The "Coaching" Debate.

[Nihonjin]

The argument is not "All coaching is bad," it's "Coaching has no place in a one-on-one competition."

This.

SmashMac: if coaching is such a big deal, allow the players themselves to determine, before the match, whether they'll allow their opponent to have a coach.

Nope, ban it. Coaching doesn't only affect the matches where coaches are present, it can affect the course of the whole tournament.

Example:

Player A & B are in a match, the winner gets to play Player C.

Player A is a Sheik player
Player B is a Fox player
Player C is a Marth

The score is 1-1, Player A is on his last stock with 100% and off stage, the Fox has 10% and is on stage. As the Sheik is trying to recover, his coach tells him the Fox player always rolls off too early when trying to edgeguard, so he should move backwards with his up B before going towards the edge. Player A follows the advice and rather than getting edgehogged or upsmashed, he makes it back on stage.

Then his coach tells him that the Fox player always full jump nairs over his needles and that he should use that to bait him to the edge. Player A again follows his advice, he charges needles as bait, the Fox immediately approaches with a full jump nair, to which the Sheik needle cancels and dash dances in to a grab. As he's about to Bthrow the Fox off stage, his coach whispers "Cover his forward B on stage, he uses it all the time". Player A again follows his coach's advice and succesfully gimps player B. Game Set & Match.

In this scenario, the coach saved his coachee, and successfully coached him to victory, this doesn't only suck for Player B, but Player C got screwed as well (And whoever's stuck with player B in the losers bracket). Because instead of having to face a Fox, he's now stuck with a Sheik.

So no, ban I wouldn't leave it up to players.


@Smasher89

1. More reason to ban it
2. No it's not, read the thread
3. Strawman

 

[Brookman]

sounds like player b is a predictable noob and I don't think player a needed a coach.


Since player C has made it this far into the tournament I tihnk he'll be able to squash player A regardless of character selection or his opponents coach.

 

[RATED]

I don't know who's right, all I know is Amsah is right.

Learning to adapt, read your opponent, handle pressure, make less mistakes, and change play styles; those are all skills. Players should be punished for not having those skills.

puu : you are so right, that it makes happy. Everything summed in one little post.

 

[Nihonjin]

sounds like player b is a predictable noob and I don't think player a needed a coach.


Since player C has made it this far into the tournament I tihnk he'll be able to squash player A regardless of character selection or his opponents coach.

Sounds like someone's trolling. (Or missed the point entirely )

 

[Brookman]

play A is marth player B is peach.


B is @ x-hundred percent and player A is struggling to find a kill. I tell A,

"don't forget your forward b"

A wins the match and set.

 

[KirbyKaze]

And then player C is Mew2King and would have squashed either of them anyway.

And we get entertaining **** a la M2K in Marth ditto :D

 

[Nihonjin]

play A is marth player B is peach.


B is @ x-hundred percent and player A is struggling to find a kill. I tell A,

"don't forget your forward b"

A wins the match and set.

Guess the in my previous post wasn't necessary..

 

[-ACE-]

Amsah, you're right. I didn't really think much into how it can affect the entire outcome of a tournament. I really think it should be banned.

 

[Jam Stunna]

The argument is not "All coaching is bad," it's "Coaching has no place in a one-on-one competition."

Without drawing the obvious comparisons to other one-on-one competitions, the latter statement is absurd. If you're arguing that coaching doesn't belong in Smash, that's something entirely different.

 

[Bamesy]

I sometimes feel bad for telling people little things during sets.
At all levels, I've probably assisted in helping people win more than is fair.
It really makes a difference, at ALL levels.
*See : Mango vs Armada - before vs after Mango was winning - factor? - Hugs
I've done it a dozen times and seen it more.
If it's on both sides sure, which I always will. That's where the player making the change quickest usually takes more advantage from it. It's still an advantage/disadvantage to one or the other.
Sometimes with a crowd you can't help it, but when someone is FOCUSSING ON IT, it becomes WAY more significant, and one sided.
Otherwise it's a good thing. :D

 

[CloneHat]

Without drawing the obvious comparisons to other one-on-one competitions, the latter statement is absurd. If you're arguing that coaching doesn't belong in Smash, that's something entirely different.

If you're talking about coaches in other sports, then that's not applicable. A coach is part of a team; if there is a coach intervening, than it is now a 2 on 2 sport.

In a sport that is truly designed to test one player against another, particularly one based heavily off of knowledge and memorization, a third party has no place.

 

[Jam Stunna]

In a sport that is truly designed to test one player against another, particularly one based heavily off of knowledge and memorization, a third party has no place.

Like boxing?

 

[forward]

Like boxing?

Yea seriously. Kinda missed the backside of a barn with that one.

 

[CloneHat]

Do coaches not only operate during the one-minute breaks? I can't imagine their advice being put to good use if the player is barely within earshot.

 

[Velox]

Suppose we have 2 coaches per player...

 

[MT_]

Coaching in Boxing and MMA are fundamentally different than in Smash.

A professional boxer or MMA fighter are associated with their gym and their gym's coach. All of their training prior to the match are done with that coach in that gym. When a boxer or fighter enters the ring, they are representing their gym and thus their coach as well. In essence, a professional boxer or MMA fighter do not register individually, but alongside their gym and thus their coach.

In Smash, when you register for a tourney you don't register yourself alongside any sort of coach. Unless we aim to change that, we should recognize that Boxing and MMA have this fundamental difference when it comes to coaching.

 

[Brookman]

I think that's a fairly negligible argument. Almost too fantastic to be coherent.

 

[Jam Stunna]

Do coaches not only operate during the one-minute breaks? I can't imagine their advice being put to good use if the player is barely within earshot.

In a boxing ring? They aren't that big, you can hear everything your coach is yelling. And yes, coaches do coach boxers during the rounds.

Coaching in Boxing and MMA are fundamentally different than in Smash.

A professional boxer or MMA fighter are associated with their gym and their gym's coach. All of their training prior to the match are done with that coach in that gym. When a boxer or fighter enters the ring, they are representing their gym and thus their coach as well. In essence, a professional boxer or MMA fighter do not register individually, but alongside their gym and thus their coach.

In Smash, when you register for a tourney you don't register yourself alongside any sort of coach. Unless we aim to change that, we should recognize that Boxing and MMA have this fundamental difference when it comes to coaching.

You're right. I was just saying that it's crazy to make a blanket statement like coaches have no place in one-on-one competition.

 

[Brookman]

I mean, I remember back @ x tournament in 07 being coached and cheered by cort/PC in my pools. These people were my friends and provided the best support they could for me in my matches.

 

[forward]

Coaching in Boxing and MMA are fundamentally different than in Smash.

A professional boxer or MMA fighter are associated with their gym and their gym's coach. All of their training prior to the match are done with that coach in that gym. When a boxer or fighter enters the ring, they are representing their gym and thus their coach as well. In essence, a professional boxer or MMA fighter do not register individually, but alongside their gym and thus their coach.

In Smash, when you register for a tourney you don't register yourself alongside any sort of coach. Unless we aim to change that, we should recognize that Boxing and MMA have this fundamental difference when it comes to coaching.

Good point.

I don't think smash is too far off though. People take a lot of pride in their region and crew. I think when people play in tournament they feel like they represent those to varying degrees.

 

[Laijin]

Like boxing, wrestling is another prime example of this.
I wrestled for 5 years. The rules for coaching in any league are similar(college, high school, even olympics).
It is allowed to have coaches at your corner and teammates to scream stuff at you DURING a match. PERFECTLY legal. (although sometimes they only limit up to 2 coaches per corner). Anyone can act as a coach even if they registered in the tournament as well. Its perfectly fair in the olympics. Plus its not like coaching only helps one person. I remember I was in one match and the other guy's coach was like "DO A GRAMBY ROLL(A wrestling move)!" and then immediatly my coach was like "WATCH OUT FOR THE GRAMBY!".
Hillarious.

tl;dr: Its perfectly legal in 1v1 OLYMPIC sports. Why would a 1v1 smash competition act "more competitive" and ban coaching? Sounds pretty dumb to me.

 

[Velox]

Its perfectly legal in 1v1 OLYMPIC sports. Why would a 1v1 smash competition act "more competitive" and ban coaching? Sounds pretty dumb to me.

That's the only debate in this thread, everything else is just fact (what Amsah is saying.) People are going to say to this though that athletes have paid coaches that are known to always coach the player and etc. Smash has for the most part existed without coaches up to this point. Personally, I like it the way it is, to allow a coach in boxing is indeed unfair to the player fighting in those sports (even though nobody ever talks about it), it takes money and prestige, and luck to obtain a good coach thus each individual fighter isn't on entirely even ground (the extent of which they are is possibly relevent, but I take it to where it doesn't really matter to what extent.) We try to be a little more fair in smash I guess. Course nobody's really thought about it until now... (so I guess this isn't a debate, you're imply the possible imposing of another standard that may or may not be entirely fair.. (though I realize you're just playing devil's advocate for argument sake probably)) The fact is, if you allow coaches in smash, someone is going to get Mango and their opponent is going to have to settle with some European player (heh, jk).

 

[Brookman]

OMG you're kidding yourself and completely out of touch with the competitive community if you think coaching is just now becoming a factor in tournaments.

 

[Velox]

Wait, what? Did you take THAT away from my post?

 

[MT_]

I think we're missing an important point from what I said earlier. When someone wins a fight in Boxing or MMA (IDK about wrestling), it's not just the individual that is credited with victory. Because the fighter registers in the tournament under a specific gym guided by a specific coach, the victory does not officially belong to the fighter alone, but to everyone affiliated with his success.

This might just be a matter of opinion, but this is fundamentally different than in Smash for a couple reasons.

1) When you register for a Smash tournament, you register for yourself and only yourself. You do not register a coach with whom you are affiliated with. This results in the following point:

2) If you win tournament set over another player, the victory is accredited only to you as an individual. If you had any coaching involved with that set, the coach gets zero credit for your victory.

Also, keep in mind that boxers and MMA fighters have the same coaches almost every single fight that they enter. They enter with the same coach that they trained under for countless hours preparing for a fight. In Smash, the coaching we are talking about involves finding whoever is available, and that can change in each set or even each match.

Also a small point @Forward: in professional Boxing, fighters from the same gym are not allowed to fight against each other under professional regulations (for various reasons like having the same coach, or fixing fights etc). Since (I think) you're making a comparison between a gym and someone's region, there is an intricate detail that is also different here. It is inevitable that people will face others from the same region in tournament even with the best seeding, so this comparison is flawed also.


I'm not necessarily taking a stand on pro-coaching or anti-coaching, but you should consider these points carefully when we try to make the "Boxing and MMA allow coaching, so why shouldn't Smash?" argument. Recognizing that they are different on very basic levels should discourage us from using the analogy as substantial evidence that coaching should be allowed.

 

[Laijin]

lol coaching will never be banned in tournaments

 

[A Pimp Named Slickback]

lol coaching will never be banned in tournaments

lol you have nothing more to say

 

[Luma]

coaching is banned in tennis, now stfu with the sports-talk

 

[Laijin]

lol you have nothing more to say

no I don't cause this is a dumb argument lol. When has anyone ever had a serious problem with it since this game came out?

 

[P.C. Jona]

coaching is banned in tennis, now stfu with the sports-talk

Tennis is for f@gs

Every other sport has coaching in one way or another.

Either get smarter friends or shut up.

If a coach is helping someone beat you then your a pattern player and you need to rethink the way you play.

No johns about coaching

Nothing in this game is that broken

 

[Velox]

no I don't cause this is a dumb argument lol. When has anyone ever had a serious problem with it since this game came out?

We've already mentioned how it can change games. No offense, but if you don't think it's important enough for the community to be talking about then.... don't.

 

[FoxLisk]

I've come to the conclusion that coaching isn't inherently unfair. What's unfair about coaching is that a lot of players show up to tournaments without a coach and with no intent to coach and expecting to play against an uncoached opponent. Coaching should be well-regulated. Perhaps, as an experiment, some regional tournaments should be run pro-coaching: Tell everyone straight up that coaching is encouraged, and, as your opponent will probably be coached, you should endeavour to bring a coach with you. The current situation however is that most players do not expect anyone to be using a coach, don't have one themselves - and have no practice incorporating coaching into their game - and are thus at a disadvantage.

Why do I think coaching is not inherently unfair? Because many of the arguments against it can be applied to teams. If the argument, 'but if my opponent is friends with mango and mango coaches him, i'm ****ed' holds, then the argument, 'but if my opponent is friends with mango and they team together, me and my buddy are ****ed in doubles' holds.
Er, that's not why I think coaching is not inherently unfair, but I think it's the easiest way to get the idea across.

 

[forward]

Also a small point @Forward: in professional Boxing, fighters from the same gym are not allowed to fight against each other under professional regulations (for various reasons like having the same coach, or fixing fights etc). Since (I think) you're making a comparison between a gym and someone's region, there is an intricate detail that is also different here. It is inevitable that people will face others from the same region in tournament even with the best seeding, so this comparison is flawed also.

Dude, all I said is that players have pride in their region and crew and they feel a sense of representation to those when playing in tourney. The place they come from and people they train with they represent them like boxers would rep their gyms, sparring partners, coaches, etc.

Don't read anything else out of it other than that.

Foxlisk: I'm actually doing just that. I'm hosting a tourney in Dec and I specifically put in the rules that coaching is allowed and encouraged.

 

[FoxLisk]

Forward: Cool. You should post in here or start a thread about it afterwords to let us know how it went/what people thought.

 

[A Pimp Named Slickback]

Why do I think coaching is not inherently unfair? Because many of the arguments against it can be applied to teams. If the argument, 'but if my opponent is friends with mango and mango coaches him, i'm ****ed' holds, then the argument, 'but if my opponent is friends with mango and they team together, me and my buddy are ****ed in doubles' holds.
Er, that's not why I think coaching is not inherently unfair, but I think it's the easiest way to get the idea across.

Do you know what DOUBLES is?

you know, when you enter with TWO people? as opposed to SINGLES, in which you enter with only ONE?

Holy ****.

and "hey this isn't my opinion but I'll state it anyways." good job.

 

[MT_]

Dude, all I said is that players have pride in their region and crew and they feel a sense of representation to those when playing in tourney. The place they come from and people they train with they represent them like boxers would rep their gyms, sparring partners, coaches, etc.

Don't read anything else out of it other than that.

Fair enough.

Anyways I think I've added what hasn't already been in the debate. Anything more I say will just be a repeat of what Amsah has previously said because the same points (that were refuted earlier) are coming back up again. I'm gonna sit out of this discussion now unless I can come up with something new to add to the discussion.

 

[FoxLisk]

Do you know what DOUBLES is?

you know, when you enter with TWO people? as opposed to SINGLES, in which you enter with only ONE?

Holy ****.

and "hey this isn't my opinion but I'll state it anyways." good job.

what the ****? read my post before spewing bile at me, moron.

 

[TheGoat]

lol coaching will never be banned in tournaments

You are probably right, its just not gonna happen

 

[Nihonjin]

Wait, what? Did you take THAT away from my post?

Ignore trolls.

no I don't cause this is a dumb argument lol. When has anyone ever had a serious problem with it since this game came out?

If you bothered reading the thread, you'd see Cactuar, Armada, me and others have posted numerous examples of how coaching can and has affected games.

I've come to the conclusion that coaching isn't inherently unfair. What's unfair about coaching is that a lot of players show up to tournaments without a coach and with no intent to coach and expecting to play against an uncoached opponent. Coaching should be well-regulated. Perhaps, as an experiment, some regional tournaments should be run pro-coaching: Tell everyone straight up that coaching is encouraged, and, as your opponent will probably be coached, you should endeavour to bring a coach with you. The current situation however is that most players do not expect anyone to be using a coach, don't have one themselves - and have no practice incorporating coaching into their game - and are thus at a disadvantage.

Why do I think coaching is not inherently unfair? Because many of the arguments against it can be applied to teams. If the argument, 'but if my opponent is friends with mango and mango coaches him, i'm ****ed' holds, then the argument, 'but if my opponent is friends with mango and they team together, me and my buddy are ****ed in doubles' holds.
Er, that's not why I think coaching is not inherently unfair, but I think it's the easiest way to get the idea across.

Coaching in teams is fine, so long as it's not a third player who's coaching, but your actual team partner during the game or after he died. It's part of teamwork.

But that's also exactly why I'm against it. Teamwork in singles, really?

Foxlisk: I'm actually doing just that. I'm hosting a tourney in Dec and I specifically put in the rules that coaching is allowed and encouraged.

Nobody's arguing about coaching in teams.


On a side note, I'm glad to see the pro-coaching argument has been reduced to:

It's never going to get banned anyway..

Concession accepted, I guess..?

 

[VA]

That is why this thread is pointless. It's all a load of guff about opinions.

In the end, the community can't agree on a standardised stage list and rule set on picking the first stage. How is it plausible that suddenly we have a formal anti-coaching rule that is in place at all tournaments?