Enough Is Enough. Coaching Needs To Stop.

Last weekend, I had the good fortune of being able to go to APEX 2015. It was, simply put, awesome. Watching players from all around the world compete on the big screen with hundreds of other Smash fans is an experience I won't soon forget. Melee? Great. Smash 4? Amazing. Even 64 got its share of the limelight. But as some of the later Smash 4 matches rolled around, the event slowed to a crawl.

I bet you can guess why.

Far too much time is being spent on this menu during tournaments.​

During Smash 4, there was nearly as much activity in between matches as there was during. People were running up and down the aisle, advising their friends on what to do versus their opponents. Players 'debated their counterpicks' while having full conversations about the last match, or what to do next. It was obvious, it was boring, and everyone but the players involved hated it. Coaching in Smash, especially Smash 4, needs to go - not just for the reasons above, but for the integrity of the game.

Why Is It A Problem?

Coaching has been a contentious issue in Smash for awhile now. At CEO 2014 last year, Project M was plagued by coaching, with mid-set coaching sessions taking longer than the matches themselves in some cases. Because the tournament took so long, several people suggested moving Project M sets from four stocks to three in order to save time - an effective idea that unfortunately did not address the true problem. At that point, Project M 3.0 was a relatively new game still. Compared to other Smash titles, Project M is considered the most matchup-based of the series; many characters have unique gameplay mechanics that must be taught or experienced to be understood. I'd go as far as to say there are situations in Project M where the player with more character knowledge can win over a stronger opponent. Because of this, knowledge of the game is a significant part of the game.

Smash 4 is even more heavily reliant on knowledge: matchups are unique, and situational understanding is a huge part of the game. This is exacerbated by the fact that Smash 4, compared to Melee or Project M, is not particularly technical. There are no useful techniques that are difficult to execute, so a player's technical skill, while important, pales in comparison to what they know. The most important attributes a Smash 4 player can have are situation awareness and adaptability. Giving players 'coaches' that can fill in knowledge gaps allows a second party to essentially adapt for them. So mid-set coaching, where a player is taught what to do in situation X, Y, or Z, gives that player an advantage over their opponent that they frankly have not earned, and do not deserve.

Thousands of people were watching matches during APEX 2015 weekend. Why should they have to watch three minutes of coaching in between?​

Now, some of you may be saying to yourselves, "well who cares? Both players can have coaches, after all." This may be true, but it doesn't make it fair. Coaching becomes doubly problematic when you realize that the only players getting significant mileage out of coaching situations are top players. Regular player Joe Schmoe's friends don't have a lot of great advice to give him; an elite player's training partners, on the other hand, are likely able to tell them exactly what to watch for. As an example, take ZeRo. He is the undisputed best at Smash 4. Nobody doubts his talent, and he will likely be at the forefront of his game for years to come, coach or no. But let's say some new player appears out of nowhere, challenging him for his spot. Should that player have to play against ZeRo and the minds of his top-level friends? Or should he be afforded the opportunity to beat, or be beaten, by the best in the world in a true battle of wits?

So What Should We Do?

Don't get me wrong: this all makes sense. Smash 4 is a new game, and even the best players have a lot to learn before they can claim full mastery of it. Knowledge is far from uniform, and a Rosalina player may notice things about a certain matchup that a Diddy Kong player wouldn't. Everyone wants to share knowledge and help their friends win, and I'll admit that's a noble cause. But at the end of the day, once a set starts, it's a competition between two players - not their posses. Add in the amount of time it wastes throughout a tournament, and you have an issue that not only cheapens competition, but keeps tournaments from running at a consistent pace.

Part of the competitive meta right now is the amount of knowledge you bring into a match. Let's get rid of coaching once and for all, and treat game knowledge like the part of the competition it deserves to be.

This piece is purely the opinion of its author, and does not reflect the position of Smashboards or its affiliates.

 

So well written. Perfect explanation on Smash 4's competitive skillset, and why coaching is a no-no

There's zero reason for anyone to come and talk to a competitor in between matches. The SET is the game, there's no 'in between'. Ban coaching please.

 

I was at Apex. The coaching that was going on was ridiculous. During M2K's match against Dabuz, at least 3 different people were running up to the stage in between the matches to give him tips which was eating up a lot of time and made Smash 4 feel like it was taking forever.

I was especially confused because I could've sworn that coaching was banned at previous Apex's. If anything, you should only be allowed to have ONE single coach and a small time limit in between matches to discuss strategies.

Even then, I would prefer that it just be outright banned.

 

Coaching was short at Apex. They had a 20 second rule or so, even less during WF's and GF's, I don't think it mattered that much. Whenever I had my coach tell me something, around 15 seconds later the TO would say time.

 

While I agree that the thought of a match being up to the players is really what smash is all about, I feel that coaching is important as well for the community as a whole. Having it limited in time would be nice for sure, but to take it away would mean less ability for players and those who watch the games to learn for the mistakes of the first match. For those of us who arent top players yet, we can watch a match and see what changes they made due to coaching that enabled them to pull through and take that to improve our own games. I think its important to remember that smash isnt just about winning, its about learning and improving too. While im sure everyone wants to win, I know i certainly dont play smash just for the sake of being able to say that i beat said player, I play because I love the game for its style and near infinite amount there is to learn and improve upon. Because of that I rely on knowledge from other players all the time; now personally Ive never had someone coach me during a match or the person im playing against, but for the sake of learning I think its great. Now for the fairness of new players not getting the right coaching Id say that for the sake of the smash community, top or high level players who are watching the game should be willing to step up and help that guy or girl who doesnt have the best coaches. That situation is a simple matter of all players caring about the community enough to want everyone to get better; I think ideally we, as a community, would want everyone to be a high or top level player because thats a majority of what the smashboards is about, a place to help players improve. There should be a limit for the the interest of time, but the opportunity to gain knowledge should never be past up for something a person is passionate about so we shouldnt throw it away.

 

Melee top 8 and Smash 4 top 8 were almost identical in length. In fact, Melee was longer even without as much coaching going on.

https://twitter.com/Smashboards/status/562186023975661568

Proof: http://www.twitch.tv/vgbootcamp/b/619084191

Smash 4 T8 is ~9:15 to ~12:35 (3hr20m) & Melee T8 is ~13:25 to 17:00 (3hr35m). Roughly the same.

 

I agree with coaching in between SETS where nobody else cares or can hear you or wastes time.

I strongly disagree with mid-set coaching that wastes time and is unfair for the opponent.

 

Coaching is not the problem. The tournament staff not being attentive is the problem. There's nothing horribly wrong with one to two minutes between matches, especially considering how long some people stay for a tournament. The Derrit doesn't seem to appreciate how much mental energy goes into a match or the fact that fatigue is a real problem during extended tournaments (three hours onward). Coaching between matches can easily be reigned in if organizers are strict about it, but it shouldn't be removed completely.

SmashBoards doesn't need any editorial articles. That's what we have threads for. I'd be happy with The Derrit taken off the staff completely considering he has a habit of writing controversially misleading articles, and now there is this.

Blaming the waning interest of the game on coaching is pretty irresponsible. Considering the magnitude and number of traveling players, they were either there to watch Sm4sh or weren't. I don't think many people would necessarily throw their hands up and leave because of the time between matches. There must be something else. Maybe there just isn't that many people interested in spectating Sm4sh.

 

I don't understand this ****. Remind me again why they're making such a big deal about coaching?

 

My opinion is maybe coach AFTER the matches. Then, it won't be too much of a problem.

 

It doesn't need to completely go away. As much as it takes away from time that could be played in the actual game, it also helps players to correct their mistakes and make the next match more interesting. Coaching should just stay limited to about a minute or so, just so that it doesn't drag the matches, while still helping players.

 

Limit coaching to where it can only be done for 20 seconds, then the players must discontinue their contact. Simple, clean, easy to pull off.

 

I'll be real, I think you're overreacting. I'm not going to say that it's not a problem at all, but saying that it needs to be banned altogether? Please. A 1 or 2 minute timer is all it takes to alleviate this issue, I think at the very least a Smasher has the right to at least share a little knowledge with someone.

 

In This Thread: people who don't actually go to tournaments but have opinions on what's fair in tournaments. Coaching has never been a serious enough issue in Smash to the point where it necessitated formal regulation. If an opponent calls out coaching, then quit coaching, but otherwise this isn't a conversation that needs to be had.

 

If we do make a regulation on coaching, it will have to have a heavy regulation put on it such as allowing each player a single 1 min "time out" per set.

 

In This Thread: people who don't actually go to tournaments but have opinions on what's fair in tournaments. Coaching has never been a serious enough issue in Smash to the point where it necessitated formal regulation. If an opponent calls out coaching, then quit coaching, but otherwise this isn't a conversation that needs to be had.

I attend tournaments and I would like to say that while no, in most cases it's not an issue, at majors and nationals it seems to have risen into being one. We saw this a lot, especially at Apex. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw it at Evo too.

 

I attend tournaments and I would like to say that while no, in most cases it's not an issue, at majors and nationals it seems to have risen into being one. We saw this a lot, especially at Apex. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw it at Evo too.

Is it more of an issue in Smash 4? I've hardly seen anything more than a rare sentence of coaching in Melee.

 

Is it more of an issue in Smash 4? I've hardly seen anything more than a rare sentence of coaching in Melee.

Not in Melee, it's fine there.
In Smash 4, because it's newer, people tend to ask more questions when asking a friend about a matchup, CP stage, etc. So I'm saying that we should limit the time to about 20-30 seconds, a bit harsh, but the player shouldn't win a tournament based on the knowledge of another player. It should be by their own knowledge, imo.

Personally, I don't mind coaching though, I just think that it might prove to become a new problem in big tourneys.

 

Totally agree, any coaching should be done before the match starts.

 

Matches already take way too long in Smash, period. Keep it to before and after sets.

 

Can we also limit handwarmers to like 20 second button checks?

 

Regarding coaching, I think it should be like Tennis, where a player's coaching team or manager is relegated to the stands and isn't available to verbally or physically instruct on court. That said, like in Tennis, there's nothing stopping a player from looking up and having their coach give them signals on what to do.

For Smash, given it's not played in a stadium and your training partner can essentially be sitting a few feet away from you, my suggestion would be to apply much stricter time limits in between games for now.

I can't recall how much time was granted for coaching at Apex, but at KiT 15 it felt like players were allowed over 30 seconds of time in between games to receive coaching. That's ridiculous, IMO. 10 seconds max in between games (basically a quick word) and then both players have to get on with it.

Either that or forbid coaching altogether, and instead players are only allowed to have notes with them for a match.

 

Should that player have to play against ZeRo and the minds of his top-level friends? Or should he be afforded the opportunity to beat, or be beaten, by the best in the world in a true battle of wits?

Man, next you're going to be saying players shouldn't be able to get advice even after the set has finished, they should have to improve on their own so it's a "true battle of wits".

 

Perhaps only have one time for both players to be coached with a 1 min limit Like after the 1st match or 2nd if its best of 5

 

Definitely alright to coach after matches, but I believe that this game should move quickly without coaches talking after every game.

 

If you as a player don't know how to deal with a given situation, that's completely on you. Having a coach or multiple coaches is like having Google open during an exam.

And as the article demonstrates, it hurts the spectators as well.

It's gotta go.

 

Matches already take way too long in Smash, period. Keep it to before and after sets.

You say that and yet Smash 4 ran almost the exact same time

Float SSB Melee top 8 and Smash 4 top 8 were almost identical in length. In fact, Melee was longer even without as much coaching going on.

Smash 4 T8 is ~9:15 to ~12:35 (3hr20m) & Melee T8 is ~13:25 to 17:00 (3hr35m). Roughly the same.

As the Meta grows in Smash 4 so does the speed of the matches, I've personally done matches in less than a minute in FG and in a competitive local tournament. When people get used to the new edge guarding mechanics along with how deep they can go off stage you're going to see shorter and shorter matches.

Edit: [This is not taking into account for the snooze fest that is camping in this game, running out the timer should not be a viable strategy otherwise you're going to see this game go the way of Brawl with planking]

 

100% agreed. Coaching shouldn't be allowed between the first moment of a set and the final handshake. Mental toughness and capacity to adapt to opponents are things that we all deem to be an important evaluation of skill in Smash, along with tech skill and execution. Same thing applies to tennis, where mid-match coaching is completely banned on the ATP Tour.

 

I've never seen coaching as a big problem, until somewhat recently.

In my ideal competitive world, a player would have 30 seconds to between games allowed for coaching. This is more than enough time to say: "I'd ban stage x. He will probably counterpick you to stage y or z. Watch out for this trick on stage y or x. Don't forget, he has a pocket character 2. You did a good job at this, but you need to work on not getting baited out by action, because he immediately follows up with this predictable action."

After the 30 second coaching time is exhausted a TO/pool leader/whatever says time, and if they continue they are penalized either through:

1- a stock loss for the next game (on first infraction), game loss (on second infraction), and dropped set and/or match loss (on third infraction depending on if its a 3/5, or if its Grand Finals etc...) in the event you just keep count of infractions during a set.

2- In the event you keep track for the entirety of the tournament it would be something similar to the above, though with the infractions carrying over to your subsequent matches.


After the coaching session, players go about the counterpick process (which, in all honesty could make use of limit on its various elements like banning, cp'ing, char cp, etc... but, I think we're splitting hairs at that point).


All in all, basically allow about 1-2 minutes between games. 30 seconds alotted out of that 1-2 minutes for coaching, and the rest for counterpicking process as well as player's collecting themselves, etc. I can't stress enough that a player SHOULD be allowed to take AT LEAST 15-30 seconds for themselves between games, to process what happened previously and to calm themselves before next game.

 

Personally I think coaching can be a good a thing. But I agree the duration of the coaching was far too long. Now I think a way around this would be to prepare a rule for coaches. To give them a duration of time to speak after a match (obviously not that long). Another thing that could potentially be set in motion, when registering for a tournament to also (if the coach for the player is also competing) register as a coach and insert the name/gamer handle of the player he will be coaching. Because to have other people running down isles to give a friend advice is ok, but as it is mentioned, it takes too much time (as seating could be a potential factor in how much time it wastes). I think the backdrop to having such a time limit would call for DQs if a coach was to violate the time limit. I guess it simply is just one of those things that sounds good on paper but is pretty much difficult to do in practice. That being said, I absolutely agree that it needs to be stopped in the future. My only thing is that, since the game is still relatively new, to allow coaching to happen, given that the coach is registered in the tournament to coach a player for a certain duration of time in between matches. To which then afterwards, eliminate coaching altogether because by a certain point the game will be mastered. Now, although I think coaching can be a good thing. I personally wouldn't want that and I am sure other players agree that, if you were playing a set and you figured out how to beat your opponent wouldn't it be more satisfying to know that you analyzed your opponents weaknesses during game and fix it in the next game, as opposed to someone practically holding your hand and helping you, right? I am pretty sure there are mixed opinions about this but I totally agree with you Derrit it should be stopped soon as it does take up a huge portion of time, especially when it is being broadcast.

 

You say that and yet Smash 4 ran almost the exact same time

As what? Melee? Which is -also- SMASH, AND THEREFORE ALSO TAKES WAY TOO LONG, as I said?

 

I still do not think coaching is even remotely an issue by itself--people on twitter keep saying "individual sports never need them", which makes me wonder how many individual sports they actually watch on an even uncommon basis--but it takes up time, and considering how getting kicked out of venues for running too late has gotten unreasonably common in the past year, time is money.

here, a single rule to solve the troubles. I'll even properly capitalize and everything, so you can copy-paste if needed:

The loser of each match in a set has 60 seconds to choose their Counterpick, and then start playing on it. If they spend far too much time beyond this, their opponent gains another point.

(this means in a 2/3 set, the opponent automatically wins, and in a 3/5 set, the opponent simply has one less game needed to win)

the issue with all smash schedules absolutely has to deal with uncertainties in time, like it is btwn matchups. give it a max time limit, problems get solved

 

IMHO most of what coaching boils down to is moral support. Perhaps its a bit naive of me to assume that the game is too dynamic that one bit of advice could really turn the tides of the match. But That guy who just said "Hey man. That guy likes to tech in place" might as well also be saying "I think you got a shot at winning, I'm here to support you and possibly distract you from how badly you might get wrecked.". I dont see a reason to rob a player of it, and I'm not really against a player getting support between high tension games as long as it doesn't hold up the game for too long.

That's just me though.

 

I don't understand why coaching should be banned when in most other other comparable competitive activity coaching is allowed. in all professional sports there are even many coaches and coaching is always allowed. In terms of it disrupting the game there is however, always a time limit, there is a limit between rounds in boxing, mma, etc. and their is a limit to a time out in hockey, basketball, etc. A player should be allowed to have one dedicated coach sitting next to them who they can conference with for 30 seconds following a game

 

As what? Melee? Which is -also- SMASH, AND THEREFORE ALSO TAKES WAY TOO LONG, as I said?

Right reread it, Smash as a whole takes about 2x as long as say Street Fighter. I thought you were referring to Smash, Smash 4, as most people refer to either Melee or Smash as Smash 4.

 

I'm pretty sure coaching in Smash 4 still took less time than handwarmers in Melee.

 

>arguing for handwarmers as a whole to be banned instead of enforcing the 30 second rule already there

ha

some people play multiple smash games and need to do things like play a Melee set and then a Smash 4 set immediately after, I need to smooth out my movement. Other than that, it's awkward hopping into a match immediately after going to the local Wendy's or whatever to eat, or from watching a lot of matches waiting for mine, so I need 15-20 seconds to just fiddle with the controller where I move my character around, and it helps my opponent play in top form as well.

 

Good God, people actually complain about this? It's laughable seeing people actually saying "if you need outside information to win, then you deserve to lose." so I suppose any sports player deserves to lose right? Just eliminate coaches and timeouts in all sports, because we came to see a game, not people talking. The players didn't come up with their own game plan, so they deserve to lose.

I believe a limit SHOULD be set and enforced, but to eliminate is and say a player deserves to lose due to coaching is asinine. Knowing the matchup can be difficult, but executing the actions also takes skill. Quit crying for entitlement.

 

Basketball is different than competetive gaming and they are ran both differently. Competitive sports had alter e itself to include coaching as a fundamental asset. In competitive gaming, such as smash, it just eats up non-gaming time.

It should be allowed but only begore and after sets. Mid-match/in between match coaching should be outright removed.

 

Just put a time limit on coaching. Just like football, coaches get 30 seconds to say what they need to say. I'm sure a similar implementation would not be a problem. Limit it to one person or one per team. 30 seconds at most between sets.

 

I agree with several other people here and think that coaching shouldn't be all together banned, but it definitely needs to be limited. About 20-maybe 30 seconds for coaching total. That way, the coach can't really get into extreme detail or what to do in very specific situations, but so the coach can advise them on their glaring flaws in the previous game, and maybe a piece of advice on how to cover those flaws. But this long coaching gets kind of boring to watch after a while and in between every game.