I would Like to take a moment (Now that I have some time from work.) to comment about Allen Schaffer's triple Xtreme deck as well as my new thoughts on the Driver Variant Rule, after THE CIRCUT event in Virgina this past weekend hosted by StayCool. When it comes to Allen’s triple Xtreme deck in the finals he only did it because he made a silly bet with myself, geetster99, Sniper, and a couple others that were going to the event where if he made it to the finals match he would use triple Xtreme. To be honest none of us had taken him seriously, nor did we care if he actually did it. But after the event was over and we were in the car ride home Allen stated many times how he regreted his decision to do it, and that he should have just stuck with the double Drift deck he used in top 8 and top 4. Take that however you wish, I just wanted to clarify why he chose to use the triple Xtreme in the final match.

Now on the topic of the Driver Variant Rule. I will say that after this past weekend my view on the rule has changed a bit from where it was. I am still on the side of I want to see the rule in place. However, I am not to the far extreme as I was. From talking with geetster99 at the event he brought up a good point that ultimately, it’s a choice to use toxic decks like double Drift or double Bearing. However, we also talked about how at a competitive level if the statistics show that a double Drift deck can easily get you to the finals with minimal effort why wouldn’t a competitive player that is there to win the tournament do that? That’s like going to a Yu-Gi-Oh!! Tournament and playing a tier 3 deck against everyone else playing tier 1 decks. You’re going to the tournament to win, and if you put yourself at that much of a dissadvantage youre not gonna have a good time when you lose a lot. Yes, the spirit of the game is to have fun. But a tournament is still a competition, and some people have money invested into the game and they would like to try and win some of it back.

Now that I have made that point, I will say that watching the double Drift strategy in action by more than just 1 blader in the top 8 (We had 3 people do it and 2 of them made it to top 4.) I have thought long and hard about different ways to counter the strategy as well as examined the top parts used for the strategy. I can safely say I think the strategy isn’t as overpowered as I first thought it was. However, I will say that if enough people decide to use this strategy tournaments runtime will be way to long and judges will have a hard time determining winners. We had several battles where we ended up needing 3 different judges to look at the slow-motion video to determine weather a bey was still spinning or falling or turning and each judge would have a different result so we would be forced to call them ties. At this point I’m not even going to say the Driver Variants or even the players are the problem anymore. But, rather this boils down to the definition of “Spinning” that we have in the rule book, as well as the WBO Deck format itself. None of the other formats, Weather it be 3v3, P3C1, or even Single Bey has the issues that WBO Deck does. So maybe now we should be looking into a new format to use for the top cut? Maybe a simple 5v5 format similar to the WBBA’s 5G format?

I will make one side note as to why I still Like the Driver Variant rule. I just think it brings more creativity to the game and Beyblade combos. When you can just always use drivers that preform the same as another variant of itself, that just makes things a little boring to me. Even though Drivers like High Xtend+’ and Zone’+Z can act similar to Bearing/Bearing’, they still do not act 100% the same as Bearing/Bearing’. Anyways sorry for the long explanation but I wanted to get this out there so people know that my opinion has changed a little bit, since I have been one of the biggest voices on this topic.

---

At this point I’m not even going to say the Driver Variants or even the players are the problem anymore. But, rather this boils down to the definition of “Spinning” that we have in the rule book, as well as the WBO Deck format itself. None of the other formats, Weather it be 3v3, P3C1, or even Single Bey has the issues that WBO Deck does. So maybe now we should be looking into a new format to use for the top cut? Maybe a simple 5v5 format similar to the WBBA’s 5G format?

Interesting take, though I do have one question: What is the problem you speak of with WBO Deck Format? The absence of the tie rule, I assume? If so, what would be your suggested solution to the issue, aside from swapping to another format like 5G? Nothing against 5G or anything, I just fear that 5G may turn away players who may not necessarily have the parts to form five competition-worthy combinations.

---

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

I would Like to take a moment (Now that I have some time from work.) to comment about Allen Schaffer's triple Xtreme deck as well as my new thoughts on the Driver Variant Rule, after THE CIRCUT event in Virgina this past weekend hosted by StayCool. When it comes to Allen’s triple Xtreme deck in the finals he only did it because he made a silly bet with myself, geetster99, Sniper, and a couple others that were going to the event where if he made it to the finals match he would use triple Xtreme. To be honest none of us had taken him seriously, nor did we care if he actually did it. But after the event was over and we were in the car ride home Allen stated many times how he regreted his decision to do it, and that he should have just stuck with the double Drift deck he used in top 8 and top 4. Take that however you wish, I just wanted to clarify why he chose to use the triple Xtreme in the final match.

Now on the topic of the Driver Variant Rule. I will say that after this past weekend my view on the rule has changed a bit from where it was. I am still on the side of I want to see the rule in place. However, I am not to the far extreme as I was. From talking with geetster99 at the event he brought up a good point that ultimately, it’s a choice to use toxic decks like double Drift or double Bearing. However, we also talked about how at a competitive level if the statistics show that a double Drift deck can easily get you to the finals with minimal effort why wouldn’t a competitive player that is there to win the tournament do that? That’s like going to a Yu-Gi-Oh!! Tournament and playing a tier 3 deck against everyone else playing tier 1 decks. You’re going to the tournament to win, and if you put yourself at that much of a dissadvantage youre not gonna have a good time when you lose a lot. Yes, the spirit of the game is to have fun. But a tournament is still a competition, and some people have money invested into the game and they would like to try and win some of it back.

Now that I have made that point, I will say that watching the double Drift strategy in action by more than just 1 blader in the top 8 (We had 3 people do it and 2 of them made it to top 4.) I have thought long and hard about different ways to counter the strategy as well as examined the top parts used for the strategy. I can safely say I think the strategy isn’t as overpowered as I first thought it was. However, I will say that if enough people decide to use this strategy tournaments runtime will be way to long and judges will have a hard time determining winners. We had several battles where we ended up needing 3 different judges to look at the slow-motion video to determine weather a bey was still spinning or falling or turning and each judge would have a different result so we would be forced to call them ties. At this point I’m not even going to say the Driver Variants or even the players are the problem anymore. But, rather this boils down to the definition of “Spinning” that we have in the rule book, as well as the WBO Deck format itself. None of the other formats, Weather it be 3v3, P3C1, or even Single Bey has the issues that WBO Deck does. So maybe now we should be looking into a new format to use for the top cut? Maybe a simple 5v5 format similar to the WBBA’s 5G format?

I will make one side note as to why I still Like the Driver Variant rule. I just think it brings more creativity to the game and Beyblade combos. When you can just always use drivers that preform the same as another variant of itself, that just makes things a little boring to me. Even though Drivers like High Xtend+’ and Zone’+Z can act similar to Bearing/Bearing’, they still do not act 100% the same as Bearing/Bearing’. Anyways sorry for the long explanation but I wanted to get this out there so people know that my opinion has changed a little bit, since I have been one of the biggest voices on this topic.

I think it is and interesting angle to look at winning at a competitive event in the light of the driver variant rule.  I only did a quick look back, but to my eyes, the decks that actually won ultimately since the topic of double bearing/drift got brought up, did not employ double bearing or double drift as a strategy as far as I can tell.  Obviously, when the variant driver rule was in place ppl couldn’t.  Then the rule got lifted and ppl still didn’t win with double bearing and double drift as far as I can tell.  Now, I don’t know if it is being suggested that had friedpasta faced a double bearing or a double drift deck the final standing would have changed? Did he face a double bearing or double drift deck somewhere in the top 8? (Just confirmed with pasta and he did beat a double drift deck at this event and a double bearing deck some months back.  Take that however anyone wants to but I guess double variants can and does lose) 

These are the last few winning decks since the rule
got lifted:

1st Lowshki
Guilty Lonignus Giga Xtreme’ 2 (final stage)
Vanish Fafnir Over Bearing’ 3 (both stages)
Dynamite Belial F-gear Tapered Drift (final stage)

Friedpasta 1st Place
Dynamite Valkyrie Tapered Br' 0 3v3 format only 
Vanish Longinus Gg HXt+' -10 3v3 format only
Vanish Longinus Ov HXt+' -10 3v3 format only
Prominence Perseus Nx+S Dr -10 Finals/Deck Format Only
Dynamite Valkyrie Ov Br' 0 3v3 & Deck Format
Guilty Bahamut Gg Mx -2 Deck Format Only

Small sample size of 2 events but the variant driver rule was put in after the sample size of 1 event and a 3 place finish of a double bearing deck iirc.  So this isn’t so bad of a sample size I guess. 
I won’t argue if there is a lot of creativity here or not, but it does look like even without the variant driver rule, the winners didn’t employ the variant driver strategy to actually win?  Both these events did consist of decks that had double bearing/drifts i believed, those just didn’t win it all. I do feel like if we are going to say some strategy is too easy to win with, we should actually see or wait to see that strategy is indeed too easy to win with.  Also, looking at these 2 decks that won it all, how does the variant driver really affect the decks or how could the rule make them more “creative?”

I am just not sure being “creative” is the right thing to force.  After all, KO attack is not very creative at all.  Doesn’t matter how many variants of xtremes you allow.  It is pretty much “take good attack layer and put it on basic rubber flat.”  It has been this way for about 20 years. We wouldn’t stop that because of the lack of creativity I don’t think. 

If we don’t need the variant driver rule in place for ppl to not play variant drivers and be very successful, then I don’t really see why it is important to have the rule in place.  As you said, it is a competition.  Lots of players will already gravitate towards what is ultimately the most successful build.  The way I see it, the variant driver rules should only be considered if that was the only way for someone to be successful.  Do people agree with this?  I don’t really know actually. Has double bearing and double drift really been what ppl must do to be successful?  Does a double bearing and a double drift deck really get players to the finals that much more efficiently than a let’s say, Bearing’/Drift/HXt+’ deck? 

Also, I absolutely agree the WBO definitions of “Spinning” is a huge problem.

At this point I’m not even going to say the Driver Variants or even the players are the problem anymore. But, rather this boils down to the definition of “Spinning” that we have in the rule book, as well as the WBO Deck format itself. None of the other formats, Weather it be 3v3, P3C1, or even Single Bey has the issues that WBO Deck does. So maybe now we should be looking into a new format to use for the top cut? Maybe a simple 5v5 format similar to the WBBA’s 5G format?

Interesting take, though I do have one question: What is the problem you speak of with WBO Deck Format? The absence of the tie rule, I assume? If so, what would be your suggested solution to the issue, aside from swapping to another format like 5G? Nothing against 5G or anything, I just fear that 5G may turn away players who may not necessarily have the parts to form five competition-worthy combinations.

To me WBO Deck format itself is the main reason why I had always felt like double Bearing/Drift was going to be as issue. As there was no 3v3 or P3C1 formats allowed for ranked events at the time this whole debate had started. My problem with the format is that you can essentially manipulate and force your opponent into using certain combos and keep yourself 1 point a head all of the time. Now of course that is more so on a perfect world and that is what this weekends event showed me. However, if you have like minded individuals going in with that exact same strategy you run into the issues of draws. WBO deck format has no draw rule to it and that can cause a big issue on time. Maybe an alternative solution would be to have 2 judges watch the match from the start, both recording and go back to the 2 judges say who they thought won and if it’s the same that’s who gets the point but if it’s different then it’s a draw? That rule seemed okay. But the only thing with that is the issue of what does one judge think is spinning or what is rolling or turning. So maybe changing the definition of spinning in the rule book closer to the WBOs where a song as the bet is moving in the same direction as when it was launched it’s still considered spinning?

---

I would Like to take a moment (Now that I have some time from work.) to comment about Allen Schaffer's triple Xtreme deck as well as my new thoughts on the Driver Variant Rule, after THE CIRCUT event in Virgina this past weekend hosted by StayCool. When it comes to Allen’s triple Xtreme deck in the finals he only did it because he made a silly bet with myself, geetster99, Sniper, and a couple others that were going to the event where if he made it to the finals match he would use triple Xtreme. To be honest none of us had taken him seriously, nor did we care if he actually did it. But after the event was over and we were in the car ride home Allen stated many times how he regreted his decision to do it, and that he should have just stuck with the double Drift deck he used in top 8 and top 4. Take that however you wish, I just wanted to clarify why he chose to use the triple Xtreme in the final match.

Now on the topic of the Driver Variant Rule. I will say that after this past weekend my view on the rule has changed a bit from where it was. I am still on the side of I want to see the rule in place. However, I am not to the far extreme as I was. From talking with geetster99 at the event he brought up a good point that ultimately, it’s a choice to use toxic decks like double Drift or double Bearing. However, we also talked about how at a competitive level if the statistics show that a double Drift deck can easily get you to the finals with minimal effort why wouldn’t a competitive player that is there to win the tournament do that? That’s like going to a Yu-Gi-Oh!! Tournament and playing a tier 3 deck against everyone else playing tier 1 decks. You’re going to the tournament to win, and if you put yourself at that much of a dissadvantage youre not gonna have a good time when you lose a lot. Yes, the spirit of the game is to have fun. But a tournament is still a competition, and some people have money invested into the game and they would like to try and win some of it back.

Now that I have made that point, I will say that watching the double Drift strategy in action by more than just 1 blader in the top 8 (We had 3 people do it and 2 of them made it to top 4.) I have thought long and hard about different ways to counter the strategy as well as examined the top parts used for the strategy. I can safely say I think the strategy isn’t as overpowered as I first thought it was. However, I will say that if enough people decide to use this strategy tournaments runtime will be way to long and judges will have a hard time determining winners. We had several battles where we ended up needing 3 different judges to look at the slow-motion video to determine weather a bey was still spinning or falling or turning and each judge would have a different result so we would be forced to call them ties. At this point I’m not even going to say the Driver Variants or even the players are the problem anymore. But, rather this boils down to the definition of “Spinning” that we have in the rule book, as well as the WBO Deck format itself. None of the other formats, Weather it be 3v3, P3C1, or even Single Bey has the issues that WBO Deck does. So maybe now we should be looking into a new format to use for the top cut? Maybe a simple 5v5 format similar to the WBBA’s 5G format?

I will make one side note as to why I still Like the Driver Variant rule. I just think it brings more creativity to the game and Beyblade combos. When you can just always use drivers that preform the same as another variant of itself, that just makes things a little boring to me. Even though Drivers like High Xtend+’ and Zone’+Z can act similar to Bearing/Bearing’, they still do not act 100% the same as Bearing/Bearing’. Anyways sorry for the long explanation but I wanted to get this out there so people know that my opinion has changed a little bit, since I have been one of the biggest voices on this topic.

I think it is and interesting angle to look at winning at a competitive event in the light of the driver variant rule.  I only did a quick look back, but to my eyes, the decks that actually won ultimately since the topic of double bearing/drift got brought up, did not employ double bearing or double drift as a strategy as far as I can tell.  Obviously, when the variant driver rule was in place ppl couldn’t.  Then the rule got lifted and ppl still didn’t win with double bearing and double drift as far as I can tell.  Now, I don’t know if it is being suggested that had friedpasta faced a double bearing or a double drift deck the final standing would have changed? Did he face a double bearing or double drift deck somewhere in the top 8? (Just confirmed with pasta and he did beat a double drift deck at this event and a double bearing deck some months back.  Take that however anyone wants to but I guess double variants can and does lose) 

These are the last few winning decks since the rule
got lifted:

1st Lowshki
Guilty Lonignus Giga Xtreme’ 2 (final stage)
Vanish Fafnir Over Bearing’ 3 (both stages)
Dynamite Belial F-gear Tapered Drift (final stage)

Friedpasta 1st Place
Dynamite Valkyrie Tapered Br' 0 3v3 format only 
Vanish Longinus Gg HXt+' -10 3v3 format only
Vanish Longinus Ov HXt+' -10 3v3 format only
Prominence Perseus Nx+S Dr -10 Finals/Deck Format Only
Dynamite Valkyrie Ov Br' 0 3v3 & Deck Format
Guilty Bahamut Gg Mx -2 Deck Format Only

Small sample size of 2 events but the variant driver rule was put in after the sample size of 1 event and a 3 place finish of a double bearing deck iirc.  So this isn’t so bad of a sample size I guess. 
I won’t argue if there is a lot of creativity here or not, but it does look like even without the variant driver rule, the winners didn’t employ the variant driver strategy to actually win?  Both these events did consist of decks that had double bearing/drifts i believed, those just didn’t win it all. I do feel like if we are going to say some strategy is too easy to win with, we should actually see or wait to see that strategy is indeed too easy to win with.  Also, looking at these 2 decks that won it all, how does the variant driver really affect the decks or how could the rule make them more “creative?”

I am just not sure being “creative” is the right thing to force.  After all, KO attack is not very creative at all.  Doesn’t matter how many variants of xtremes you allow.  It is pretty much “take good attack layer and put it on basic rubber flat.”  It has been this way for about 20 years. We wouldn’t stop that because of the lack of creativity I don’t think. 

If we don’t need the variant driver rule in place for ppl to not play variant drivers and be very successful, then I don’t really see why it is important to have the rule in place.  As you said, it is a competition.  Lots of players will already gravitate towards what is ultimately the most successful build.  The way I see it, the variant driver rules should only be considered if that was the only way for someone to be successful.  Do people agree with this?  I don’t really know actually. Has double bearing and double drift really been what ppl must do to be successful?  Does a double bearing and a double drift deck really get players to the finals that much more efficiently than a let’s say, Bearing’/Drift/HXt+’ deck? 

Also, I absolutely agree the WBO definitions of “Spinning” is a huge problem.

No, I’m not saying that if Allen had used double Drift he would of won. Which is why I’m saying I realized that the multiple drivers aren’t really that bad. However when you do get people using those same strategies and it’s left vs right drift, it really demoralizes people from wanting to judge. Not to mention on top cut you have to keep having the same 2 beys go over and over and over again.

As far as the creativity thing I have mentioned this is something I am more worried about for the future. Now I’m not saying this is a definite going to be a problem thing yet. It’s just something that concerns me. If say more people that make it to top cut start using double drift decks statically the amount of people wining with that deck line up will probably go up. And if that does happen and it keeps happening you will see less and less creativity and individuality. We already get those kinds of issues with disks. Granted we only have what 6 DB disks? And we are in the DB era. So… that’s not a surprise.

---

Interesting take, though I do have one question: What is the problem you speak of with WBO Deck Format? The absence of the tie rule, I assume? If so, what would be your suggested solution to the issue, aside from swapping to another format like 5G? Nothing against 5G or anything, I just fear that 5G may turn away players who may not necessarily have the parts to form five competition-worthy combinations.

To me WBO Deck format itself is the main reason why I had always felt like double Bearing/Drift was going to be as issue. As there was no 3v3 or P3C1 formats allowed for ranked events at the time this whole debate had started. My problem with the format is that you can essentially manipulate and force your opponent into using certain combos and keep yourself 1 point a head all of the time. Now of course that is more so on a perfect world and that is what this weekends event showed me. However, if you have like minded individuals going in with that exact same strategy you run into the issues of draws. WBO deck format has no draw rule to it and that can cause a big issue on time. Maybe an alternative solution would be to have 2 judges watch the match from the start, both recording and go back to the 2 judges say who they thought won and if it’s the same that’s who gets the point but if it’s different then it’s a draw? That rule seemed okay. But the only thing with that is the issue of what does one judge think is spinning or what is rolling or turning. So maybe changing the definition of spinning in the rule book closer to the WBOs where a song as the bet is moving in the same direction as when it was launched it’s still considered spinning?

I agree this is a problem.  As the person who proposed the WBO Video Review Protocol you mentioned, I obviously like that approach but accept that even that isn’t going to solve the problem.  The problem is also nothing new.  This is what really the dreaded cho Z meta is in reality.  Bearing in one spin and Xt+ in the other.  What alleviated the problem of “Cho Z meta?”  Basically judgment and X’. If you have an attacker or 2 (could be even better) that can win 50% or better against same and opposite spin stamina/LAD combos, the math changes.  Ppl back off the “win 1st point and grind you down with LAD approach.”  What will change this even more is going back to a 2 point KO as intended by the manufacturer, but I know not everyone likes that idea.  I do agree judging long LAD matches is soul crushing, but isn’t that why there is a constant effort to buff attack?  There are too many LAD drivers in burst.  Taking away a variant of an LAD driver seems to stop nothing.  Might as well give attack another X or 2? 

As far as creativity goes, how important and sustainable is “creativity?” Especially when artificially trying to force creativity.  I don’t think putting something on X’ is “creative” personally, but is there anything wrong with putting the next man up on X’?   We have been putting something that hits hard on X’ for years.  Been putting something that hits hard on basics rubber flat for 20 years ish.  Some Ppl seem to love it and can’t get enough of it.  I don’t see a problem with people wanting to play exactly that.  In fact, I even think giving them another X is a good idea.  I don’t think I feel a need to force them to play Qc’ or Jl’ or whatever, and be more “creative” if they don’t want to be. 

If the variant driver rule isn’t really going to “fix” anything and having variant drivers “aren’t really that bad,” then why was it in place?  Why do ppl still think we need the rule?  I honestly don’t understand what it is suppose to do.  Seriously, is Hxt+’/Dr/Br’ more “creative” than double bearing and double drift, but I’m just too blind?

Interesting take, though I do have one question: What is the problem you speak of with WBO Deck Format? The absence of the tie rule, I assume? If so, what would be your suggested solution to the issue, aside from swapping to another format like 5G? Nothing against 5G or anything, I just fear that 5G may turn away players who may not necessarily have the parts to form five competition-worthy combinations.

To me WBO Deck format itself is the main reason why I had always felt like double Bearing/Drift was going to be as issue. As there was no 3v3 or P3C1 formats allowed for ranked events at the time this whole debate had started. My problem with the format is that you can essentially manipulate and force your opponent into using certain combos and keep yourself 1 point a head all of the time. Now of course that is more so on a perfect world and that is what this weekends event showed me. However, if you have like minded individuals going in with that exact same strategy you run into the issues of draws. WBO deck format has no draw rule to it and that can cause a big issue on time. Maybe an alternative solution would be to have 2 judges watch the match from the start, both recording and go back to the 2 judges say who they thought won and if it’s the same that’s who gets the point but if it’s different then it’s a draw? That rule seemed okay. But the only thing with that is the issue of what does one judge think is spinning or what is rolling or turning. So maybe changing the definition of spinning in the rule book closer to the WBOs where a song as the bet is moving in the same direction as when it was launched it’s still considered spinning?

Ah, makes sense. I personally haven't participated in an event since late July so I have no experience whatsoever with double bearing/double drift decks, but I've seen some tournament clips on YouTube so I see what you mean. In regards to the definition of spinning, I concur; swapping to the WBBA's ruling of opposite spin matches (Essentially what you suggested) would make judging so much easier and less stressful for both the judge and the organizer.

---

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

To me WBO Deck format itself is the main reason why I had always felt like double Bearing/Drift was going to be as issue. As there was no 3v3 or P3C1 formats allowed for ranked events at the time this whole debate had started. My problem with the format is that you can essentially manipulate and force your opponent into using certain combos and keep yourself 1 point a head all of the time. Now of course that is more so on a perfect world and that is what this weekends event showed me. However, if you have like minded individuals going in with that exact same strategy you run into the issues of draws. WBO deck format has no draw rule to it and that can cause a big issue on time. Maybe an alternative solution would be to have 2 judges watch the match from the start, both recording and go back to the 2 judges say who they thought won and if it’s the same that’s who gets the point but if it’s different then it’s a draw? That rule seemed okay. But the only thing with that is the issue of what does one judge think is spinning or what is rolling or turning. So maybe changing the definition of spinning in the rule book closer to the WBOs where a song as the bet is moving in the same direction as when it was launched it’s still considered spinning?

I agree this is a problem.  As the person who proposed the WBO Video Review Protocol you mentioned, I obviously like that approach but accept that even that isn’t going to solve the problem.  The problem is also nothing new.  This is what really the dreaded cho Z meta is in reality.  Bearing in one spin and Xt+ in the other.  What alleviated the problem of “Cho Z meta?”  Basically judgment and X’. If you have an attacker or 2 (could be even better) that can win 50% or better against same and opposite spin stamina/LAD combos, the math changes.  Ppl back off the “win 1st point and grind you down with LAD approach.”  What will change this even more is going back to a 2 point KO as intended by the manufacturer, but I know not everyone likes that idea.  I do agree judging long LAD matches is soul crushing, but isn’t that why there is a constant effort to buff attack?  There are too many LAD drivers in burst.  Taking away a variant of an LAD driver seems to stop nothing.  Might as well give attack another X or 2? 

As far as creativity goes, how important and sustainable is “creativity?” Especially when artificially trying to force creativity.  I don’t think putting something on X’ is “creative” personally, but is there anything wrong with putting the next man up on X’?   We have been putting something that hits hard on X’ for years.  Been putting something that hits hard on basics rubber flat for 20 years ish.  Some Ppl seem to love it and can’t get enough of it.  I don’t see a problem with people wanting to play exactly that.  In fact, I even think giving them another X is a good idea.  I don’t think I feel a need to force them to play Qc’ or Jl’ or whatever, and be more “creative” if they don’t want to be. 

If the variant driver rule isn’t really going to “fix” anything and having variant drivers “aren’t really that bad,” then why was it in place?  Why do ppl still think we need the rule?  I honestly don’t understand what it is suppose to do.  Seriously, is Hxt+’/Dr/Br’ more “creative” than double bearing and double drift, but I’m just too blind?

(Take this with a grain of salt as I haven't been to a tournament in several years, and thus haven't experienced either the Sparking or DB metas first-hand)

I strongly believe that going back to the 2 point KO rule would help the metagame. The whole point of attack types is to be high risk/high reward, but ATM being skilled with an attack type gives you the same amount of points as grinding people down with LAD. Sure, it sucks if you self-KO, but you can work to alleviate that risk by practicing your launch (now that I think about it, self-KOs only being worth one point helps Drift users a lot, as they can hard-launch with less risk). Unfortunately, there's no way to practice your way into having more LAD than Bearing or Drift.

As it currently stands, attack users have to either net 3 KOs, or pray for a burst, while LAD users can safely shrug off a KO and still win. I feel that reverting back to two-point KOs would help to alleviate both issues.

I agree this is a problem.  As the person who proposed the WBO Video Review Protocol you mentioned, I obviously like that approach but accept that even that isn’t going to solve the problem.  The problem is also nothing new.  This is what really the dreaded cho Z meta is in reality.  Bearing in one spin and Xt+ in the other.  What alleviated the problem of “Cho Z meta?”  Basically judgment and X’. If you have an attacker or 2 (could be even better) that can win 50% or better against same and opposite spin stamina/LAD combos, the math changes.  Ppl back off the “win 1st point and grind you down with LAD approach.”  What will change this even more is going back to a 2 point KO as intended by the manufacturer, but I know not everyone likes that idea.  I do agree judging long LAD matches is soul crushing, but isn’t that why there is a constant effort to buff attack?  There are too many LAD drivers in burst.  Taking away a variant of an LAD driver seems to stop nothing.  Might as well give attack another X or 2? 

As far as creativity goes, how important and sustainable is “creativity?” Especially when artificially trying to force creativity.  I don’t think putting something on X’ is “creative” personally, but is there anything wrong with putting the next man up on X’?   We have been putting something that hits hard on X’ for years.  Been putting something that hits hard on basics rubber flat for 20 years ish.  Some Ppl seem to love it and can’t get enough of it.  I don’t see a problem with people wanting to play exactly that.  In fact, I even think giving them another X is a good idea.  I don’t think I feel a need to force them to play Qc’ or Jl’ or whatever, and be more “creative” if they don’t want to be. 

If the variant driver rule isn’t really going to “fix” anything and having variant drivers “aren’t really that bad,” then why was it in place?  Why do ppl still think we need the rule?  I honestly don’t understand what it is suppose to do.  Seriously, is Hxt+’/Dr/Br’ more “creative” than double bearing and double drift, but I’m just too blind?

(Take this with a grain of salt as I haven't been to a tournament in several years, and thus haven't experienced either the Sparking or DB metas first-hand)

I strongly believe that going back to the 2 point KO rule would help the metagame. The whole point of attack types is to be high risk/high reward, but ATM being skilled with an attack type gives you the same amount of points as grinding people down with LAD. Sure, it sucks if you self-KO, but you can work to alleviate that risk by practicing your launch (now that I think about it, self-KOs only being worth one point helps Drift users a lot, as they can hard-launch with less risk). Unfortunately, there's no way to practice your way into having more LAD than Bearing or Drift.

As it currently stands, attack users have to either net 3 KOs, or pray for a burst, while LAD users can safely shrug off a KO and still win. I feel that reverting back to two-point KOs would help to alleviate both issues.

There are a few little things we can also do to help slightly mitigate the 2 points lost with self KO of attack types such as: 

1) don’t make it 2 points for self KO, keep no contact self KO 1 point, and 
2) amend the current reshoot rule. Go with a double fault system.  If you self KO without contact with an opponent, you get a “fault” and can shoot again. 2nd one is a point for the opponent.  Actually, I wouldn’t mind the entire reshoot system became a double fault system.  Doesn’t matter if it is launcher issue or self KO.  Obstruction should not count tho obviously.

Not perfect, but just some ideas.  Also these are not really novel ideas.  These are adaptations of some of the old rules of some WBBA regions.

Obviously I like 2 point KO rule (especially with mitigation for self-ko). I also think we need to fix our silly rolling stuff right away.
Crisis, I'm glad you're coming around a bit. To be honest I am sure a double dr or br deck will place first in time. It is inevitable. The strategy can function, my concern has always been it just... Isn't significantly more powerful than using a mix instead. Ppl were still ezgaming it to finals with stamina during the rule.
On creativity, people just aren't exploring. Look at classic, c.h.hxt+' does pretty bad things to that format but... No one had done it for a few months after HXt+' released. In Standard there is less room, sure, but there are things I think that haven't been examined sufficiently around same spin stamina at the least, and maybe some other things too. I think part of this is the lack of activity on the forums and competition around combo creation and testing - we used to have a huge culture of this and it lead to some really good times and advancements in formats and our understanding of beyblade as a community. I really want to see that come back. I think things like this may help with the monotony some feel.

---

th!nkBlargh|H-Code Product List

I think it is at least worthwhile to think about going back to 2 point KOs in WBO deck finals and maybe in first stage as well.   I think sometimes we forget that for this generation, beyblade burst, TT designed the parts and the stadiums with 2 point KOs in mind. We don’t have to be just like TT/WBBA, but it doesn’t hurt to think about what they do and what works for them.  After all, they do get to design the toys.

Maybe some of our tournament issues are caused by our off label use?  Not sayin off label use is bad, but also I don’t think we should be too surprised when problems arise with off label use.

I would Like to take a moment (Now that I have some time from work.) to comment about Allen Schaffer's triple Xtreme deck as well as my new thoughts on the Driver Variant Rule, after THE CIRCUT event in Virgina this past weekend hosted by StayCool. When it comes to Allen’s triple Xtreme deck in the finals he only did it because he made a silly bet with myself, geetster99, Sniper, and a couple others that were going to the event where if he made it to the finals match he would use triple Xtreme. To be honest none of us had taken him seriously, nor did we care if he actually did it. But after the event was over and we were in the car ride home Allen stated many times how he regreted his decision to do it, and that he should have just stuck with the double Drift deck he used in top 8 and top 4. Take that however you wish, I just wanted to clarify why he chose to use the triple Xtreme in the final match.

Now on the topic of the Driver Variant Rule. I will say that after this past weekend my view on the rule has changed a bit from where it was. I am still on the side of I want to see the rule in place. However, I am not to the far extreme as I was. From talking with geetster99 at the event he brought up a good point that ultimately, it’s a choice to use toxic decks like double Drift or double Bearing. However, we also talked about how at a competitive level if the statistics show that a double Drift deck can easily get you to the finals with minimal effort why wouldn’t a competitive player that is there to win the tournament do that? That’s like going to a Yu-Gi-Oh!! Tournament and playing a tier 3 deck against everyone else playing tier 1 decks. You’re going to the tournament to win, and if you put yourself at that much of a dissadvantage youre not gonna have a good time when you lose a lot. Yes, the spirit of the game is to have fun. But a tournament is still a competition, and some people have money invested into the game and they would like to try and win some of it back.

Now that I have made that point, I will say that watching the double Drift strategy in action by more than just 1 blader in the top 8 (We had 3 people do it and 2 of them made it to top 4.) I have thought long and hard about different ways to counter the strategy as well as examined the top parts used for the strategy. I can safely say I think the strategy isn’t as overpowered as I first thought it was. However, I will say that if enough people decide to use this strategy tournaments runtime will be way to long and judges will have a hard time determining winners. We had several battles where we ended up needing 3 different judges to look at the slow-motion video to determine weather a bey was still spinning or falling or turning and each judge would have a different result so we would be forced to call them ties. At this point I’m not even going to say the Driver Variants or even the players are the problem anymore. But, rather this boils down to the definition of “Spinning” that we have in the rule book, as well as the WBO Deck format itself. None of the other formats, Weather it be 3v3, P3C1, or even Single Bey has the issues that WBO Deck does. So maybe now we should be looking into a new format to use for the top cut? Maybe a simple 5v5 format similar to the WBBA’s 5G format?

I will make one side note as to why I still Like the Driver Variant rule. I just think it brings more creativity to the game and Beyblade combos. When you can just always use drivers that preform the same as another variant of itself, that just makes things a little boring to me. Even though Drivers like High Xtend+’ and Zone’+Z can act similar to Bearing/Bearing’, they still do not act 100% the same as Bearing/Bearing’. Anyways sorry for the long explanation but I wanted to get this out there so people know that my opinion has changed a little bit, since I have been one of the biggest voices on this topic.

I think it is and interesting angle to look at winning at a competitive event in the light of the driver variant rule.  I only did a quick look back, but to my eyes, the decks that actually won ultimately since the topic of double bearing/drift got brought up, did not employ double bearing or double drift as a strategy as far as I can tell.  Obviously, when the variant driver rule was in place ppl couldn’t.  Then the rule got lifted and ppl still didn’t win with double bearing and double drift as far as I can tell.  Now, I don’t know if it is being suggested that had friedpasta faced a double bearing or a double drift deck the final standing would have changed? Did he face a double bearing or double drift deck somewhere in the top 8? (Just confirmed with pasta and he did beat a double drift deck at this event and a double bearing deck some months back.  Take that however anyone wants to but I guess double variants can and does lose) 

These are the last few winning decks since the rule
got lifted:

1st Lowshki
Guilty Lonignus Giga Xtreme’ 2 (final stage)
Vanish Fafnir Over Bearing’ 3 (both stages)
Dynamite Belial F-gear Tapered Drift (final stage)

Friedpasta 1st Place
Dynamite Valkyrie Tapered Br' 0 3v3 format only 
Vanish Longinus Gg HXt+' -10 3v3 format only
Vanish Longinus Ov HXt+' -10 3v3 format only
Prominence Perseus Nx+S Dr -10 Finals/Deck Format Only
Dynamite Valkyrie Ov Br' 0 3v3 & Deck Format
Guilty Bahamut Gg Mx -2 Deck Format Only

Small sample size of 2 events but the variant driver rule was put in after the sample size of 1 event and a 3 place finish of a double bearing deck iirc.  So this isn’t so bad of a sample size I guess. 
I won’t argue if there is a lot of creativity here or not, but it does look like even without the variant driver rule, the winners didn’t employ the variant driver strategy to actually win?  Both these events did consist of decks that had double bearing/drifts i believed, those just didn’t win it all. I do feel like if we are going to say some strategy is too easy to win with, we should actually see or wait to see that strategy is indeed too easy to win with.  Also, looking at these 2 decks that won it all, how does the variant driver really affect the decks or how could the rule make them more “creative?”

I am just not sure being “creative” is the right thing to force.  After all, KO attack is not very creative at all.  Doesn’t matter how many variants of xtremes you allow.  It is pretty much “take good attack layer and put it on basic rubber flat.”  It has been this way for about 20 years. We wouldn’t stop that because of the lack of creativity I don’t think. 

If we don’t need the variant driver rule in place for ppl to not play variant drivers and be very successful, then I don’t really see why it is important to have the rule in place.  As you said, it is a competition.  Lots of players will already gravitate towards what is ultimately the most successful build.  The way I see it, the variant driver rules should only be considered if that was the only way for someone to be successful.  Do people agree with this?  I don’t really know actually. Has double bearing and double drift really been what ppl must do to be successful?  Does a double bearing and a double drift deck really get players to the finals that much more efficiently than a let’s say, Bearing’/Drift/HXt+’ deck? 

Also, I absolutely agree the WBO definitions of “Spinning” is a huge problem.

I beat pasta in Swiss with double bearing.  Granted it was random(ish) all Swiss I used double bearing and faced double bearing r2 r4 r5. Geetster99 and i both used double drift in top 4.

---

I think it is at least worthwhile to think about going back to 2 point KOs in WBO deck finals and maybe in first stage as well.   I think sometimes we forget that for this generation, beyblade burst, TT designed the parts and the stadiums with 2 point KOs in mind. We don’t have to be just like TT/WBBA, but it doesn’t hurt to think about what they do and what works for them.  After all, they do get to design the toys.

Maybe some of our tournament issues are caused by our off label use?  Not sayin off label use is bad, but also I don’t think we should be too surprised when problems arise with off label use.

If we do it should be in the db stadium the standard stadium is too small for that rule with the current beyblades

“I beat pasta in Swiss with double bearing.  Granted it was random(ish) all Swiss I used double bearing and faced double bearing r2 r4 r5. Geetster99 and i both used double drift in top 4”

---

I absolutely agree double bearing and double drift is a valid strategy.  I am just pointing out that, clearly, you can do fine without the strategy.  It seems like plenty of players employed the double Br or Dr strategy, which shows how effective it can be.  Double variant decks probably even had better odds to take the event based on just how many there were.

If we use DB stadium as a default I think we'd need to make KO 3 points given how things behave in there. I don't think there is that much wrong with standard, not nearly on the level of what is wrong with DB. Most of the calls for DB are to make LAD battles clearer... Changing the points is meant to reduce the amount of LAD battles. Kinda runs counter to making DB the standard, and the DB discussion is best left for elsewhere I think.


Personally though, I would be quite happy to see 2 Point KO come back, though that's partially because I'm curious just how far we have to go for people to practice launching attack.

---

th!nkBlargh|H-Code Product List

I think it should be 2 points for some formats but not all formats
Because for example gt format has alot of good attack layers and attack is used alot
But in standard i think it should be 2 points for a k.o in deck format battles .

I think LAD needs to be controlled by bans since Savior/Ultimate can’t handle it.

I think LAD needs to be controlled by bans since Savior/Ultimate can’t handle it.

Savior does kinda struggle against Vanish (it’s still a very winnable matchup for Savior tho), but Ultimate and especially Guilty can handle everything in the format without too much struggle on the right setups. Top tier LAD doesn’t need to be kept in check with bans, since attack is right there to handle it. If you don’t want to play attack, just try beating those LAD drivers in same spin with something like HXt+’.

---

I think LAD needs to be controlled by bans since Savior/Ultimate can’t handle it.

People got really mad at me last time I told you to think before you post... Here is a video. 

---

th!nkBlargh|H-Code Product List

I think LAD needs to be controlled by bans since Savior/Ultimate can’t handle it.

People got really mad at me last time I told you to think before you post... Here is a video. 

I withdraw my statement 😓😓😓😓

I think one thing to consider is that there are lots of high LAD drivers. Lots and lots of top tier LAD options now.  Because of that,

1) the variant driver rule hurts KO attackers more because they have less top tier options

2) since there are lots and lots of top tier LAD drivers, LAD drivers are not safe from each other in LAD matches.  I have recorded this following video in the follow ways:
-not much skill involved.  I tilt or not tilt and launch light or moderate to high moderate depending on the situation.
-I tried my best to launch pretty much the same way each round most of the time
-I am not trying to show what I can do or anyone else can do.  I am only hoping to see if the tools are there for someone skilled to do it.  
-no cuts, no edits, straight through.  

UπR.Lg.X’-9 (low mode) vs VLn.Ov.HXt+’-0 (low mode)
https://youtu.be/Fmqn1GU_wZI

Is the above really less safe against LAD than LAD vs LAD?
Also, I am one of the few who prefer savior over ultimate.  I think I am bad with Ultimate. Push comes to shove, I personally don’t like either tbh and would only use them reluctantly.  I would use them because of odds tho.  The tools seem to be there to me.

NC New Game+
Waxhaw, NC- 19 March 2022

Burst Standard Format
Winning Combos:

1st Fire blader07
Devil(F-Gear) Belial 2 Over High Xtend+'-0 (First Stage Only)
Vanish Longinus Over High Xtend+'-0
Devil(F-Gear) Perseus Tapered Drift-9 (Deck Format Finals Only)
Guilty Bahamut Giga Metal Drift-10 (Deck Format Finals Only)

2nd BeyCaddie
Roar Bahamut Giga Metal drift-10
Prominence Valkyrie Tapered Mobius-0
Dynamite(F-Gear) Belial Over High Xtend+'-3

3rd Breaker Bahamut
Guilty Longinus Nexus(S-Gear) Xtreme'-2
Dynamite(F-Gear) Valkyrie Over Bearing'-0
Dynamite(F-Gear) Valkyrie Giga Bearing'-3 (Deck Format Finals Only)
Vanish Longinus Giga High Xtend+'-3 (Deck Format Finals Only)
Guilty Fafnir Nexus(S-Gear) Xtreme'-2 (Deck Format Finals Only)
Dynamite(F-Gear) Perseus Over Bearing'-0 (Deck Format Finals Only)
Prominence Belial 2 Over High Xtend+'-0 (Deck Format Finals Only)
Dangerous(F/L-Gear) Valkyrie Giga Drift (Deck Format Finals Only)



Thanks to everyone for coming out.

---

aka The Competitive Gamer

You Can Only Choose!
Standard P3C1

Silver Springs Maryland
3/20/2022

CrisisCrusher07 1st Place

Guilty Fafnir Karma Jolt' -6 1st Stage Only

World Diabolos Giga Drift 1S Deck Format Only

Dynamite (F Gear) Perseus Tapered Bearing' -9 1st Stage and Deck Format
Vanish Longinus Over High Xtend+' -0 1st Stage and Deck Format

geetster99 2nd Place

Vanish Longinus Giga High Xtend+' -0 1st Stage Only
Dynamite Belial 2 Over Bearing’ -3 1st Stage Only

Vanish Longinus Over High Xtend+' -0 Deck Format Only
Dynamite belial 2 Tapered Bearing’ -3 Deck Format Only
World Spriggan Giga Drift 1S Deck Format Only

Allen Schaffer 3rd Place

Dynamite Perseus (F Gear) Tapered Bearing' -9 1st Stage Only
Vanish Longinus Giga Bearing -6 1st Stage Only
Roar Bahuamet Giga Metal Drift -10 1st Stage Only

Roar Bahuamet Giga Drift -10 Deck Format Only
Prominence Belial 1 Nexus (S Gear) Metal Drift -6 Deck Format Only
Dynamite Perseus (F Gear) Over High Xtend+' -9 Deck Format Only

Rage Diabolos 3A Metal Xtreme Deck Format Only
Guilty Lonhinus 0 Over Xtreme' -0 Deck Format Only (No Ponts)
Astral Belial 2 Giga Xtreme -9 Deck Format Only (No Points)

I put the 2 combos that did not get points in only because I feel that in deck format it's important to have the knowledge of what the bladers were thinking when making their decks.

---

You Can Only Choose!
Standard P3C1

Silver Springs Maryland
3/20/2022

CrisisCrusher07 1st Place

Guilty Fafnir Karma Jolt' -6 1st Stage Only

World Diabolos Giga Drift 1S Deck Format Only

Dynamite (F Gear) Perseus Tapered Bearing' -9 1st Stage and Deck Format
Vanish Longinus Over High Xtend+' -0 1st Stage and Deck Format

geetster99 2nd Place

Vanish Longinus Giga High Xtend+' -0 1st Stage Only
Dynamite Belial 2 Over Bearing’ -3 1st Stage Only

Vanish Longinus Over High Xtend+' -0 Deck Format Only
Dynamite belial 2 Tapered Bearing’ -3 Deck Format Only
World Spriggan Giga Drift 1S Deck Format Only

Allen Schaffer 3rd Place

Dynamite Perseus (F Gear) Tapered Bearing' -9 1st Stage Only
Vanish Longinus Giga Bearing -6 1st Stage Only
Roar Bahuamet Giga Metal Drift -10 1st Stage Only

Roar Bahuamet Giga Drift -10 Deck Format Only
Prominence Belial 1 Nexus (S Gear) Metal Drift -6 Deck Format Only
Dynamite Perseus (F Gear) Over High Xtend+' -9 Deck Format Only

Rage Diabolos 3A Metal Xtreme Deck Format Only
Guilty Lonhinus 0 Over Xtreme' -0 Deck Format Only (No Ponts)
Astral Belial 2 Giga Xtreme -9 Deck Format Only (No Points)

I put the 2 combos that did not get points in only because I feel that in deck format it's important to have the knowledge of what the bladers were thinking when making their decks.

Jolt? Someone has been grinding hard!

Jolt? Someone has been grinding hard!

Indeed. I was practicing with all kinds of rubber tips all week!

---

Jolt? Someone has been grinding hard!

Indeed. I was practicing with all kinds of rubber tips all week!

I am legitimately stoked to see it man. And Jolt of all things, I guess the hard rubber is easier if you're more used to plastic drivers huh? Maybe I need to practice with plastic, so I can be effective with lld blitz jl' in GT 😅

World Drift is cool to see too, I feel like World is still a pretty viable layer honestly.

---

th!nkBlargh|H-Code Product List

Indeed. I was practicing with all kinds of rubber tips all week!

I am legitimately stoked to see it man. And Jolt of all things, I guess the hard rubber is easier if you're more used to plastic drivers huh? Maybe I need to practice with plastic, so I can be effective with lld blitz jl' in GT 😅

World Drift is cool to see too, I feel like World is still a pretty viable layer honestly.

Honestly I chose to practice with Jolt’ because I didn’t want to rely on Xtreme’. I know Xtreme’ is arguably the best attack driver because on how fast it is, but I feel like the other attack drivers deserve some spot lite too.

World on drift was definitely a monster! Most of the matches it was in were obviously opposite spin and even against opposite spin drifts. But it had less draws than most of the other layers and when it won it was always clear and visible.

---