Coaching

[Miamisportsfan45]

I have nothing better to do anyway.



If you read this and still think we should allow it I really have nothing else to say..lol

Don't worry bro. You've made your point and I support you and have been agreeing with you from the very beginning of this thread. I think you've made your point lol and you officially won the thread.

 

[soap]

good points from both sides throughout the thread.

coaching imo speeds up your ability to adapt. Coaches see stuff as a spectator much like you watching your own recorded matches.

but learning to do this yourself mid-match is an even greater skill. You can even view coaching as a crutch that never lets you develop this.

So in terms of overall growth as a player, i am not sure what is more beneficial in the long run. Picking up on one or two habits with the help of the coach. Or learning how to pick up on stuff relying on only yourself.

 

[Nihonjin]

So in terms of overall growth as a player, i am not sure what is more beneficial in the long run. Picking up on one or two habits with the help of the coach. Or learning how to pick up on stuff relying on only yourself.

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime."

You tell me.

 

[Miamisportsfan45]

good points from both sides throughout the thread.

coaching imo speeds up your ability to adapt. Coaches see stuff as a spectator much like you watching your own recorded matches.

but learning to do this yourself mid-match is an even greater skill. You can even view coaching as a crutch that never lets you develop this.

So in terms of overall growth as a player, i am not sure what is more beneficial in the long run. Picking up on one or two habits with the help of the coach. Or learning how to pick up on stuff relying on only yourself.

Exactly. There's nothign wrong with coaching, as long as it's not during the match. During the match. No.

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime."

You tell me.

I really like your arguments. xD

 

[Delta-cod]

I feel like coaching actually has the OPPOSITE effect of what you guys are saying. I think it actually helps people learn to adapt mid-match faster than if they were left to their own. Having someone there to point out your mistakes AS you make them is huge. You can't always learn by yourself. Eventually, if you're told what to do often enough and well enough, you do it on your own. You learn how to notice things that your coach has been pointing out for you and can fix them on your own.

It's kind of like school. I technically could teach myself everything, but it's MUCH more efficient to have somebody there to facilitate the process.

 

[da K.I.D.]

I feel like coaching actually has the OPPOSITE effect of what you guys are saying. I think it actually helps people learn to adapt mid-match faster than if they were left to their own. Having someone there to point out your mistakes AS you make them is huge. You can't always learn by yourself. Eventually, if you're told what to do often enough and well enough, you do it on your own. You learn how to notice things that your coach has been pointing out for you and can fix them on your own.

It's kind of like school. I technically could teach myself everything, but it's MUCH more efficient to have somebody there to facilitate the process.

What happens if you ask your teacher how certain equations work, during your finals?

 

[Nihonjin]

It's kind of like school. I technically could teach myself everything, but it's MUCH more efficient to have somebody there to facilitate the process.

When's the last time your teacher helped you out in the middle of your exams?
The whole point is to see how much you've learned and if you can actually apply it yourself without the teachers help.

[edit]

da K.I.D. =D

 

[X1-12]

I feel like coaching actually has the OPPOSITE effect of what you guys are saying. I think it actually helps people learn to adapt mid-match faster than if they were left to their own. Having someone there to point out your mistakes AS you make them is huge. You can't always learn by yourself. Eventually, if you're told what to do often enough and well enough, you do it on your own. You learn how to notice things that your coach has been pointing out for you and can fix them on your own.

It's kind of like school. I technically could teach myself everything, but it's MUCH more efficient to have somebody there to facilitate the process.

EDITED out cause Amsah's response was better..

 

[Delta-cod]

What happens if you ask your teacher how certain equations work, during your finals?

Well, my post was mainly in response to the idea that coaching was a crutch that prevented players from being able to learn to adapt mid-match. I didn't actually take a stand on whether or not it should be allowed. I lean more to allowing coaching between matches, and not for someone constantly talking into your ear telling you what to do.

Also, to answer your question, it depends on which teacher. I can weasel the answer out of some.

 

[soap]

Also, to answer your question, it depends on which teacher. I can weasel the answer out of some.

rofl i do this too

 

[Nihonjin]

Well, my post was mainly in response to the idea that coaching was a crutch that prevented players from being able to learn to adapt mid-match.

They point things out so you'll be able to do it on your own, but if you're never on your own, why would you need to memorize it, you can just rely on your teacher to give you the answers.

So yes, allowing coaches to help people out every match prevents them from learning how to adapt themselves or at the very least slows down improvement.

 

[jugfingers]

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime."

You tell me.

the funny thing is, coaching is almost synonymous with teaching in this situation


and your university analogy isn't relevant to smash because there are no obvious answers in the game of smash.


you can't use an example of teaching on a test to relate to the game of smash, on a test there are correct answers, and there are incorrect answers, even essay style questions have a set of criteria that you must meet.

this isn't true in smash or other sports.

 

[da K.I.D.]

Whos to say that the 1 rank is that much better that the 8 rank that he would win anyway?

Im fairly sure than the number 1 player in my region could/would lose to the number 8 in my region if myself (mumber 4) and another person (number 6) were coaching him.

that just happens to be because my number one mains ike and our number 8 mains mk. but the point still stands.

 

[Nihonjin]

the funny thing is, coaching is almost synonymous with teaching in this situation

Coaching = giving answers = giving fish

And though you can't teach someone how to adapt, you can prevent them from ever learning by doing it for them all the time.

And your university analogy isn't relevant to smash because there are no obvious answers in the game of smash.

Yes, there are.
But wait, you're ignoring my point because you think my analogy is slightly off? That's pretty much admitting you have no argument.

consider a smasher that is 8th in his regions power ranking playing a smasher that is ranked 1st in his power rankings. but the 8th ranked smasher has a smart player who is better than the 1st ranked player as his coach while the 1st ranked player has no coach.

the 8th ranked player is feed useful advice throughout and after each matches, which help him make better decisions than he would have normally, but he still gets destroyed because thest ranked player is simply alot better than him. lol the end.

moral of the story is that coaching isn't broken.

Consider a smasher that is 8th in his regions power ranking playing a smasher that is ranked 1st in his power rankings. but the 8th ranked smasher asked one of his friends to unplug the 1st ranked players controller.

The 8th ranked player uses this opportunity to take an entire stock of the 1st ranked player before he gets a chance to plug his controller back in, but even with all that, still got JV 3 stocked.

moral of the story is that something doesn't have to be 100% effective to be unfair.

 

[Jem.]

I think Coaching should be allowed to a full extent. if your coach isn't there though, too bad. You can just pick a random respected player you like if they agree to it if you ask me. It's allowed in Halo, the coach calls out what he sees (Basically what the players see, but with how loud and chaotic it can be, just reminds them)

It isn't too big of deal.

 

[da K.I.D.]

Smash isnt Halo. And I already explained why coaches in halo arent comparable to coaches in smash.

Coaching in halo is like Your partner coaching you in doubles (which is perfectly acceptable.) the coach is another fully regulated part of the team in halo.

 

[Nihonjin]

I think Coaching should be allowed to a full extent. if your coach isn't there though, too bad. You can just pick a random respected player you like if they agree to it if you ask me. It's allowed in Halo, the coach calls out what he sees (Basically what the players see, but with how loud and chaotic it can be, just reminds them)

It isn't too big of deal.

In some parts of the world you're allowed to stone your wife to death if she cheated on you. So why should we have any rules against it here in the west? I mean, come on, it's allowed in Iran, man.

Solid argument is solid.

 

[da K.I.D.]

Amsah, you either need to start responding quicker or just let me take care of this thread. lol

 

[Nihonjin]

Dammit >.<

It's because I open this thread but don't reply for half an hour and then post without refreshing..

 

[strawhats]

coaching = gay end of story...lol brother Amsah = too good

 

[Jem.]

In some parts of the world you're allowed to stone your wife to death if she cheated on you. So why should we have any rules against it here in the west? I mean, come on, it's allowed in Iran, man.

Solid argument is solid.

I'm mentioning, Halo is a game that requires your awareness too just like smash, requires you to know where they are, what weapons your team/the opponent has, what theyre gonna do, and its still okay to have a coach telling you all that.

in brawl, its not that big of deal to go "stop challenging his utilt" or something to that degree. the argument "the player should realize this himself" is valid I guess, but in sports, the coach tells the players their weaknesses too. i think people just need to get over the "fact" they believe that coaching determines an outcome when it doesn't, because tripping can determine an outcome a match every once in awhile, but we dont modify it to no-tripping.

maybe im the only one who feels this way though.

@KID: Then why not allow one coach per singles player/team? Then its equal ground. Most local tournaments though let the crowd be right next to the players. What are you going to do, threaten to DQ the kid if he coaches from the crowd? He may already be eliminated anyways

 

[da K.I.D.]

Some coaches are going to be better than others, and sometimes in a smash community like mine, all of the good people may want 1 person to win, which would leave the other guy with either no coach or a subpar one to work with, which in my eyes still ends up being unfair.
and if an eliminated person tried to coach somebody during one of my tourneys they would get kicked out of the venue. possibly with a penalty to be enforced at the next event depending on circumstance.

 

[Jem.]

I suppose so. I'm just trying to defend coaching, because I can see the argument from the other side, but I just don't think it impacts a match enough for it to need to be debated about. And Brawl being in MLG makes it bigger than just a game now.

Hopefully I'm not coming off as a jerk or offending anyone.

 

[cykofox]

coaching during a match is cheating.

 

[DMG]

The real question is what is the line drawn on coaching/what would be allowed or not.

Frankly, there is some coaching that goes on that should not be allowed. There is also general advice that can help out most players in most situations that probably should be allowed.

Something like don't roll so much/try not to roll here is probably fine. You are suggesting a possible improvement in their gameplay that is fairly minor. However, getting into player specific habits is a whole nother monster. There's nothing wrong with people talking about player habits when a match is not going on (preferably not when a set is going on either, but this would be unrealistic to enforce). Talking about habits or playstyle or personal choices while a game is going on I think is detrimental.

 

[Nihonjin]

I'm mentioning, Halo is a game that requires your awareness too just like smash, requires you to know where they are, what weapons your team/the opponent has, what theyre gonna do, and its still okay to have a coach telling you all that.

Iran is a country, with people, laws and a justice system just like the US, and it's still okay to kill your wife for adultery.

If my point still isn't clear to you, "they're doing it too" isn't an argument.

in brawl, its not that big of deal to go "stop challenging his utilt" or something to that degree. the argument "the player should realize this himself" is valid I guess, but in sports, the coach tells the players their weaknesses too.

"They're doing it too" isn't an argument.

I think people just need to get over the "fact" they believe that coaching determines an outcome when it doesn't

Go back a couple of posts and read the billion examples I gave on how a coach turn a game around completely. It's not a matter of opinion.

because tripping can determine an outcome a match every once in awhile, but we dont modify it to no-tripping.

I absolutely hate tripping. It's one of the reasons I will never play Brawl.
It's a random event that can win or lose an entire match for someone, it shouldn't even be in the game.

maybe im the only one who feels this way though.

Sadly, you're not. But that doesn't make you any less wrong.

 

[VA]

Couldn't TO's start implementing no coaching rule trials?

I think SBR should at least attempt to construct some kind of rule on it that is in place at tournaments. Either it is allowed or it isn't. The decision needs to be made. As we are progressing with melee as a competitive game we need to start taking it a bit seriously. Things like this need clear and decisive laws I think.

I don't think grand finals of Street Fighter 4 tourney with Jwong vs Daigo would allow someone to shout some crap out. But tbh at their level it wouldn't really make any difference.

 

[Nihonjin]

But tbh at their level it wouldn't really make any difference.

Regardless of what level you are, you still make mistakes and someone can still point them out.

Anyway this is my last post here. I'm bored with this thread now and have better things to do..lol

 

[Miamisportsfan45]

Regardless of what level you are, you still make mistakes and someone can still point them out.

Anyway this is my last post here. I'm bored with this thread now and have better things to do..lol

You've already won. You have the right to leave man. xD

 

[Jem.]

Lol.. This seems like a pointless argument to be having with you : p. Brawl wants to be a big name game, I listed what goes off in big name games, you'll just say theyre doing it too argument doesn't work.

coaching can impact an outcome, but it doesn't determine it. =p

 

[Gadiel_VaStar]

Why are people bothered by coaching? Who cares! The crowd is most likely too loud & hyped up, so they will drown the noise. The player will barely be able to hear, and he's probably focused on the match anyways. If we want to compare Brawl to sports, going from what Jem said, coaching just helps; it doesn't determine the match or anything...only the player does.

 

[Padô]

As A Moderator from the Brazilian Forums, we've opened the EXACTLY same pool there.

Our main argument to get Coaching prohibited during matches is what DMG just stated above. Telling the player you are coaching to stop rolling too much, stop spotdodging that much is fairly OK but still changes a bit the match since the opponent might be abusing/punishing from those flaws the player you are coaching are making, which, obviously, he should realize and correct them by HIMSELF ONLY. Still make this kind of coaching bearable.

But, lets suppose some coaches are telling the players he is coaching, about specific and unique patterns every player have on his playstyle and how to overcome them or telling him "Be careful Wario's Waft is up to 1 minute!" or "C4 just under right platform" could change DRASTICALLY the match since the coach is putting in danger the opponents playstyle making change/adapt it only because someone has told to do this or that. Thats really annoying, unfair and over all probably, stupid because you are playing against X not against X+Y right? 1x1, not 2x1, if the coach didn't talk about those patterns the opponent could probably win the set just by keeping up his solid playstyle.

Sorry if this writing got a bit confusing. I'll be checking this frequently to be sure you all guys (which want to) get it right.

 

[X1-12]

Our main argument to get Coaching prohibited during matches is what DMG just stated above. Telling the player you are coaching to stop rolling too much, stop spotdodging that much is fairly OK but still changes a bit the match since the opponent might be abusing/punishing from those flaws the player you are coaching are making, which, obviously, he should realize and correct them by HIMSELF ONLY. Still make this kind of coaching bearable.

it still influences the outcome though? Matches should be player Vs player, ability to pick up habits and not fall into habits is part of a player's ability, if he sucks at that then its his fault

 

[Miamisportsfan45]

it still influences the outcome though? Matches should be player Vs player, ability to pick up habits and not fall into habits is part of a player's ability, if he sucks at that then its his fault

I'm glad you beat me to it.

 

[VA]

Regardless of what level you are, you still make mistakes and someone can still point them out.

Anyway this is my last post here. I'm bored with this thread now and have better things to do..lol

Daigo doesn't, he's fully aware of what he's doing.

 

[Nihonjin]

I'm fully aware of what I'm doing too. What's your point?

As long as you take damage, lose stocks and matches, you're making mistakes.
As a matter of fact, even if you don't take damage, lose stocks or matches, you most likely still make mistakes, people simply aren't punishing them/punishing them properly (which could change if your opponent has a decent coach).

Dammit I was done with this thread..>.<

 

[VA]

Haha.

The point is he's aware of the mistakes he makes. He doesn't need someone to point it out!?

Like if I shouted out something to him he'd be like, yeah I know.

 

[Nihonjin]

It's not just about what he knows, it's about what his opponents knows (or doesn't know) as well.

Daigo might be doing something he knows is flawed, but also knows his opponent doesn't know how to counter it, so he abuses that tactic. Then some random coach comes in and explains how to counter Daigo's strategy. In that case the coach took away Daigo's main weapon and turned it against him.

But no, that's fair, because Daigo's fully aware of it, right?

 

[VA]

You can look at it that way.

But would it really matter in the long run? It depends on the skill level. Say you're fighting Fuzzyness and abusing a flaw in his game. Assume I point it out and he stops getting caught out. Would it matter? I'd wager you'd still win anyway.

In the case of you vs an equally skilled player, would I really be able to provide advice that you hadn't already worked out?

It's tough to generalise on a law for coaching or the way it affects the match. Roger Federer doesn't have a coach because he simply does not need one. He's aware enough of what's happening and the advantage ALL the other coaches in the world is not enough to supplant him.

P.S lol if I'm just reiterating. I haven't really read many of the posts here, I'm just thinking about it now xD.

 

[Nihonjin]

You can look at it that way.

But would it really matter in the long run? It depends on the skill level. Say you're fighting Fuzzyness and abusing a flaw in his game. Assume I point it out and he stops getting caught out. Would it matter? I'd wager you'd still win anyway..

That's still helping him and putting me at a disadvantage. So yes, it matters.

In the case of you vs an equally skilled player, would I really be able to provide advice that you hadn't already worked out?.

Yes, you would. And even if you personally can't, there are people who can.

It's tough to generalise on a law for coaching or the way it affects the match. Roger Federer doesn't have a coach because he simply does not need one. He's aware enough of what's happening and the advantage ALL the other coaches in the world is not enough to supplant him.

Tennis is irrelevant to this argument.