and planning done for both combos rather than just throwing all the work done on the combos by someone winning via a mid-air collision. An example would be a combo planned to maximize its weight, if it gets KO'ed legitimately, I can accept that. Kudos to the opponent. However, if it gets KO'ed mid-air, especially by a "lighter" combo, it would be deflating

If I won, by pure chance, on a mid-air snipe, it won't be as rewarding. If I gambled wrong, say I put a left spin At combo in the 3rd round and got a right spin Bearing as an opponent, that's on me. However, if I'm able to pull off the legal snipe I mentioned earlier, then it would be very rewarding. *The opponent wouldn't also feel cheated as he/she knew that his/her Bearing combo is the overwhelming favorite that was then "legitimized" by being able to travel a noticeble length on the stadium. But because his/her opponent was able/fortunate to execute a KO 'the right way'”

KingSpin

“What papabey said I guess. We don’t want the game to devolve into a sniping game instead of making good combos to win”

12 - for (me, OnlyCanBeOne, AirKingNeo, kai edits, BuilderRob, Vtryuga, Lugiamaster0249, Phantomflame, NAP, Wombat, bassraven, The Blacknight)

20 - against (BreakerDs, g2_, BladerGem, CitrusNinja3, Needforspeed, Flame-Byxis, #Fafnir, Bladerbuilder, DeltaZakuro, Cat-Daddy, Valtryek Aoi, GeneriCringe, SunBlader98, ZeroYiggs, Mikuri, eigerblader, MagikHorse, FireKingArd, andowantsfood, LazerBeamz)

I wouldn't put me down for against. In my post I mentioned that I am all for gattyaki, but we need to define the PPA first and create parameters for what constitutes a legal gattyaki. I think the issue is definitely more complex than just yes/no, but I appreciate you capturing data!

Thanks for telling me. The posts tend to be really long so I just skim through it. I will place you in it should be allowed as you still wish for the concept to be there.

I've been looking at this thread for a while. Personally, I think it should stay in the game. This could be a final resort if your in a bad matchup and adds a bit more excitement and possibilities to the game. If it is apart of the game, we should definitely have some rules added to classify what is a legal gattyaki.

---

Spoiler (Click to View)

I've been looking at this thread for a while. Personally, I think it should stay in the game. This could be a final resort if your in a bad matchup and adds a bit more excitement and possibilities to the game.  If it is apart of the game, we should definitely have some rules added to classify what is a legal gattyaki.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.  Would you care to comment on what types of rules you would like to see added and what in your mind classify as a legal gattyaki?  I do think the conversation at this point has become more of “what a legal gattyaki should be?”

i dont have the actual rules in front of me, but arn't the rules along the lines of "both players need to launch AT THE SAME TIME" ?
arn't both players supposed to launch at "RIP" (or "SHOOT") ?

if the theory is Gattyaki is a technique initiated by purposefully trying to launch late, isn't that against the rules?

if this starts getting into a slowmotion RRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIPPPPPPPPP and you're saying Gattyaki means launching at the end of the "P" when your opponent happened to launch on the "R" it sounds kind of fishy to me. then everyone should just start their launch at the end of RIP (or Shoot) and if Gattyaki happens then that player did not launch in time?

its just my understanding has always been, both players are launching at the same time, and Gattyaki in theory is about launching late.
I like the idea of "final resort in a bad matchup" but in fairness i don't like the idea of skirting/bending/breaking rules to do it.

i dont have the actual rules in front of me, but arn't the rules along the lines of "both players need to launch AT THE SAME TIME" ?
arn't both players supposed to launch at "RIP" (or "SHOOT") ?

if the theory is Gattyaki is a technique initiated by purposefully trying to launch late, isn't that against the rules?

if this starts getting into a slowmotion RRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIPPPPPPPPP and you're saying Gattyaki means launching at the end of the "P" when your opponent happened to launch on the "R" it sounds kind of fishy to me. then everyone should just start their launch at the end of RIP (or Shoot) and if Gattyaki happens then that player did not launch in time?

its just my understanding has always been, both players are launching at the same time, and Gattyaki in theory is about launching late.
I like the idea of "final resort in a bad matchup" but in fairness i don't like the idea of skirting/bending/breaking rules to do it.

The rulebook says "Both bladers must simultaneously launch their Beyblades as the word 'shoot' is called." which is weird wording. "Simultaneously" implies that both Bladers must launch at the same time, but it's hard to determine how exact that needs to be. The most common (and likely intended) interpretation of this statement is that both players need to launch during the word "shoot" in "Go Shoot" because that's easier to ensure.

---

[font="Proxima Nova Regular", "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif][/font]

Tbh I don't think this should be allowed.... If you were to permit this then im pretty sure it would complicate player space and launching violations.... Also it would increase the chances of mislaunchs and launches with no contact which will prolong the tournament, moreover, there is a higher chance of hitting the stadium and damaging it than gaining one point or two.... I just believe the cons out way the pros

Well, yes. Which is why I don't see why people would make such a big deal to distinguish a mid-air snipe from this. Are they not essentially the same technique? Why does the floor of the stadium make such a big difference? Why does it need to?

The drivers’ interaction with the stadium floor is one of if not the most important aspects of the game to me. It is fundamental to the game in my opinion.  Keep’ wont help with KO defense much while in the air.  X’ won’t improve your attack much if you are just dropping it on someone.  

The stadium surface is also a visible, physical starting point vs the invisible starting point of leaving the launcher.

That's a good answer that I didn't think of and I guess I can't really argue with it. If you look at it as contact (with the floor) vs non-contact (with the floor), it would make sense to look at it differently since that's what we do for Non contact KOs when the party that wasn't contacted was one of the opponents, though I think the distinction of contact only applies in Deck format.

Would this mean that a Beyblade must come into contact with both the floor of the stadium and the opponent in order for the round to be considered "valid"? Currently, I think non-contact (with the opponent) KOs count for 1 point in Deck Format, where contact KOs may be worth 2, and 1 point in first stage, where contact KOs are worth 1. So our policy on both non-contacts as of right now is kind of just "tough luck". Does that need to change?

Here are some comments (direct quotes) I got from our WBO members  who play in the WBBA system.  Just thought it would be interesting to hear their perspective:

Papabey

“I feel that a mid-air snipe is a cheap win because I place a lot more weight on the custom combos and deck preparation. Therefore, having both combos land on the stadium floor and travel a noticeable amount would "legitimize" the work and planning done for both combos rather than just throwing all the work done on the combos by someone winning via a mid-air collision. An example would be a combo planned to maximize its weight, if it gets KO'ed legitimately, I can accept that. Kudos to the opponent. However, if it gets KO'ed mid-air, especially by a "lighter" combo, it would be deflating

If I won, by pure chance, on a mid-air snipe, it won't be as rewarding. If I gambled wrong, say I put a left spin At combo in the 3rd round and got a right spin Bearing as an opponent, that's on me. However, if I'm able to pull off the legal snipe I mentioned earlier, then it would be very rewarding. *The opponent wouldn't also feel cheated as he/she knew that his/her Bearing combo is the overwhelming favorite that was then "legitimized" by being able to travel a noticeble length on the stadium. But because his/her opponent was able/fortunate to execute a KO 'the right way'”

KingSpin

“What papabey said I guess. We don’t want the game to devolve into a sniping game instead of making good combos to win”

Now that I don't really see contact with the floor as just some arbitrary divider anymore, I can definitely understand Papabey's point a lot clearer than before. I would definitely not feel "legitimized" playing a Attack vs. Defense matchup, where attack self KOs 3 times, from either side. I guess what may be the distinction between a mid-air snipe and a self KO is the feeling of  "the opponent beat me" as opposed to "I lost" - which I think is the same feeling that causes our rulings to try and incentivize and reward "active" playstyles like attack.

Though I feel like expanding "attack" to "active playstyles" would suggest that it would devolve into the sniping game KingSpin says, I was going to bring up that Gattyaki only really becomes a viable option pretty much after anything else, and in pretty much any case you'd have a better chance just trying to use attack.

But I wonder are situations like this more common in the WBBA formats? Like, their rules for deck construction are almost the same as ours, if you look at any two decks how many unwinnable matchups exist within those six combos? Most of the time, they play all 3 combos and don't really have any say in which combo fights which. So statistically, those would be much more common in the WBBA format, so there would be more rounds where players have a motive to snipe.

But they would also be more temporary and the results of them less catascrophic. Unwinnable matchup in WBBA or WBO Deck? It lasts 1 round, maybe 2 in WBO deck if the loser replays, and generally is not the deciding factor of the match. Most of the time, the round ends, and one or both players switches to a different combo with a different matchup.

Unwinnable matchup in WBO first stage is pain lasts 3 rounds, and generally is the deciding factor of the match, meaning that there are some times where - as I paraphrased before - "you've won the game without playing the game". In the first stage, you don't have your "metagaming" agency to help you once you're attached, so after you lose once, you have two more chances to rely on your "Beyblade skills" to change the course of the match - which includes, at times, sniping.

Before 2017, Entire WBO tournaments were done in First Stage Double Blind format, and this was the standard since a long time before that, so this was definitely an environment that encouraged sniping, at least to a greater degree than WBBA format did. This difference in the rules between the WBO and WBBA could be what caused our diverging opinions on sniping as a tactic.

i dont have the actual rules in front of me, but arn't the rules along the lines of "both players need to launch AT THE SAME TIME" ?
arn't both players supposed to launch at "RIP" (or "SHOOT") ?

if the theory is Gattyaki is a technique initiated by purposefully trying to launch late, isn't that against the rules?

if this starts getting into a slowmotion RRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIPPPPPPPPP and you're saying Gattyaki means launching at the end of the "P" when your opponent happened to launch on the "R" it sounds kind of fishy to me. then everyone should just start their launch at the end of RIP (or Shoot) and if Gattyaki happens then that player did not launch in time?

its just my understanding has always been, both players are launching at the same time, and Gattyaki in theory is about launching late.
I like the idea of "final resort in a bad matchup" but in fairness i don't like the idea of skirting/bending/breaking rules to do it.

The rulebook says "Both bladers must simultaneously launch their Beyblades as the word 'shoot' is called." which is weird wording. "Simultaneously" implies that both Bladers must launch at the same time, but it's hard to determine how exact that needs to be. The most common (and likely intended) interpretation of this statement is that both players need to launch during the word "shoot" in "Go Shoot" because that's easier to ensure.

I agree with this, you basically said what I was going to say. I don't doubt that the intention of the rule is for both players to launch perfectly simultaneously. However, if we go down to the more granular levels of, as myself and BladerGem have done, we all know that that's impossible - not even pro athletes will start within the same frame after hearing a buzzer. So, fundamentally, you need to have enough leeway for players to launch within an acceptable time distance within each other. What would be considered an acceptable time distance? The best answer we have for now is what's in the rule book, 'how ever long it takes the judge to say shoot'. I actually timed myself saying 'shoot' several times and it seems to take about 4/5 of a second, which both of the intervals calculated beforehand would fit within.

I agree with the point about skirting/bending/breaking the rules as a final resort in a bad matchup but I really don't think this qualifies. IMO it's more along the lines of understanding how the rules work and creating an Emergent Gameplay Solution within them.

---

Before 2017, Entire WBO tournaments were done in First Stage Double Blind format, and this was the standard since a long time before that, so this was definitely an environment that encouraged sniping, at least to a greater degree than WBBA format did. This difference in the rules between the WBO and WBBA could be what caused our diverging opinions on sniping as a tactic.

This is a really good point.  I do have a solution at least in my mind, but I don’t think this thread is the right place or right time to discuss it. I have shared some of what I envision WBO stage one could be like internally, just recently.  I don’t think it will work anyway until Project AIDA is further along.  I am still thinking things through a bit.  That is my solution to the snipe promoting environment, time eating infinite LAD draws, ability to use the best gimmick in the game and etc.

I've been looking at this thread for a while. Personally, I think it should stay in the game. This could be a final resort if your in a bad matchup and adds a bit more excitement and possibilities to the game.  If it is apart of the game, we should definitely have some rules added to classify what is a legal gattyaki.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.  Would you care to comment on what types of rules you would like to see added and what in your mind classify as a legal gattyaki?  I do think the conversation at this point has become more of “what a legal gattyaki should be?”

I think definitely there is gonna be an issue with launch timing. Both bladers must launch at roughly the same time and both beys must initially have contact with either the stadium floor or the opponent's bey for the match to be counted. There is also the chance of damaging the opponent's bey and that could be a higher risk with certain parts. We could have a list of parts that you're not allowed to snipe with and have a penalty in place if they are used to snipe but that could be a bit too much.

---

Spoiler (Click to View)

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.  Would you care to comment on what types of rules you would like to see added and what in your mind classify as a legal gattyaki?  I do think the conversation at this point has become more of “what a legal gattyaki should be?”

I think definitely there is gonna be an issue with launch timing. Both bladers must launch at roughly the same time and both beys must initially have contact with either the stadium floor or the opponent's bey for the match to be counted. There is also the chance of damaging the opponent's bey and that could be a higher risk with certain parts. We could have a list of parts that you're not allowed to snipe with and have a penalty in place if they are used to snipe but that could be a bit too much.

I agree judging timing of launch can be a pretty challenging task for judges.  I am still of the opinion that the stadium surface as a visible starting line helps with judging.  

With damage, I have already given my view that damage is an inevitable part of the game.  However, I do agree we should try to minimize damage. A good example is the 12 disk rule. You have to use 12 disk with a frame.  It isn’t impossible for 12 disk to lose its frame during battle and still damage something but it is highly unlikely.  This is a good rule in my opinion.   The rule still allows players to use the 12 disk that they paid for, but also minimized chance of damage.  While I don’t think damage should be the reason to force a Gattyaki user  to have to hit the floor of the stadium first, it will probably help further limit that rare chance of damage even more.  Landing directly on top of your opponent with your driver isn’t common but definitely can happen.  If we make drop snipe an invalid launch strategy I think we could limit occurrence even more.   Again, I don’t think preventing damage should be a main reason to start the battle at the stadium surface.  Preventing damage is more of a side effect that players may welcome.  The main reason for me is still that drivers (and really the whole combo) deserves a chance to interact with the stadium floor, and it is just easier to judge a fair beginning of the battle if both beyblades have to hit the surface first.   

I also agree that banning/punishing certain parts for being used sniping might be a bit much.

I think definitely there is gonna be an issue with launch timing. Both bladers must launch at roughly the same time and both beys must initially have contact with either the stadium floor or the opponent's bey for the match to be counted. There is also the chance of damaging the opponent's bey and that could be a higher risk with certain parts. We could have a list of parts that you're not allowed to snipe with and have a penalty in place if they are used to snipe but that could be a bit too much.

  The rule still allows players to use the 12 disk that they paid for

I’m sorry- but who would pay for a 12 disk? Like, a 12 disk on it’s own. Not on wV or hS. Lol

---