Tournament Ethics: Coaching

[pockyD]

the only way to really address it is to have mandatory headsets with high-volume game sound for the players

the question (well, a question) is whether we want to take our game and community down that super-serious, all-business path rather than the fun-based track we're on right now (in my experience, everyone LOVES being in a crowd and yelling at the players)

i've never been good enough to consistently place in the money (but 90% of the community is probably in that boat too)... and the reason I play the game and go to tournaments is to interact with my opponents and compadres. it'd be a shame to throw that away imo

 

[Cactuar]

The difference between cheering and coaching is significant.

 

[jugfingers]

The difference between cheering and coaching is significant.

I heard that chu-dat and m2k split in some grandfinals along time ago because chu-dat accused you of coaching m2k.

or something like that.

what say you.

 

[Pi]

DON'T TELL HIM HOW TO BEAT ME BRO
THEN I'LL LOSE!

-.-
If someone is given advice and is able to respond accordingly in a match to it, then why can't you do the same thing?

"Dude all he's doing is shielding, grab more"
"WTF DON'T SAY THAT, HOW CAN I COUNTER HIS GRAB?"

"He keeps approaching with nair, CC or shield grab him"
"WTF CHEATER, HOW I CAN BEAT SHIELD GRAB?"

sure is johns up in here.

 

[Cactuar]

I heard that chu-dat and m2k split in some grandfinals along time ago because chu-dat accused you of coaching m2k.

or something like that.

what say you.

True story.

At the time, I knew Chu's playstyle pretty much inside and out, but I lacked the ability to use it effectively with my own Marth. M2K likely would have won that set regardless of my coaching, but Chu's portrayal of the situation was that he believed M2K only won because of the advice I was giving. Most of the "coaching" I had been doing for M2K as far as advice vs ICs was prior to the actual match, as all I really did during the matches was say little things to M2K to keep him calm, as he had a problem with nerves when playing vs Chu.

I don't believe coaching was written as being illegal in the rules of that tournament, but I do see how it is unethical and should not be legal, as I have swayed sets other than that one by talking people through the opponent's strategies mid game.

Note: Eventually, an agreement was made between Chu, Chillin, M2K, and I, in which Chillin and I would both remain silent during any future sets of M2K vs Chu. This was done largely to prevent M2K from being distracted by Chillin, as he is quite... loud... as well as keeping me from pointing out Chu's habits for M2K to punish.

@knihT: The point you are missing here is that Player A (with coach) does not have to think and adapt on his own. He should be able to adapt and change his own strategy without having a person telling him to do so. This is a large part of tournament pressure. Our thinking is often clouded by the intensity of the situation. Having a coach basically relieves him of having to do this, as the coach, who is most cases will be significantly calmer than the player, can point out what should be used more or less. Player B does not have this advantage. He will be one step behind throughout the game because he will be slower to pick up on when he must adjust his own strategy or when he is being countered by something specific.

 

[jugfingers]

True story.

At the time, I knew Chu's playstyle pretty much inside and out, but I lacked the ability to use it effectively with my own Marth. M2K likely would have won that set regardless of my coaching, but Chu's portrayal of the situation was that he believed M2K only won because of the advice I was giving. Most of the "coaching" I had been doing for M2K as far as advice vs ICs was prior to the actual match, as all I really did during the matches was say little things to M2K to keep him calm, as he had a problem with nerves when playing vs Chu.

I don't believe coaching was written as being illegal in the rules of that tournament, but I do see how it is unethical and should not be legal, as I have swayed sets other than that one by talking people through the opponent's strategies mid game.

Note: Eventually, an agreement was made between Chu, Chillin, M2K, and I, in which Chillin and I would both remain silent during any future sets of M2K vs Chu. This was done largely to prevent M2K from being distracted by Chillin, as he is quite... loud... as well as keeping me from pointing out Chu's habits for M2K to punish.

@knihT: The point you are missing here is that Player A (with coach) does not have to think and adapt on his own. He should be able to adapt and change his own strategy without having a person telling him to do so. This is a large part of tournament pressure. Our thinking is often clouded by the intensity of the situation. Having a coach basically relieves him of having to do this, as the coach, who is most cases will be significantly calmer than the player, can point out what should be used more or less. Player B does not have this advantage. He will be one step behind throughout the game because he will be slower to pick up on when he must adjust his own strategy or when he is being countered by something specific.

hmmm....

kinda sounds like hella johns on chu's part.

of course coaching is probably really helpful, especially at high levels of play where players can use advice that they are given effectively and especially in a character/player specific
situation, but I dunno It just seems to elevate the level of play to a higher level which I like

disproving of coaching done in between matches or before matches seems preposterous for manifestly obvious reasons.

coaching in realtime during a match is different, but as long as both players are hearing what is being said I don't see how it could really give an advantage to one player over another at the highest level of play.

I have played against people getting coached to an enormous degree, mid match, in between matches and in my experience, really made the matches more fun and exciting, I might feel differently if I had lost those matches but I dunno I just think that it basically brings the game to a higher level increasing the mental aspects of game, because even though a player is getting advice they still have to comprehend and use the information, which requires thinking about the match up differently and any increase in cognitive function I approve of.

 

[Pi]

If I ever lost because someone was able to point out a flaw in my playstyle to my opponent that I couldn't respond in kind to then I would assume I need to find a counter to that immediately.

 

[MarsFool!]

Telling someone to chain throw, or tech chase here, or bair there shouldnt have its own topic. Too bad someone pointed out a flaw in your game, guess what? Too bad. Waaahhhhhhh hes helping him figure out my mistakessss wahhhhhh. It only seems like a big deal if someone is screaming in your ear in which case can be frustrating but cheering and having fun should also be banned too. Grow some nuts smashbros

 

[Rappster]

What if someone gives you tips during a match without your consent?

unsolicited advice during a match should result in the spectator being warned. if happens again, they leave.

 

[Cactuar]

Telling someone to chain throw, or tech chase here, or bair there shouldnt have its own topic. Too bad someone pointed out a flaw in your game, guess what? Too bad. Waaahhhhhhh hes helping him figure out my mistakessss wahhhhhh. It only seems like a big deal if someone is screaming in your ear in which case can be frustrating but cheering and having fun should also be banned too. Grow some nuts smashbros

I don't think you understand what we mean by coaching. It isn't telling someone to chain throw or tech chase or bair in a certain spot. It is pointing out general strategy, such as repeated approaches, habits upon being approached, etc, and telling the player how to counter it or punish it during the match rather than between matches. These are the types of things that are part of adaptation. At high level play, with two equal players playing one another, the game largely comes down to the ability to adapt to the other person faster than they adapt to you. Having a third party doing this for either player cheapens that imo. The concern is over whether this should really be up to the player to figure it out and adapt during the match, rather than having a third party do this for you.

I personally disagree with coaching purely because I enjoy doing all of that on my own as a player and it goes against my own stance on the concept of player vs player. Fighting with another person on even ground is a wonderful thing. Relying on someone else to do your thinking for you just seems so boring.

I also disagree with this notion that "it should be legal as long as both players can hear it". Why should Player A be forced to listen to Player B's coach just to try and anticipate an artificial adaptation to Player A's strategy? This is external to the actual game being played...

@knihT: That's pretty much my point though, you would need to find a counter to that immediately. In response to your opponent doing... nothing... to find a counter to your current strategy. You are constantly keeping up with the coach pointing out your strategy and trying to adapt yourself, rather than watching for your opponent's strategy and play style and countering it. This puts your thought processes on the defensive rather than on equal ground with the opponent.

@jugfingers: Regarding this "higher level of play", the pace is definitely different, but the way I see it, the player being coached is relying on a crutch. It is not as difficult as you imagine to rely on an individual you have picked out to coach you as you think it is. To have someone doing that for you actually relieves a lot of the pressure of the situation, as your mind is not thinking of nearly as many things during a match as it normally would be. It is actually hindering the development of the mental aspect of the game because the individual is not learning to do this on their own.
To recap: I disagree strongly with your idea that this increases cognitive function. The majority of people are wired to be sheep and can follow instructions much easier than figuring out what to do on their own.

 

[TheManaLord]

Coaching is akin to trash talk an commentary. It's totally acceptable.

 

[Roneblaster]

keep legit coaching to inbetween matches. Quick 1-liners like "stop" or "shoot more lasers" is fine during the match.

if you cant differentiate between "legit" or "real" coaching then you have issues that need to be addressed elsewhere.

why do you think there are time-outs in sports? so the coach can do some serious coaching, not saying "kobe shoot more" and in smash the time-outs are inbetween matches.

 

[TheManaLord]

Understand that it takes a great player to truly take coaching in the middle of a match and apply that information. Also note that it takes a truly weak player to ignore the coaching of an opponent by not responding accordingly.

There's nothing fundamentally wrong with coaching because application in this game is very difficult, especially at higher levels. If some noob gets ***** by a strategy their opponent was told about mid match it's honestly their problem for being a noob. This game has been out so long and it is a shame when people don't understand the basics of competition.

 

[Jam Stunna]

I personally disagree with coaching purely because I enjoy doing all of that on my own as a player and it goes against my own stance on the concept of player vs player. Fighting with another person on even ground is a wonderful thing. Relying on someone else to do your thinking for you just seems so boring.

I can understand this reasoning, but I don't think it's a reason to ban ALL coaching.

In my crew, I'm the coach. It's my job to advise my crewmates on counterpicks, tournaments rules, and stuff like that. Sure, they could familiarize themselves with matchups and counterpicks and whatnot, but I enjoy doing it and they enjoy having someone else's opinion. It's pretty much win-win, and in the end it comes down to the player actually executing the gameplan.

 

[Cactuar]

The discussion isn't over banning coaching due to advice given between matches on potential counterpicks and character changes. That will likely remain legal.

 

[Roneblaster]

then ban the other ****.

if some1 is shouting out ****, warn them, then throw them out if they continue

 

[jugfingers]

@jugfingers: Regarding this "higher level of play", the pace is definitely different, but the way I see it, the player being coached is relying on a crutch. It is not as difficult as you imagine to rely on an individual you have picked out to coach you as you think it is. To have someone doing that for you actually relieves a lot of the pressure of the situation, as your mind is not thinking of nearly as many things during a match as it normally would be. It is actually hindering the development of the mental aspect of the game because the individual is not learning to do this on their own.
To recap: I disagree strongly with your idea that this increases cognitive function. The majority of people are wired to be sheep and can follow instructions much easier than figuring out what to do on their own.

if better players can help other players improve and play better I think the should do it,

I agree that coaching is like having training wheels in a sense but I think that people will be able to transcend the training wheels at a point and transform into a higher evolved form faster than if they tried to learn completely by themselves.

I personally wouldn't seek coaching because I like to do things myself, but I also share the same perspective as Goku, which is that I want my opponent to be as strong as possible.

and if a player can be a more formidable opponent with coaching then I would encourage it.

 

[Ryzol_]

One possible way to enforce no coaching would be to penalize the person giving advice. If they are still in the tournament you could DQ them. If not you could ban them from future tournaments. This avoids the problem of people coaching to try to DQ a player.

 

[Solid Jake]

The discussion isn't over banning coaching due to advice given between matches on potential counterpicks and character changes. That will likely remain legal.

Indeed, I see nothing wrong with coaching between matches what so ever. Whereas coaching during the match could potentially distract both players and or give the coached player an unfair advantage.

 

[pockyD]

give the coached player an unfair advantage.

is it an unfair advantage if both players were explicitly allowed to do so?

 

[Solid Jake]

Here's how I look at it.
Not all players will have a coach, but if its allowed many will want it. As soon as you start allowing coaching to be the norm, players will stall matches because their friend, being their coach is in a match. If they're forced to play their match without their coach, and their opponent has a coach available, they are going to feel like they got cheated. I suppose a large part of my reasoning is geared towards avoiding conflict and maximizing efficiency when running events, but I still believe its a valid point.

 

[pockyD]

i hadn't thought of that, and i'm not really sure how that could be handled

if the solution is to unilaterally isolate players in matches, then so be it

 

[KAOSTAR]

I personally dont like coaching, but its too hard to police.

I can say that in cases where its not a super hype match or late in the tournament(where players should be use to the intense pressure/heckling)

ppl should respect a players wish for quiet. I dont like seeing spectators intentionally making jokes or doing things that are distracting because the match doesnt mean anything to them.

It would be rude/unsportsman-like for one player to talk **** and be distracting to the other player.

and all of this is different that encouragement and/or cheering. I guess you cant really do anything about initial crow reactions.

 

[ThunderThumbs]

i dont mind coaching in between matches i always ask for counter pick help from my better friends. now if something i dont like is being said during a match i will vocalize my opinion. however if it is not clearly defined as illegal there nothing that can be done other that kindly asking the other players coach to shut the hell up.

 

[smakis]

i dont like being coached, I want to win on my own, not because someone else pointed out how to beat them. Kinda like chess when people point out moves, or that your queen is in danger or when your opponent offers you to make a different move when you do something stupid.

 

[ranmaru]

How about this.

When you go to a tournament, you to either Learn, or to apply. That's the same thing you'd do at a test in school. You test with a group of class mates, but are to be quiet.

Why not treat it like that? When in a tournament match, you are sort of taking a test. Have people quiet, so that both opponents (or all four) can focus on their task.

Coaching in between matches seems ok. But during matches it seems like cheating, because one practices and practices to be able to win a set, and then to get the information then and there, seems as it was given, instead of earned.


NO wait... Maybe in between sets. Meaning that after you were done with that set (if you won or lost, you probably lost if you need help) that way you can learn the mistake of your ways, and it wouldn't effect the set (you would use this in losers though so you would have a chance to bounce back). In between matches, I don't think so. After a set (because its like a test, you can't get advice during a test, unless you went to the bathroom)

One more thing...

One should be allowed to make mistakes, so that they can LEARN from them and never do them again. If someone tells them to, it seems they are spoiled. I have been told that if one finds something out themselves, they might remember it better. (they remember it better because they know the MEANING of why it mattered, and people remember things with meaning and not just symbols)

For example I am a slow learner. But I practice as much as I can so that I can get over my short comings and succeed. I am still in progress. Meaning I haven't succeeded yet (won a tournament) but I will keep on keeping on.

 

[L__]

...lol why do you guys make it sound like when someone gives advice during a tournament match the people hearing the advice automatically are going to follow the advice

you have a choice to ignore them

even then, application won't be perfect

 

[ranmaru]

Well if the person doesn't want to win.... ^_^

Or maybe people don't like advice.

You are right though, I don't think everyone follows advice as I would. (meaning that maybe some people ignore advice so they can try to do it their way, like Ichigo breaking his mask off when fighting Byakuya)

So its a question of honor I guess.

 

[Zodiac]

I cant remember what I posted before but I was at a tourney last week where I lost because the player I was going up against got a significant amount of coaching from player who was a lot better than me, I got a little irritated but since there wasn't a rule against coaching I decided not to let it get to me. but yea, I would like to see some coaching guideline go up at future tournaments.

 

[L__]

blahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh nvm

 

[KAOSTAR]

...lol why do you guys make it sound like when someone gives advice during a tournament match the people hearing the advice automatically are going to follow the advice

you have a choice to ignore them

even then, application won't be perfect

Well lets be real, If I didnt notice that this person was only hitting me with Fsmashes because they were fading back the nair and I bit on it trying to grab.

but then somebody yells it out, You essentially changed the possible outcome of the match. I cant unnotice that piece of information. And in that case its not even advice that I would follow/not follow.

Thats like somebody standing in the classroom while u are taking a test. He takes the answer key and puts it on the projector. You arent gonna be able to go back and not see the answer.

I dont think that ppl should be coached during matches. Its almost like cheating. It essentially makes the other person work harder, because you can audibly null some of the mindgames that would have worked.

 

[Rubyiris]

Picture this scenario:
You are in grand finals of pound16 coming from the loser bracket. You noticed a small flaw in your opponents play, which you were able to use this flaw to your advantage and abused it. This led you to winning the first set of grand finals pretty squarely. The first 2 games of the second set also go to you. Your opponent is now in a tough spot. Between the second and third game, a friend of your opponent talks to your opponent. He had noticed the flaw you have been abusing in your opponents play and tells your opponent to stop doing what you were taking advantage of. He listens, and without the aid of this flaw, the next 3 games of the finals go to your opponent and he wins the set and the entire tourney.

The fact that he was able to remedy this one mistake and win the next three games means he's clearly better than you.

Is this fair? Your opponent may have never noticed the flaw were it not for his friend telling him. Does this count as unfair outside help?

Yes it's fair. Unlike in games where coaching is illegal, I.e. Trading Card Games where doing something like telling someone their opponents hand/etc. Fighting games are treated more like a sport imo, where sports actually have coaches who do exactly that.

 

[KAOSTAR]

You cant coach in Yu Gi OH. You cannot have other players tell you what to do with YOUR cards regardless of whether they have inside info on the other players hand/strat whatever.

But the point is that ALL sports with coaches have a dedicated coach. In some sports there is a box or area where that coach is allowed to stand. Coaches are known b4 the game because the information they know is taken into account along with the players abilities.

In melee you have have somebody coming up and giving you the goods. And not necessarily the other person. If its legal then each player/team should be able to choose 1 coach and 1 coach only. and should prob be declared when they register but that may be taking it a little to far.

 

[L__]

but then somebody yells it out, You essentially changed the possible outcome of the match. I cant unnotice that piece of information. And in that case its not even advice that I would follow/not follow.

I've actually witnessed a few cases in which people telling a player what they were doing mid-match didn't help whatsoever, but then again ... I don't even know

I dont think that ppl should be coached during matches. Its almost like cheating. It essentially makes the other person work harder, because you can audibly null some of the mindgames that would have worked.

I'm actually really indifferent towards whether people coach during matches or not.

Now that I look back at that post of mine I realize that I should have put more thought into what I said.

 

[KAOSTAR]

No worries. ^_^

I wouldnt care but Ive been on the other side of it. Sometimes it bugs be a bit. Ppl should just let ppl play, but hey either way melee is too dam good to worry about it I guess.

 

[L__]

I dunno why it just never bugged me when the other player would get coached

 

[Pyronic_Star]

inbetween rounds is fine, not during the match, basically i agree with what many have said

during a match isn't fair because one player shouldn't have to mind game two people... esp when one of the people don't have the pressure of being in the match or executing certain actions to deal with. or maybe the coach mains your character, is it really fair to have him break down all situations as they occur, no, since he's not your opponent... the guy he's coaching is