The "Coaching" Debate.

[Strong Badam]

I do not see how this can even pass as a debate at all. Who can honestly justify a player receiving outside help in a tournament setting? The only ones who are for this are the people who suck too much to matter and what to gain an unfair advantage. I suck too much to matter and somehow I manage to play by the rules and enjoy the game. The **** is wrong with this community?

 

[Pi]

I do not see how this can even pass as a debate at all. Who can honestly justify a player receiving outside help in a tournament setting? The only ones who are for this are the people who suck too much to matter and what to gain an unfair advantage. I suck too much to matter and somehow I manage to play by the rules and enjoy the game. The **** is wrong with this community?

god your wrong on so many counts i'd totally call you out on so much **** if it weren't for these stupid permanent points bull**** now -.-
seriously it's ****ing bull****, most of us are ****ing adults, been w/ this site longer than MLG, and probably more actively than the founders
getting infracted for censor dodging, trolling, flaming? serious bro? is that offending people lol?

w/e

coaching is fair, clearly
if you feel like you're 'playing the game' for someone by coaching them, then you're doing it wrong and in essence doing them a disservice

nobody respond to this please, i'm not going to check back

 

[KAOSTAR]

Yea, imma go with strongbad on this one. Kniht with such an obvious troll lol. permanent points happen if u get 12 points in a 6 month period.

 

[A Pimp Named Slickback]

coaching is fair, clearly
if you feel like you're 'playing the game' for someone by coaching them, then you're doing it wrong and in essence doing them a disservice

nah you're just bad.

 

[DippnDots]

Someones trying to top VBM. I think, at this point, a new thread should be made and this one locked. With all the conclusions of this one. No one is seriously going to read through 30 pages, half of which are flames/trolls. If this thread is going to continue a little work is needed so it's not just the same **** over and over. Amsah's head will get stuck in an infinite loop and that's just not healthy

 

[Nihonjin]

Vro:

I will roll a die before we play our match. If it's a 1, I win. If it's a 6, you win. If it's a 2, 3, 4, or 5, we play normally.

This is completely fair, wouldn't you agree? You have a 1/6 chance of instantly winning, and so do I. And then we have a 2/3 chance of playing normally. That sound good to you? I hope not.

AND BEFORE YOU SAY THAT COACHING IS NOT ANALOGOUS TO THIS... you're right. The point is that just because something is "fair," or applies "equally," or "may not even affect the match," does NOT make it a legitimate and welcome part of the game.

Hey guys, welcome to tripping. It doesn't affect matches very often and it has an equal chance of applying to either player. And if you think it's always disadvantageous (though it HAS cost people games), consider that sometimes the invincibility frames on it help you dodge attacks, and has also possibly HELPED those players as well. Tripping = bueno? No. Tripping no es bueno. Es malo.

AGAIN, AND AGAIN... we are making the argument that coaching changes the way the match is played, for better or worse. We are also arguing that in a 1v1 situation, having somebody point things out to you that you did not see or realize yourself is unfair. We are also arguing that being in a spectator position--where your mind is not occupied with execution and making decisions--allows you to concentrate more on the mental aspect, to see things that the player in the hot seat does not. Whether he should or should not see those things is irrelevant.

Actually, it IS relevant. If he could have seen something, SHOULD have seen it, but did NOT, then that is his error. If you correct that error FOR him by pointing it out, in time for it to make a difference, then you are giving him an advantage that he does not deserve.

Hey, I could have shine spiked you and you would have died. In fact, under most circumstances, I would have done it, but for whatever reason, this time I didn't. It would also improve the quality of the match by making it closer if it had worked. Would you kindly SD for me?

No. Mistakes and player errors belong to the player. Mistakes can be missed l-cancels, bad reads, poor positioning, using punishable moves at questionable times. Nobody should be there to cover for you to "make the match better."

^This.

UNLESS, and this is my only concession to the pro-coaching argument, you make the coach an official part of the match. Again, why not just register coaches? Make them entrants, make them official parts of the match. Let us officially state that we are testing the coach's ability to analyze and communicate, and the player's ability to listen and execute. That would be interesting, and it would say to each player, "the burden is on you to bring a coach," rather than leave it to chance which of your friends is watching your match at the time. The coach can sit next to you and whisper whatever he wants to help you play better. That's the only thing that would make coaching and I dandy with one another.

^This.

Though this would require coaches to not register as players, so it's never going to happen.

Amsah's head will get stuck in an infinite loop and that's just not healthy

^And this.

 

[trahhSTEEZY]

I do not see how this can even pass as a debate at all. Who can honestly justify a player receiving outside help in a tournament setting? The only ones who are for this are the people who suck too much to matter and what to gain an unfair advantage. I suck too much to matter and somehow I manage to play by the rules and enjoy the game. The **** is wrong with this community?

let's makeout?

 

[Zodiac]

This is ALMOST as heated as the brawl vs melee debates we had in 08....Almost

 

[ss118]

if by "heated," you mean Amsah using his superiorly intellectual **** as a fire extinguisher against anything that even resembles the word "coaching," then yes.

 

[Dark Hart]

Amsah, so you think that "coaching" is okay between matches??

 

[Ocho(*8*)]

so when it comes to punishing coaching would you guys just punish the coach or would you even punish the player being coached? what would you do about it is what i'm asking?

 

[Nihonjin]

@Dark Hart
No, for the same reasons I don't want it during the match.

Also, counter picking is an essential part of our tournaments that can be the deciding factor in winning or losing the match. It requires character knowledge, stage knowledge, analytical skills and strategic insight (and probably more). It's something you should do on your own.

so when it comes to punishing coaching would you guys just punish the coach or would you even punish the player being coached? what would you do about it is what i'm asking?

Depends. If the coach is just yelling stuff while the player is in the middle of a match, you punish the coach. But if the player is clearly and actively talking to his coach, you warn/punish him/her as well.

 

[Vro]

If I recall correctly, even you, Amsah, asked Adam for advice in between your Pound quarter-finals matches. Something so innocent as looking at your crewmate with a shrug when the time comes for counterpick could be considered asking for advice. Maybe I'm remembering it wrong. I know Armada always looks to his brother.

If this game were different, where it was standard to play from different TV's and in closed environments, we could keep to this elitist, absolute ruleset of isolated 1v1's. But this game is Smash, a game we play in front of our TV's with our friends. We can only play this game LAN and we've grown accustomed to this, traveling and training with crewmates.

I think it is very reasonable to look into couching standards. I don't think it is very reasonable to shut out all discussion with a matter of fact opinion. "It should (read: must) be a competition between the minds and technical abilities of two and only two players." If anything were to come from this discussion it'd be outlets for couching in the future of smash. At every avenue where someone mentions anything Pro-Couching, we've been beaten to death with the current definition of tournament smash, why couching adds an "unfair" advantage compared to the current system, and how it "undervalues" a player's skill.

First off all, if we were to add couching, it is completely obvious that it would aid the player, in comparison to the current game. So many people have shouted this to me. So the second part of the argument is that it is unfair or cheats a player out of the skill aspect. Those can only be measured by the current system, so of course they'd be completely unfair!

If you think there's absolutely no redeeming qualities of exploring coaching as a possibility, you better have a **** good reason besides "it is different (unfair) to the current system, and we like the current system." If you can prove to me the current system is flawless or that everyone that plays Melee can agree that there is only one way to play this game in tournament, then we should keep our minds open.

To be realistic, we should explore any coaching options (during or in between matches, or during bracket in general) and test them locally. We can continue to "ban" couching (currently afaik there is no official rule) in the larger tournaments. But why cut off a possibility? Especially since coaching (in the long run) will improve all players of the game.

[the way i see it, people who hate couching want to protect their egos, prevent "cheap" wins, prevent other players from ascertaining free learning, etc.]

Knowledge should be free. Don't shoot me!

 

[KAOSTAR]

If I recall correctly, even you, Amsah, asked Adam for advice in between your Pound quarter-finals matches. Something so innocent as looking at your crewmate with a shrug when the time comes for counterpick could be considered asking for advice. Maybe I'm remembering it wrong. I know Armada always looks to his brother.

So what.

so amsah and many others including myself are hypocritical from time to time. Doesnt mean coaching is the right way to go.

 

[Nihonjin]

If I recall correctly, even you, Amsah, asked Adam for advice in between your Pound quarter-finals matches. Something so innocent as looking at your crewmate with a shrug when the time comes for counterpick could be considered asking for advice. Maybe I'm remembering it wrong. I know Armada always looks to his brother.

Everybody does things they know they shouldn't every now and then (though I don't clearly remember that specific case tbh). What's your point?

If this game were different, where it was standard to play from different TV's and in closed environments, we could keep to this elitist, absolute ruleset of isolated 1v1's. But this game is Smash, a game we play in front of our TV's with our friends. We can only play this game LAN and we've grown accustomed to this, traveling and training with crewmates.

Nirvana fallacy.

I think it is very reasonable to look into couching standards. I don't think it is very reasonable to shut out all discussion with a matter of fact opinion. "It should (read: must) be a competition between the minds and technical abilities of two and only two players." If anything were to come from this discussion it'd be outlets for couching in the future of smash. At every avenue where someone mentions anything Pro-Couching, we've been beaten to death with the current definition of tournament smash, why couching adds an "unfair" advantage compared to the current system, and how it "undervalues" a player's skill.

You've been beaten to death because you have no way of defending yourself against logic with such an illogical viewpoint.

First off all, if we were to add couching, it is completely obvious that it would aid the player, in comparison to the current game. So many people have shouted this to me. So the second part of the argument is that it is unfair or cheats a player out of the skill aspect. Those can only be measured by the current system, so of course they'd be completely unfair!

I already gave you the only possible way coaching can logically be considered "fair", but it's completely impractical in our current scene.

[the way i see it, people who hate couching want to protect their egos, prevent "cheap" wins, prevent other players from ascertaining free learning, etc.]

Then you should open your eyes.

Knowledge should be free. Don't shoot me!

Strawman.

 

[Vro]

It is only illogical to our current standard.

Why is it okay for an offensive coordinator to sit bird's eye view, with binoculars and a mic, and advise the QB on plays? Because the rules allow for it.

The most fundamental aspects of smash is we start at equal lives, last one standing wins. We've changed a number of aspects over the years: items, lives, stages, time, etc. The only thing I am saying is that coaching deserves a shot. What makes coaching different is that it is not a % value for affecting the game outcome. It is an abstract value in the form of information. I truly do think knowledge should be free, even during game. I know this concept is different at the very high end, where small tricks can change things and be kept secret.

Let's say I go to smashboards before a tournament and learn that fox's upsmash is 7 frames, just like his grab. What if I repeated that information to someone in tourney? "Hey don't forget, fox's up smash is freaking fast!" Imo, that is free knowledge, which should be dropped anytime needed.

What if I wanted to chain grab a spacie with Marth on FD? M2K just told me right before my match that at 17% I need to do an up tilt because pivot regrab won't get it. Is that much different from him telling me at that exact moment, when Fox hits 17%? Or was it my responsibility to remember that?

If my couch whispered to me, "he's been teching out everytime" i hope to god I've been noticing that too and I truly hope the other side's coach can pick up on that too (hey you've been teching out a lot!). No one wants to watch sloppy, unadaptive play. Well, except when you're the one beating the sloppy play. (Gotta win, win, win!)

By prohibiting coaching of all kinds is to withhold information that can help players and the community develop, mostly for selfish reasons. Which is fine, 1st place is a one man occupation. But c'mon guys, we have to be able to get some light out of this (allow coaching in between matches, allow it before/after sets, something).

Forget picking apart everything I say, I'm truly tired of defending myself when I come to the table with open arms, aiming for coaching possibilities. I can safely say that I understand and honor the opposing side. I can't say the same for it.

 

[Nihonjin]

It is only illogical to our current standard.

Why is it okay for an offensive coordinator to sit bird's eye view, with binoculars and a mic, and advise the QB on plays? Because the rules allow for it.

Football's a team sport. The coordinator is part of the team. What he's doing is part of team work.

Team team team. Get it?

The most fundamental aspects of smash is we start at equal lives, last one standing wins. We've changed a number of aspects over the years: items, lives, stages, time, etc. The only thing I am saying is that coaching deserves a shot.

It really doesn't.

What makes coaching different is that it is not a % value for affecting the game outcome. It is an abstract value in the form of information. I truly do think knowledge should be free, even during game. I know this concept is different at the very high end, where small tricks can change things and be kept secret.

This "abstract" information is the game. Melee isn't physical, it's mental. The most important part of this game isn't to outperform your opponent physically (techskill), but mentally (analyzing, reading, adapting, etc).

Saying "knowledge should be free, even during a game" is as ridiculous in Melee as it is in Chess.

Let's say I go to smashboards before a tournament and learn that fox's upsmash is 7 frames, just like his grab. What if I repeated that information to someone in tourney? "Hey don't forget, fox's up smash is freaking fast!" Imo, that is free knowledge, which should be dropped anytime needed.

Don't make me pull out the exams analogy again.

What if I wanted to chain grab a spacie with Marth on FD? M2K just told me right before my match that at 17% I need to do an up tilt because pivot regrab won't get it. Is that much different from him telling me at that exact moment, when Fox hits 17%? Or was it my responsibility to remember that?

Exams.

If my couch whispered to me, "he's been teching out everytime" i hope to god I've been noticing that too and I truly hope the other side's coach can pick up on that too (hey you've been teching out a lot!). No one wants to watch sloppy, unadaptive play. Well, except when you're the one beating the sloppy play. (Gotta win, win, win!)

?

By prohibiting coaching of all kinds is to withhold information that can help players and the community develop, mostly for selfish reasons. Which is fine, 1st place is a one man occupation. But c'mon guys, we have to be able to get some light out of this (allow coaching in between matches, allow it before/after sets, something).

Nobody's trying to ban coaching before or after sets. Just during matches (during sets in my case).

 

[Vro]

So what about crews? Is that a 1v1 experience? Or is that a team game?

What about boxing? MMA?

 

[Jessup124]

It is only illogical to our current standard.

it really is not.

Why is it okay for an offensive coordinator to sit bird's eye view, with binoculars and a mic, and advise the QB on plays? Because the rules allow for it.

that's a team sport and also remember that a lot of plays called by the coaches covered their mouth , so discretion is key because they DO NOT WANT THE OPPOSING TEAM TO " Lipread their messages".
And all players have a playbook that the team follows, so plans has been put in play and practiced and calls are made to be modified because the opposing team just don't know their plays despite knowing how to play football. So it is INCOMPARABLE TO SMASH.

 

[Wobbles]

While we're letting people coach (to improve match quality) we should let people stop tournament matches to have friendlies and practice their tech skill in between matches.

You want good games? Play better.

Oh, right, you want a coach to step in and get you to play better because you can't/won't do it under your own influence. My bad.

Under the pressure of tournament situations, some players crack. Some players revert to old dumb habits or don't pick up on obvious ones that they really should. That's THEIR fault. Handling pressure is their job. Making good decisions and understanding matchups is their job.

If you want to go around during the tournament and ask people how many frames so-and-so's up-smash is, go for it! Bring your iPhone and look it up on Smashboards. But not DURING the match, because that's when you're being tested on whether or not you have the knowledge and the ability to implement it.

**** better matches, I want authentic ones. Right now our ruleset has nothing regarding coaches, and it should. They can affect the outcome of matches, and should be regulated. I'm just that way, I'm a stickler for rules. I play to them exactly, regardless of whether people like it or not. So if coaches are part of the ruleset then I'll be in favor of them, because they'll be part of the match.

As it is, there's no regulation whatsoever for them; they're permitted by failure to mention them. Which means that any random-*** player can come up and interfere with matches. And yeah, if they aren't official, they're *interfering*. They are influencing the outcome of the game with their actions. And, as stated, it's a match in which they have no official stake, and no authority to interfere with.

Is this really that hard to grasp? Ever watch Street Fighter streams? The players are up in front of their TV, and the massive crowd generating massive hype is 15+ feet behind them. I can pretty much guarantee that through the noise and focus of the players no advice is getting through, but you're just wrong if you don't think those tournaments have incredible crowd presence.

There you go. You get your crowd and we get our no coaching. Just have a **** rope or something, what's the big deal?

 

[Jessup124]

Oh, right, you want a coach to step in and get you to play better because you can't/won't do it under your own influence. My bad.

Not just a coach, I wondered would it be out of line to ask for a "time out session" that includes a snack, perhaps maybe a slice of pumpkinroll with cream cheese and a massage chair, to calm my nerves while Smashboard provides me with therapist whose specialty is to boost morale...

 

[Nihonjin]

So what about crews? Is that a 1v1 experience? Or is that a team game?

For everyone but the crew Captains it's technically a 1v1.

What about boxing? MMA?

That's teamwork.

 

[-ACE-]

Vro, you should read this thread. Virtually all of your concerns would be addressed.

 

[DippnDots]

VROtually all his concerns

 

[Nihonjin]

^I lol'd

 

[Brookman]

So, Amsah, how much of your argument has been hypothetical??

 

[CloneHat]

So, Amsah, how much of your argument has been hypothetical??

None. He ran several "test tournaments" where the elements of coaching were controlled and the players' performance and vital signs were carefully measured.

Just like you did.

 

[Nihonjin]

So, Amsah, how much of your argument has been hypothetical??

Dumb question is dumb.

 

[Brookman]

I pretty frequently coach players, so put your sarcasm away. The question still stands.

 

[Nihonjin]

My arguments and analogies are based on personal experience (what I've seen, what I've done, what's been done to me).

But I don't see why it matters. Whether or not they're hypothetical doesn't make my points any less valid.

 

[-ACE-]

W

But I don't see why it matters. Whether or not they're hypothetical or not doesn't make my points any less valid.

This .

 

[Composeur]

Can't we keep our arguments strictly to the legality of coaching in tournament? The discussion isn't about the legitimacy or utility of coaching in general--just the fairness of its impact in tournament sets!

 

[PoundSlap]

i dont think coaching is ok. an exception should be in teams but only if the team partner doesnt participate and plays the coach in the background. its a 2v1 but you have the coach in the background.

 

[PoundSlap]

sorry for the double post but i just noticed that AMSAH should be the last one to complain about coaching:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q76jzEBqUiw#t=0m43s

"everyone is choaching amsah"
"shroomed in the background telling him to backair"

thats really pathetic amsah.

 

[KirbyKaze]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

vbm status

 

[CloneHat]

You have to give him props for searching through the videos to find 2 seconds of meaningless footage

 

[trahhSTEEZY]

i honestly think VBM went about his **** 10x more intelligently, this guy is either trolling, or being a complete tool!

amsah, next time i think it'd be appropriate if you paused the game, and told anyone that was throwing tips at you to please stop since you don't approve of it!

amirite

 

[Nihonjin]

sorry for the double post but i just noticed that AMSAH should be the last one to complain about coaching:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q76jzEBqUiw#t=0m43s

"everyone is choaching amsah"
"shroomed in the background telling him to backair"

thats really pathetic amsah.

I always wonder if people like you don't grow tired of themselves.

amsah, next time, i think it'd be appropriate if you paused the game, and told anyone that was throwing tips at you to please stop since you don't approve of it!

amirite

I naturally block out crowds, I didn't even know I got coached until I saw that video and heard Waffles' commentary..

But yeah, I'll do that next time..

 

[KirbyKaze]

You have to give him props for searching through the videos to find 2 seconds of meaningless footage

*internet high five*

 

[Velox]

amsah, next time i think it'd be appropriate if you paused the game, and told anyone that was throwing tips at you to please stop since you don't approve of it!

isn't pausing not allowed in tournament?