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.

 

This presents a problem.

 

It gets way out of hand sometimes. Some type of rule would be nice

 

I completely agree. The players should be making the choices and fight for themselves, anyways.

 

I think we ought to limit coaching to 60 seconds maximum. If a player needs any more info than that, they deserve to lose. It's their job to learn the MU, and if they fail at that, they fail at Smash. I completely agree with TheDerrit's position on integrity too. The player did not earn that knowledge, and so coaching eliminates some of the integrity of the match. If you have to be coached, it's not really you playing, is it? Somebody else had to come give you that knowledge.

 

Nothing is wrong with a some tasteful coaching imo… But if it's going on a hot minute or more there's just no time for that.

 

(╭ರ_•́)\ Ｂａｎ Ｃｏａｃｈｉｎｇ Ｏｒ Ｒｕｃｋｕｓ (╭ರ_•́)\

A minute seems 'reasonable', but somehow unenforcable. Sure, the opponent would have a vested interest in not letting the person go over. So, how about we give a game to the person who calls 'em out, or DQ someone? Both people can use the coaching time, though. It seems too cumbersome. Just ban it.

 

something like "coaching cannot go longer than _ (I dunno what would be a good time frame) and can only happen once a set." would probably be better than if they could go in whenever they wanted and helped out. I don't think coaching is too bad, just it should be kept to a minimum so the tournament doesn't take too long.

 

Want to know what also needs to regulated....hand warmers....needs to have a time limit....way too much time was spent on that at apex

 

Coaching isn't a huge problem, you can literally wait a minute for free entertainment. I'm not going to jeopardize anything towards a win all because people are impatient and want to watch me compete. I paid money to compete, I'll do whatever it takes to win, at whatever cost.

And it doesn't matter if you play buffed up coached ZeRo, you should be mentally strong enough and prepared enough to play against anyone if you want to win more than anything.

Alternatively, Coaching can be taken differently. Allot thirty seconds sessions before Game 1, if anything exceeds that time limit or if you coach after Game 1, punish the player.

 

I think we ought to limit coaching to 60 seconds maximum. If a player needs any more info than that, they deserve to lose. It's their job to learn the MU, and if they fail at that, they fail at Smash.

If a player needs any info at all, they deserve to lose. That's the whole point, in my opinion. Someone else telling you how to win doesn't make you deserve the win.

 

I think 1 solution is that there needs to be a set time limit between sets, like players can only spend 1 minute at the menu and discussing counter picks. Personally I don't think coaching itself is the problem, it's MID-SET COACHING that's the issue, and the fact that the TO's aren't willing to be assertive enough to say "Guys! We're on a schedule, Shut up and Play!"

 

Give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile. Ban mid-match coaching.

 

People complain that Sm4sh takes too long, but in truth, Melee took just as long as Sm4sh at Apex. The reason wasn't because the games themselves that were slow, it's the coaching and all the breaks in the middle that delayed everything. People want Sm4sh to be 2-stock, thinking that the stocks are the problem. But that just makes players more campy and defensive, making games actually longer alongside the huge amount of time spent on the menu. It really was a huge turn off to see the menu screen more than the actual matches themselves.

Coaching needs to go, or be regulated with a timer like they do in sports.

 

If a player needs any info at all, they deserve to lose. That's the whole point, in my opinion. Someone else telling you how to win doesn't make you deserve the win.

Exactly. It's Smash Integrity. Plagiarism is a violation of Academic Integrity, and using someone else's coaching is the Smash form of Plagiarism.

 

Yeah, I think coaching should be banned, because it just helps things move along.

 

One minute breaks, Just like a boxing match between rounds.

Your coach gives you a quick tip on what to look out for, but doesn't have the time to literally baby you through the whole thing. They simply give you a piece of advice that the player has to notice.

On another note, while I do believe it's not fair for those who don't have coaches, it does kind of promote making more social connections with other players.

Edit

Quoting my page 2 post as it adds a lot more insight to my thoughts on this matter.

Everything in smash is a round by round basis. The time between each round is that cool-down period where a player can wipe away their sweat, hear some advice, and take a drink of water or something.

Like I said earlier, this is most similar to boxing, another sport where coaching between rounds (preformed by the corner-man) is indeed allowed, and extremely beneficial.

The only difference is that in boxing, both players always have a corner-man, whereas in smash not everyone does.

As we are trying to strive for fairness for both players, then both players should have the equal opportunity to have the coaches.

With that in mind, If one player doesn't have a coach, then the other player should not be allowed to have their coach for that match.

In the case that both players have coaches, then the time frame should be short enough so that each player can hear a small bit of advice and not an entire lecture. One minute is a good enough time frame for this.

 

Exactly. It's Smash Integrity. Plagiarism is a violation of Academic Integrity, and using someone else's coaching is the Smash form of Plagiarism.

Uuuuuuhhh this has nothing to do with legal consequences of stealing someone's intellectual property

 

Oracle mentioned a rule variation on The Salt Mines podcast this week that basically is calling a "clock", if someone is taking too long to make a decision or is being coached excessively, you call a TO to start a clock for 30/60 seconds or however long, and they have to make a character/stage choice in that time.

If coaching isn't banned, it should be limited to a reasonable amount of time by something like this rule.

 

One minute breaks, Just like a boxing match between rounds.

Your coach gives you a quick tip on what to look out for, but doesn't have the time to literally baby you through the whole thing. They simply give you a piece of advice that the player has to notice.

On another note, while I do believe it's not fair for those who don't have coaches, it does kind of promote making more social connections with other players.

Exactly. A minute is the perfect time for a quick tip without making things drag on too long. Also, that point about the social connections was very interesting.

 

Coaching... ugh... I dunno, making it banned or forbidden feels like too much, but I really think if you're going into a fight it should be all on you. Your skill, your knowledge, your decisions. Taking a while to hear a friend tell you why whoever is the perfect counterpick and try to convince you is lame and can even get in the players head. So... I'm ganna go with the banned option. Cause even regulating it - what is that? They only get 10 seconds or whatever? Still messes with the player and effects their decision. It should be all you! I wouldn't want any help and I would feel it would be sorta lame if my opponent got help too.

 

People complain that Sm4sh takes too long, but in truth, Melee took just as long as Sm4sh at Apex. The reason wasn't because the games themselves that were slow, it's the coaching and all the breaks in the middle that delayed everything. People want Sm4sh to be 2-stock, thinking that the stocks are the problem. But that just makes players more campy and defensive, making games actually longer alongside the huge amount of time spent on the menu. It really was a huge turn off to see the menu screen more than the actual matches themselves.

Coaching needs to go, or be regulated with a timer like they do in sports.

To be fair, Melee also played 9 extra games than the Top 8 of Smash 4, so it isn't really a fair comparison.

 

Uuuuuuhhh this has nothing to do with legal reifications of stealing someone's intellectual property

Granted, it's not as serious of a matter by any means, but it's the same general concept. It wasn't really you who wrote that paper, and it wasn't really you who won that game. In both scenarios, one uses the easy out to avoid doing work and look good.

 

Solution

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGjSJmJkFb4

 

Granted, it's not as serious of a matter by any means, but it's the same general concept. It wasn't really you who wrote that paper, and it wasn't really you who won that game. In both scenarios, one uses the easy out to avoid doing work and look good.

Ok, when you phrase it like that it makes more sense.

I just realized how undisciplined of a community we are when it comes to running these events. Like MLG last year when so many people didn't want to be punctual about their match and complained about it when they got DQ'd, and now with this when seeing how long we let drawn out coaching sessions become. I mean, it's cool how we all treat each other like family, but still with events this big there needs to be SOME level of professionalism.

 

I know we have Little Mac in the game but this isn't a boxing ring. Ban coaching 2015.

 

It seems pretty unfair when playing surprisingly intellectual fighting games and having someone "help fight with intellect" while someone without a coach to call out patterns has to just use what s/he observes while playing in a match.

Also yeah please don't take that long between matches kthx

 

The entire Top 8 being best 3/5 didn't help, either.

 

Giving advice between sets should be 100% allowed. At the end of the day 2 players skill and execution decides the match. All forms of sports have this between sets in some way or another. I also support something along the lines of 1 minute or so for counterpicking/advice. Completely teaching someone what to do should not be a thing, but saying, "you're rolling too much." should be acceptable.

 

I think we shouldn't ban coaching entirely, rather just give a set time limit on how long people should coach mid-match.

 

If a player needs any info at all, they deserve to lose. That's the whole point, in my opinion. Someone else telling you how to win doesn't make you deserve the win.

that is so naive. most of coaching is getting advice from someone who just has more knowledge than you. most coaches aren't even as good as the players they are coaching. players have respect for coaches and vice versa. if you're butthurt over debate between two people between a video game match then you should probably rethink the ruleset for anything. how about you can't take longer than 3 minutes counterpicking a stage because guess what some people do. if you don't care about that then this shouldn't be an issue.

 

Granted, it's not as serious of a matter by any means, but it's the same general concept. It wasn't really you who wrote that paper, and it wasn't really you who won that game. In both scenarios, one uses the easy out to avoid doing work and look good.

In just overall playing you can completely copy someone's successful playstyle and use that to your success shortcutting the effort it would have taken you to progress. In a minute between games you aren't going to be able to change so much that the outcome is going to be altered because it relies on your execution. Smash is a game where all knowledge is open to the public, and only execution matters.

 

I don't understand the coaching problem. If someone needs advice then why is it so big?

 

I know we have Little Mac in the game but this isn't a boxing ring. Ban coaching 2015.

The boxing ring stage certainly is!

 

that is so naive. most of coaching is getting advice from someone who just has more knowledge than you. most coaches aren't even as good as the players they are coaching. players have respect for coaches and vice versa. if you're butthurt over debate between two people between a video game match then you should probably rethink the ruleset for anything. how about you can't take longer than 3 minutes counterpicking a stage because guess what some people do. if you don't care about that then this shouldn't be an issue.

Coaches in pretty much every individual sport sit in the stands. Golf, tennis, everything. When the game starts, coaching is over. Imagine a chess player getting coached between moves. Pretty ridiculous right?

If you have a coach who teaches you while you practice, whatever. Fine. Having a coach tell you what to do when you flounder during a match is just covering your weaknesses, something you should have done before competition.

 

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.

Try posting that on /r/smashbros and see what happens man. Pitchforks and anger and fire.

Not only should COACHING be banned from smash 4, HANDWARMERS are completely unacceptable!! The game requires no tech skill, so wtf handwarmers?? Button check I can understand... make sure the controller is working before a tourney match etc... takes 2 seconds.

 

I feel like I made a really long post for news like this so here's a spoiler tag.

Spoiler

Then again, I have seen that menu screen a stupid amount of screen. Actually, I think I can compare it to Sonic 06. You know, that game that had like those 15 second loading screens that I know everyone hated? Kind of the same here (not that I would dare compare Sonic 06's gameplay to Smash Wii U's gameplay), whereas I have to wait a long moment in order for the next match to begin. I didn't think stage and character advantage planning was neccessary to the point where it takes just as long as the majority of the matches, and if it did, then man do these people think way too much about this.

Also, my personal gripe would be that in Smash games like Melee while they're on the menu, they always tend to pick a low-tier character and then make us think they're going to pick said character but then they immediatley pick an S-tier character. Is that some thing they do to move something in thier body while they're waiting or is that some sort of nasty troll move to the people watching?

Second paragraph aside, tournaments like Apex has an audience, and when they come for Melee's fast-paced action, the hype is slowed down because people have to take the time to get thier nerves back and plan thier next character and stage. I don't think it should be put an end to, but it should be lessened for sure. I refuse to believe people need that much time to pick a character and a stage.

EDIT: Oh sorry I thought this was completley another thing, staying on menus and such. I take that back. Coaching, now that I know the situation, should be removed because it's almost a 2v1, with one player giving advice to the other. Does that seem fair to the other person? No.

 

Coaches in pretty much every individual sport sit in the stands. Golf, tennis, everything. When the game starts, coaching is over. Imagine a chess player getting coached between moves. Pretty ridiculous right?

If you have a coach who teaches you while you practice, whatever. Fine. Having a coach tell you what to do when you flounder during a match is just covering your weaknesses, something you should have done before competition.

lol i golf so that statement is completely wrong. the caddy is with the golfer the whole round. i get what you're saying about chess, but that's different. smash is a completely different sport and should be treated as such. coaches honestly i don't care about but if someone comes up to me and offers some advice i'll take it whatever, but if someone goes on for longer than 30 seconds i'll just say ok i'm good and go on. i agree coaching shouldn't take 3 minutes or whatever, but that's almost the player's fault, not the coach.

 

I think when it comes to the matter of Top 8, the person who announces the matches/players to come up to the stage should also regulate some coaching to 1 min or less and announce beforehand to have your coaches at your side during the game so no one is allowed to run up and try to help.

 

Doc Louis dislikes this

I can see why this is a problem at tournaments. Maybe they could coach in between matches.