Coaching

[Jessup124]

Wtf school is not smash Dont even compare that ****.
If you really wanna compare smash its prolly closest to boxing wich is were coaching is alowed to.

It is NOT the same as boxing. In boxing the 2 boxers fight and hit each other; therefore Zgetto just so that you understand, the boxers become DISORIENTED. The coach's job is to center and advise the fighter. During the fight, you know as they HIT EACH OTHER, advise of how their boxer is fighting and guidance is given . BUT in a match NO ONE IS HITTING EACH OTHER, there is NO DISORIENTATION. No advise needs to be given as the players are competing. You understand this?

 

[Nihonjin]

Actually X1. If Amsah lost, I don't think he would've bothered learning that MU.

That's my own problem.

Notice his quick change from Luigi to Pikachu, I could assume he doesn't but hardcore time in both characters. :/

Actually, I still don't know anything about the matchup.
All I learned was that spamming nairs worked better against Reaper than spamming uairs.

 

[john!]

Cause i want the best coach to sit next to me and learn me how to spam bairs so i can win some bigass tourneys.

LOL

"If we ban cheating, some people will cheat, putting everyone who plays by the rules at a disadvantage, thus we should allow cheating."


Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't that the bottom line of your argument John..?

Really...?

If coaching is made legal, then it's not cheating. You can't "allow cheating" because then it's not cheating, because it's within the rules. You only call it cheating because of the preconceived notion you have that coaching is inherently unfair. That was kind of a silly response to be honest.

 

[Purple]

Yo guys, imma win pound 5. I just need that m2k guy by my side y'dig?

 

[Nihonjin]

If coaching is made legal, then it's not cheating. You can't "allow cheating" because then it's not cheating, because it's within the rules. You only call it cheating because of the preconceived notion you have that coaching is inherently unfair. That was kind of a silly response to be honest.

You're against the banning coaching because you think people regardless of the rules, will coach anyway. Which is cheating.

So you're against the banning of anything we consider unfair because people will break the rules and do it anyway. Correct?

 

[Zgetto]

It is NOT the same as boxing. In boxing the 2 boxers fight and hit each other; therefore Zgetto just so that you understand, the boxers become DISORIENTED. The coach's job is to center and advise the fighter. During the fight, you know as they HIT EACH OTHER, advise of how their boxer is fighting and guidance is given . BUT in a match NO ONE IS HITTING EACH OTHER, there is NO DISORIENTATION. No advise needs to be given as the players are competing. You understand this?

Sure u got a point there.
I didnt want to compare it to anything cause in the end smash = smash and no boxing/chess or school w/e but atleast its kinda similiar with boxing unlike school lmao

 

[X1-12]

So pretty much its turned into a matter of opinion now...
If u want to limit Yourself u should ban it.
If u want to improve ur skills to the max u should allow it.
And in the end no matter what u say, its all about the player himself and the ability to perform to the max.

No its not limiting yourself. If you lose in a tourney match as you didn't know how to deal with your opponents play style, then you should go and practise and find out how then come back, when you have improved and beat them. If you have a coach to tell you this firstly you will probably not want to go home and learn how to beat that char, instead you will just, next time its that opponent/char/ whatever try to remember some rushed things you were told mind-match during the last tournament.

And random guy what you say about tournaments are for testing ur skills.. Not its not at all, tournaments is about 1 thing and thats about doing the best u can do with no limitations.

LOL I actually can't beleive you are posting this kind of thing.

1.) "Doing the best you can" IS testing your skills.. lolwut? explain how these are different.

2.) "Doing the best you can"Yeah, the best YOU can, not the best you+coach can..

Yo guys, imma win pound 5. I just need that m2k guy by my side y'dig?

good strawman there (yes I looked it up since everyone was talking about it)

No-one is saying having M2K coach you will make you win everything... but it'll still make you play better

 

[Purple]

You're against the banning coaching because you think people will coach anyway, which is cheating. So where exactly was I wrong..?

It's just your idea that cheating should be allowed doesn't make sense (the idea of cheating can't be allowed because then it would just be following the rules, not cheating). Coaching itself isn't cheating. You can't say it is because the results it brings aren't always good, hell, even if they are good, they aren't always 'helpful' to say the least. There are rules made because of their guaranteed downfalls in competitive play, coaching doesn't have guaranteed downfalls.



Learn what the **** strawman is (not directed at X1 exactly). It's taking negative aspects of someone's argument, and only talking about them, making his argument look bad when it's not even the original position.

By the way X1, my statement was a joke.

However I just thought of something, in the idea that the best player coaches me and knows every player, does it give me the unfair advantage to beat every player?

 

[Faab]

That's the problem.

It was a point to show that somebody in the crowd gave you advice, so it's linked to what coaches do.

Or we could just ban giving advice and leave the crowd as is.

Can't do this on big tournaments since the crowds are to big to control.

I've already explained to you multiple times in this thread and on MSN that coaching and crowds are not the same thing.

Yeah and i remember not agreeing to it, care to explain it again here to show everybody i'm right?

You clearly have no idea what a strawman is. And explain to me why it's different from being helped on a test.

True i don't know what a strawman is, was just a guess :D
Cause somebody coaching on a test is coaching against something that has no ability to think back, react, or whatever. A test just lies there waiting for you to fill it in. While when you're playing a opponent i doubt he'll stand still there.
Even the coaching against cpu's is to good for this example, it's literally like helping someone in training mode.

......................

 

[Nihonjin]

It's just your idea that cheating should be allowed doesn't make sense (the idea of cheating can't be allowed because then it would just be following the rules, not cheating). Coaching itself isn't cheating. You can't say it is because the results it brings aren't always good, hell, even if they are good, they aren't always 'helpful' to say the least. There are rules made because of their guaranteed downfalls in competitive play, coaching doesn't have guaranteed downfalls.

I editaed my post before you replied, read it again.

And Faab, I can't quote your post like that, so edit it please.

 

[X1-12]

"If we ban pulling out the other players controller, some people will pull out their opponents controller, putting everyone who plays by the rules at a disadvantage, thus we should allow people to pull out their opponents controllers."


I've replaces 'cheating' with 'pulling out controllers' so you can understand better, but this is what john's argument still boils down to

 

[A-D]

lol amsah . Several people have aggreed on some of your opinions and think that you are right on some facts. but they still think it's not really that nescesary to ban it .(that's their opinion)

why is it that you have to answer everything that we say as irrelevant or not can't agree with anything that we say and have to proove your right on every fact that we say ?
so you really think everything we say makes no sence at all or isn't right.
cause that is the way you present yourself to us

this is getting pretty sadning now.

 

[Purple]

We ban things because it gives unfair advantage to everyone and changes games for everyone, or that if duplicated, the game would be unplayable. Fact is, coaching doesn't change every game, and can be beaten.

Yknow, I don't even know why i keep saying this, because you'll just use another analogy to thwart my point.

 

[Faab]

I aint gonna update my post so you can quote me (i don't even know how), do some work if you wanna reply :D

 

[john!]

You're against banning coaching because you think people will coach anyway, which is cheating.

Among other reasons, yeah. Banning coaching will not stop it from happening, and will actually PUNISH people for following the tournament rules. I don't understand how you can justify a ban that's nearly impossible to enforce, that very few people complain about, and that hinders a player's chances of winning. What if someone was falsely accused by a TO of coaching or being coached? What if someone though he saw someone else coach? How could you prove it? What if a TO didn't like someone and kicked them out on dubious evidence for coaching? What if they liked someone and turned a blind eye when they caught them coaching?

Banning coaching brings forth far more unfairness than it prevents.

 

[Zgetto]

Lol this is going to be endless....
It's never been a problem before why suddenly ban it? thats all there is to it... why fix something that isnt broken?
And even though coaching should just be allowed its still way overated imo

I think im pretty much done cause im bored already cant believe ur holding on to this Amsah.. U've spend so much time into this you gotten way to much stubborn and i dont think ur ever gonna stop replying till we agree with you.

 

[X1-12]

lol amsah . Several people have aggreed on some of your opinions and think that you are right on some facts. but they still think it's not really that nescesary to ban it .(that's their opinion)

why is it that you have to answer everything that we say as irrelevant or not can't agree with anything that we say and have to proove your right on every fact that we say ?
so you really think everything we say makes no sence at all or isn't right.
cause that is the way you present yourself to us

this is getting pretty sadning now.

because what's the point in talking about things which have nothing to do with smash or coaching? and if you are talking about things with no evidence or backing then why should we assume they are correct

We ban things because it gives unfair advantage to everyone and changes games for everyone, or that if duplicated, the game would be unplayable. Fact is, coaching doesn't change every game, and can be beaten.

Yknow, I don't even know why i keep saying this, because you'll just use another analogy to thwart my point.

It doesnt have to change games for everyone Wobbling only affects people who play as or vs ICs but its still banned (most places) and I'm sure it can be beaten (I KNOW this is not actually to do with coaching but it proves that it doesn't have to effect everyone to be bannable)

but to use a more standard rule, I'm sure players could still beat me if kept hitting them while they were playing me so I could break their combo's but it doesn't make it fair.. The difference coaching makes is not massive. but big enough to be worth considering

@Amsah: just copy and paste his text then use the quote button when replying

 

[Purple]

note the most places.

also wobbling is beaten by players like silent spectre.

 

[Sion]

people have been coached not to roll/tech behind me. guess what happens anyways?

i could care less whether one is coached or not. it's all fair imo.

 

[Nihonjin]

It was a point to show that somebody in the crowd gave you advice, so it's linked to what coaches do.

The problem isn't the crowd, it's players receiving help during tournament sets.

Can't do this on big tournaments since the crowds are to big to control.

This isn't an argument. If you look at our rules there are many we can't realistically enforce.

Yeah and i remember not agreeing to it, care to explain it again here to show everybody i'm right?

Do you really not see the difference between people watching a game and people giving advice/information to players..?

While when you're playing a opponent i doubt he'll stand still there.
Even the coaching against cpu's is to good for this example, it's literally like helping someone in training mode.

I've asked you this before, are you in favor of people coaching during chess..?

people have been coached not to roll/tech behind me. guess what happens anyways?

This the worst argument ever.

 

[X1-12]

Among other reasons, yeah. Banning coaching will not stop it from happening, and will actually PUNISH people for following the tournament rules.
I don't understand how you can justify a ban that's nearly impossible to enforce, that very few people complain about, and that hinders a player's chances of winning. What if someone was falsely accused by a TO of coaching or being coached? What if someone though he saw someone else coach? How could you prove it? What if a TO didn't like someone and kicked them out on dubious evidence for coaching? What if they liked someone and turned a blind eye when they caught them coaching?

Banning coaching brings forth far more unfairness than it prevents.

I'm sure a TO could turn a blind eye if they saw someone pull out another players controller too, but do you think they would? Coaching is just as hard to enforce as other rules such as the ban on wobbling, but do you see wobbling happening anyway? no, so why should coaching be so different?

 

[Sion]

wasn't trying to make an argument there, amsah. the thing about this thread is that it's hard for people to agree with one another because one will stand by strong with his/her opinion and the other will do the same. it just comes down the the TO's discretion, not these text-wall arguments.

 

[Zgetto]

Btw can i have cheerleaders? They make me play better and it isnt coaching =]
Or is that 5vs1 too now and that should be banned .(yes i have 4 cheerleaders be jealous)

Yes im not taking any of you pro banners serious anymore its just sad now.

 

[X1-12]

note the most places.

also wobbling is beaten by players like silent spectre.

fine lets talk about rising pound? or wall bomber? or freeze glitch? I only said most places so I'm not attacked about it

Btw can i have cheerleaders? They make me play better and it isnt coaching =]
Or is that 5vs1 too now and that should be banned .(yes i have 4 cheerleaders be jealous)

Yeah have cheerleaders, but i won't bother again explaining why because:

Yes im not taking any of you pro banners serious anymore its just sad now.

it sounds like you just ran away..

 

[Faab]

The problem isn't the crowd, it's players receiving help during tournament sets.



This isn't an argument. If you look at our rules there are many we can't realistically enforce.



Do you really not see the difference between people watching a game and people giving advice/information to players..?



I've asked you this before, are you in favor of people coaching during chess..?

Don't be ********, people from crowds will give advice, that's a fact. Live with coaches or ban crowds aswell.

How does chess have anything to do with this? Stop bringing out strawman questions.

To question it though, i'd ban it if there is a limitless time per round. However i do not know the rules to proffesional chess games so i can't reply to this.

 

[Zgetto]

it sounds like you just ran away..

Not yet but sometimes you gotta realise when ur wasting ur time with stubborn people..

But now im really running away! Catch me if u can!

 

[Jem.]

Btw can i have cheerleaders? They make me play better and it isnt coaching =]
Or is that 5vs1 too now and that should be banned .(yes i have 4 cheerleaders be jealous)

Yes im not taking any of you pro banners serious anymore its just sad now.

this made me a smile a bit

 

[Faab]

I thought about it and don't even bring up chess anymore, comparing turn based games to real time games. Can it get more stupid then this?

 

[X1-12]

Don't be ********, people from crowds will give advice, that's a fact. Live with coaches or ban crowds aswell.

.

People from crowds currently do give advice, but they know its OK, and its not banned (its called coaching btw) but if they knew its against the rules why would they do it?

 

[pockyD]

yes, yes they would

anyone actually think that mandatory crowd silence would fly?

 

[Nihonjin]

Don't be ********, people from crowds will give advice, that's a fact. Live with coaches or ban crowds aswell.

Not really. People naturally abide to rules. If we ban coaching and make the definition of it clear to everyone, people will refrain from yelling advice when they're in crowds. And those that do anyway will get punished.

How does chess have anything to do with this? Stop bringing out strawman questions.

To question it though, i'd ban it if there is a limitless time per round. However i do not know the rules to proffesional chess games so i can't reply to this.

Let's assume there is limitless time, why would you ban it..?

And if there wasn't limitless time, why would you allow it..?

yes, yes they would

anyone actually think that mandatory crowd silence would fly?

Straaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawman.

 

[Faab]

I'm sorry to burst the bubble of you're perfect world amsah but it's not doable.

And once again, im not gonna discuss chess since it's a turnbased game.

Accept defeat!

 

[pockyD]

Straaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawman.

Until the difference between generic crowd shouting (which I think you'd agree is largely unenforceable) and detailed coaching is strictly defined, I'm not sure you can address one without impeding on the other

 

[Nihonjin]

Until the difference between generic crowd shouting (which I think you'd agree is largely unenforceable) and detailed coaching is strictly defined, I'm not sure you can address one without impeding on the other

Coaching is considered to be communication, advice or instruction of any kind,
audible or visible, to a player.

That does not include crowds yelling and screaming. And if it does, remove the word communication.

 

[pockyD]

major tennis tournaments actually wait for complete crowd silence before commencing play

 

[X1-12]

Until the difference between generic crowd shouting (which I think you'd agree is largely unenforceable) and detailed coaching is strictly defined, I'm not sure you can address one without impeding on the other

Here ya go Pocky,

Any advice given about to either player in the match, including tips on match-ups stage selections or method of play.


some examples
"Use X move more" = coaching
"Watch out for thier X" = coaching
"Don't always recover the same way" = coaching


quite different from shouting "USA, USA" or the name of who is playing

 

[X1-12]

major tennis tournaments actually wait for complete crowd silence before commencing play

cool story bro

 

[Nihonjin]

major tennis tournaments actually wait for complete crowd silence before commencing play

And if it does, remove the word communication.

Anything else..?

 

[pockyD]

Here ya go Pocky,

Any advice given about to either player in the match, including tips on match-ups stage selections or method of play.


some examples
"Use X move more" = coaching
"Watch out for thier X" = coaching
"Don't always recover the same way" = coaching

so if, in a crowd of 40 people watching a hugely important match, someone (unidentifiable) shouts something like "no jump", what should the T.O. do?

cool story bro

???

was it really that hard to understand the relevance?

if you can't understand something so simple, maybe this discussion isn't for you

Anything else..?

really? you too?

 

[Nihonjin]

^Really me too what?

so if, in a crowd of 40 people watching a hugely important match, someone (unidentifiable) shouts something like "no jump", what should the T.O. do?

The same thing TO's do when people break other rules.