How Should the Vintage Championships be Run this year?

[Smmenen]

I posted this question on SCG, but they didn't get it.  This a serious question that could use some debate and thought.  

Last year, over 180 people registered to compete in the Vintage Championship at Gencon. Undoubtedly, the allure of new Black Lotus artwork as a prize helped draw many of those competitors. Are you thinking about going to Gencon this year? To our knowledge, Kenny Oberg won the only qualifier event offered where the winner got a trip to the Type One Championships. Should Wizards make a concerted effort to hold more qualifiers (in the sense that people can afford to come) this year? The tournament ended up being 8 rounds last year becuase of the size of the crowd. Should Wizards offer "trials" where the winner can get 3 byes? Share any thoughts or suggestions about the Vintage Championship

Basically, what I want to hear from you guys is whether wizards should do "Trials" or Qualifiers for travel costs.

Steve

[Dr. Sylvan]

Basically, what I want to hear from you guys is whether wizards should do "Trials" or Qualifiers for travel costs.

Yes, they should. The administratively easiest way to do this the first time around might be to incorporate it into the existing PT side event system and maybe add it to European GPs. This seems like a very low-cost way of promoting global attendance to a very visible event on their calendar, and I don't think I see any downside.

A side issue: I would relate the number of byes to the size of the qualifier, through some formula better left to TOs to determine.

[jpmeyer]

Eh, just do byes based on rating and then have trials the day before like most GPs have.

[Dr. Sylvan]

Eh, just do byes based on rating and then have trials the day before like most GPs have.

The point of the Trials is to encourage people to come from further away. The day before would be rather impossible to coordinate with this goal.

[Matt]

I liked that SCG poster's idea of making the trials 1.5. That way "The Vintage World Championship" encompasses both halves of Vintage. Also, it lets you keep your T1 tech secret for the main tournament.

[Smmenen]

It would be a simple thing to make one of the Origins tournaments a Trial.

Steve

[jpmeyer]

I liked that SCG poster's idea of making the trials 1.5. That way "The Vintage World Championship" encompasses both halves of Vintage. Also, it lets you keep your T1 tech secret for the main tournament.

See, I think it would be cooler if they used Type 1 because it would be like the Meatgrinders were for Standard in like 98/99ish because people would break out new tech for each one (it was the first tournament where the 3rd block expansion was legal) and you could see the metagame shifting in minutes.  That was really cool.

[Matt]

That would be all right if this were held in the first couple days after Fifth Dawn is released, but if it's after that then we aren't as surprised.

[rvs]

Qualifiers with flight expenses is really the only way to go, since simply put, noone from outside north america will be attending otherwise.

[Toad]

Thats right. This "World Championship" is little more than a "North America Championship" after all. We want to go there with our European crazy techs too  

[CF]

I doubt Wizards will fund qualifiers. The two qualifiers that took place in Scandinavia (one in Denmark, one in Norway - both won by Swedes) were financed by the wotc distributor - Midgaard. Their (ex) organized play manager, a guy most of you know from wotc's Saturday School, was kind enough to do something for type1 in Scandinavia. If you want similar actions taken in other places, go speak with the distributor (or perhaps a local store).

Of course, I hope for a repeat this year, but Midgaard has a new organized play manager now so I don't have any chance for inside information (or lobbying)

Byes, like always when there's no sealed deck involved, sounds like a very stupid idea.

--
Chris

[JACO]

Eh, just do byes based on rating and then have trials the day before like most GPs have.

The point of the Trials is to encourage people to come from further away. The day before would be rather impossible to coordinate with this goal.

Qualifiers with flight expenses is really the only way to go, since simply put, noone from outside north america will be attending otherwise.

Thats right. This "World Championship" is little more than a "North America Championship" after all. We want to go there with our European crazy techs too  

I concur. The whole point of the 'qualifiers' run by Midgaard in Europe were to arrange for travel expenses so the winner could represent in the World Championship. I think that any and all 'qualifiers' run outside of the United States (and perhaps even a couple IN the United States) should be primarily for travel costs to Indianapolis for the World Championships (or wherevever they would be held in the future). CF is on the money though, it would take the help of distributors, stores, and others to help sponsor these tournaments, as I doubt Wizards would foot the bill.

See, I think it would be cooler if they used Type 1 because it would be like the Meatgrinders were for Standard in like 98/99ish because people would break out new tech for each one (it was the first tournament where the 3rd block expansion was legal) and you could see the metagame shifting in minutes.  That was really cool.

I think this would be really cool too, as my favorite part of pouring over PTQ and GP event results was to see the new tech rapidly unveiled every few weeks. That would create a true metagame, which would show the shifting from combo to control to aggro to whatever. However, I would abandon the idea of ratings based byes (at least until the Type 1 scene gets more well established), but one thing that would be interesting is if each of these 'qualifiers' (even ones that did not provide travel expenses) gave you a 1 round bye, but they could be cumulative, up to 3 or 4 rounds. If you win 3 qualifiers, you get byes the first 3 rounds of the World Championship. If you win 1 qualifier, you get a 1 round bye. Let's keep brainstorming...

[Smmenen]

Byes, like always when there's no sealed deck involved, sounds like a very stupid idea.

--
Chris

Why?  Isn't the underlying principle the same?  The principle is that the purpose of a bye is to not have to play the chaff one must face in the first couple rounds of a very large tournament - and it is also a reward for winning something else or doing well in the past.

I don't see why the principle would be "stupid" to apply here.  Although I could be wrong - you come off very strongly here - which leads me to beleive you must have a good reason for your statement.  I just fail to see it.

Steve

[Milton]

I say keep the tournament as democratic as possible.  No byes, no qualifiers, no ratings points that get you anything.  Just sign up, show up and do well.  The only requirements should be the entry fee, the banned and restricted list and floor rules.  That's all.

And I also say that one should have to face that chance of "playing against the chaff" in the early rounds in order to be a champion.  That's part of the game.  

I was there last year.  It was well attended.  The judges did a fair job of running the show (with an exception or two).  The organization was fine.  It did start a little late, which I found dissapointing, but considering this was the first event of it's kind I thought it was well done.

Now, if a store in Europe or Australia wants to run a qualifier, than that is their right.  In fact, under the present system you would assume that this would happen more and more.  I wouldn't give these qualifiers and special standing, though.  Just some money.

I wouldn't change anything structurally.  I would alter a few cosmetic things, but nothing major.

[Smmenen]

I say keep the tournament as democratic as possible.  No byes, no qualifiers, no ratings points that get you anything.  Just sign up, show up and do well.  The only requirements should be the entry fee, the banned and restricted list and floor rules.  That's all.

I think thats assy.  I think Wizards should move quickly to support 2-4 European Qualifiers - say one in Scandenavia (like last year which was awesome), one in Germany, and one in Italy and/ or Frenchland.

Steve

[Pyromaniac]

Agreed: the minute you totally shut out qualifiers etc, you're bascially shutting out most of Europe, cause people here don't want to pay(except for a few) to go over to the USA for a tournament. We could just as well go to Dulmen then and find a powered metagame.

[Smmenen]

I'm going to be promoting that idea in the next few months.

Steve

[MuzzonoAmi]

I'm coming as soon as my parents let me hitch a ride with Kowal .

But I think having a couble of qualifiers (especially over in Europe) is a good idea. It helps alot to get the best end results (top 16, top 8) when type2.dec isn't on your list of things to watch out for.

[Milton]

I think thats assy. I think Wizards should move quickly to support 2-4 European Qualifiers - say one in Scandenavia (like last year which was awesome), one in Germany, and one in Italy and/ or Frenchland.

Steve

My ideal would be to let the market bear this out.  Let the high proflile tournament organizers in Europe give travel money as a prize.  A qualifier doesn't have to be run by Wizards.  In fact, I think it would be a detrement to our format if Wizards did run the touranemts.  More and more people would call this an elitist format where an individual has to be from an elite metagame with elite cards and an elite tournament organizer that is recognized by Wizards for a qualifier...  The fairness issues would be endless.  If Wizards gets involved then people in other remote areas, like California, who have legitimate skills and could compete at the championships, lose out on potential prize money because Wizards won't sponsor a qualifier anywhere but Europe.  By the way, it may very well be less expensive for a European to fly to Indy than a Californian right now, what with current exchange rates.

So, I'll turn the questions back on you, my friend.  Do you start down the slippery slope here?  Is this for Europeans only or are you going to support qualifiers throughout the world?  Where is the limit?  How many qualifiers around the world?  Do you sponsor a qualifier in the Philipines?  What about Japan?  Or, are there regions that are exempt?  If you live in the Indy area do you get a qualifier so you too can have travel expenses to get to Indy and get into GenCon?  Do you want Wizards to sponsor the qualifiers, or do you want this to be done indepentally of Wizards?  Clearly Wizards has the infrastructure to do so but, is throwing an ass monkey from the Northern Australia region who won his qualifier because he was the only person who had Chain Lightnings in his Sligh deck a good idea?  Or, are you talking Europe only?  How big do you want to go with this idea?

[Phantom Tape Worm]

I'm coming as soon as my parents let me hitch a ride with Kowal .

But I think having a couble of qualifiers (especially over in Europe) is a good idea. It helps alot to get the best end results (top 16, top 8) when type2.dec isn't on your list of things to watch out for.

Having qualifiers would be neat, but...I don't understand why type2.dec is bad for the metagame breakdown.  In a 100+ size event type2.dec is just a natural part of the environment and something that you should be ready for.

[CF]

Why?  Isn't the underlying principle the same?  The principle is that the purpose of a bye is to not have to play the chaff one must face in the first couple rounds of a very large tournament - and it is also a reward for winning something else or doing well in the past.

The best players _should_ have to be prepared for 'chaff'. How can you call yourself "the best" if you haven't played against the variety of decks present at the tournament? This is even more important for t1 than other constructed formats. Byes let you take shortcuts in deck construction which will bring additional rewards _after_ the actual byes. Take an example: You have 3 byes so you decide to disregard the sligh matchup and the type2.dec matchup. This frees up slots in the sideboard and perhaps also the maindeck. When you then play round 4 you may meet a mirror match. However, he HAS prepared for those decks so you then have an unfair advantage in the matchup. Do you really deserve this because you have a higher rating? No, because there is another, even more important point:

A very large amount of type 1 events are not sanctioned. This will, for instance, give people who play at a store that holds "proxy" tournaments an unfair disadvantage. Often in type1 ratings will not accurately depict the actual quality of the player. Some have a higher rating than they should have because they happen to be "the guy with all the cards" in a small environment, while other very good players will have 1600 because they have never been at a sanctioned event.

--
Chris

[CrazyCarl]

I'm going to talk to the gentleman in charge of Grey Matter events(ie the biggest tournament organizer in the US, and yes, more than Guptil) and see what he might think about running qualifiers for entry/hotel something like that.

[Smmenen]

Why?  Isn't the underlying principle the same?  The principle is that the purpose of a bye is to not have to play the chaff one must face in the first couple rounds of a very large tournament - and it is also a reward for winning something else or doing well in the past.

The best players _should_ have to be prepared for 'chaff'. How can you call yourself "the best" if you haven't played against the variety of decks present at the tournament? This is even more important for t1 than other constructed formats. Byes let you take shortcuts in deck construction which will bring additional rewards _after_ the actual byes. Take an example: You have 3 byes so you decide to disregard the sligh matchup and the type2.dec matchup. This frees up slots in the sideboard and perhaps also the maindeck. When you then play round 4 you may meet a mirror match. However, he HAS prepared for those decks so you then have an unfair advantage in the matchup. Do you really deserve this because you have a higher rating? No, because there is another, even more important point:

A very large amount of type 1 events are not sanctioned. This will, for instance, give people who play at a store that holds "proxy" tournaments an unfair disadvantage. Often in type1 ratings will not accurately depict the actual quality of the player. Some have a higher rating than they should have because they happen to be "the guy with all the cards" in a small environment, while other very good players will have 1600 because they have never been at a sanctioned event.

--
Chris

I agree with what you said - but you would award the "bye's" not on the basis of rating, but by winning one of a few key "trials" that might be held around the world in the Spring.  To the extent that one does that, I don't see why one can't have that slight edge going into round four - that all other formats permit.  Further, I would argue that you must face chaff even after round 4 based upon Kevin Cron's 7-1 performance and report last year getting him 1st place after the swiss.  

Steve

Steve