The reason we get games cut from stream is that there isn't enough time. Cutting a stock is a step towards solving that issue. There's a whole lot of hyperbole going on in there that isn't worth dissecting and also you aren't taking into account all the down time in between games.
but mike, i've just shown you that the statement that 64 takes "too long" is bull****. it's the fastest moving game! if anything, to's should consider moving melee and brawl around to shorten them. why should we get the **** end of the stick? because melee/brawl are more popular? again, you aren't seeing the fair side of the issue.
as far as other people hosting events, i mean, sensei is hosting 64 at smashacre. at the tournament at rutgers march 9th i think, they had 64 available. the problem was nobody came, for one reason or another. here's the big problem - melee/brawl players (who also happen to be to's) have this bias against 64. it's always the same thing - "if the 64 community brings their own setups and gets people to come, we'll have it". that kid who ran the one at rutgers said, "you can ask one of the melee players for one of their tv's, but that isn't fair cuz they brought it to play melee".
and yet, it's always the 64 community that brings an excess of tv's. strife wanted chris and will's tv's to go to melee at zenith, i remember. and in maryland somebody took a tv off 64. but heaven help us if we take a tv off melee or brawl to play 64!
bracket pools would be great. or multiple rounds. i enjoyed pools at zenith, but to only get a 16 man bracket out of a 35 man group...it just seems ****ed up.
Well he's flying to Japan for a single elim 4-stock tournament lol. Perhaps that speaks for itself.
correct me if i am wrong but he was going to japan with his girlfriend regardless of whether or not he'd make the tournament. i recall him saying he'd probably miss it, but then found out it would coincide.
but he also flew to peru. and they play 5 stocks. and he's been at apex, all the way on the other side of the country, which is 5 stocks. so it's kinda arbitrary.
did 4-stocks really do anything detrimental to your tournament experience? Did it make anything better? Let me know from both a player's perspective and a spectator's perspective.
i would not blame my losses on 4 stocks - i got outplayed in both sets. as i said, it was a very enjoyable tournament. however, i was definitely out of my comfort zone, and the idea of having one less stock to work with stuck in the back of my mind. losing two stocks suddenly put me a lot closer to elimination than ever before. it didn't improve the experience by having shorter sets.
as a spectator, my opinion is moot and should not matter. i stand by that.
4 stocks was way more fun and intense. If making the whole tournament too fast is an issue, then changing it to best 3 out of 5 for everything would be a better way to fix it.
i feel like that's improper weighing, though. a first round match is not nearly as intense as winner's finals and they should not be weighed the same. ideally we'd have bo3, 5, and 7, but if everything becomes bo5, then grand finals should definitely become a bo7 set (or two). it's the biggest, most important match of the entire tournament, after all. however, i am not proposing that we move everything to bo5 and bo7. i am alright with bo3s and bo5s. just not with 4 stocks.
if more tournaments occur with 4 stock bo5s, i could provide my opinion on that.
