Posted By sienar on 04/29/2008 8:33 AM
Is it fair to Dwayne to say Paul is more deserving of the slot simply because he lost out second? No way. Why is Paul more deserving?

Posted By Kevizoid on 04/29/2008 8:39 AM

Is that a challenge for your Arch-nemesis, hmmm?

Posted By greyhaze on 04/29/2008 8:54 AM


Ok, without getting hackles up... it's not about deserving-ness, afterall it's a dice game - fairness isn't even a factor, is the situation fair now? Not really.

But, as we all know, if something is a rule, stated and clarified, it's a rule. Paul would be be getting the pass, while Dwayne would not by the ol luck factor (or even the ol "i knew this might happen so i went to several qualifiers and earned a bump from 5th factor"), and since it's a rule, there wouldn't be any questioning whether someone was more deserving or not, it's the rule.

I personally don't find it all that fair to win just as many matches as someone else only to not make it because my opponents weren't as highly ranked, but it's a rule and i have accepted it. Even if my matches were bad matchups and I still won due to better play, it doesn't matter, my rating just isn't as high.

Posted By tundrin on 04/29/2008 7:01 AM

Can anyone more in the "know" comment on a rumor that WotC is intentially cutting down on players for this champs due to floorspace at GC [GenCon] this year?

I plan to go , will grind if I dont qual somehow.  

Posted By Dordledum on 04/29/2008 7:25 AM
I think the only way to win a plane ticket in Europe is to win the European champs (it's the only qualifier here, right?). I think the only way to get one of us Europeans to GenCon is to give us plane tickets.

Posted By sienar on 04/29/2008 9:11 AM

Posted By greyhaze on 04/29/2008 10:41 AM


*sigh* I think we (you and I) argue about this every year. Both systems are flawed with someone getting their "just desserts" being the casualty. I'm looking to grow the number of people that can attend GenCon, and therefore grow the community, passing down wins to some 5th place winners can help achieve this. The current system doesn't. That's my only stance.

Is there a reason once you've qualified that you'd want a higher rating and how would passing down your invitation prevent your rating from changing? I'm confused. I'm assuming in this proposal if you win the plane tickets and boosters you keep those, it's only your invitation (and not even your score or ranking) that gets passed down. You don't lose anything, but another player gains an invitation. The 5th or 3rd place player is still 5th or 3rd, they just get an invite.

Posted By Teflon Jeff on 04/29/2008 11:45 AM
What does everyone think ab out having all the qualifiers on the same day. Pick your location, and be one of the top X.

No sniping, no bumping, you get your one shot. If that doesn't get you in, now you have a lot more incentive to qualify on ranking.

Posted By greyhaze on 04/29/2008 12:28 PM
All on one day is good, but as mege says some locations get swamped, while others may not even have enough to be legit... however, if you're area is swamped, perhaps that's incentive to hit a smaller "pool"?

Posted By Kevizoid on 04/29/2008 2:57 PM

A single poor tournament can completely ruin your chances of going to GenCon.

Posted By Kevizoid on 04/27/2008 7:54 PM
I'd choose to drop top 4 based entirely on who would be getting in if I dropped. Will people I know get in? Will they get in on rating anyways? If so what's the point of me dropping if the slot would be wasted anyways. What if it's the guy I don't like whose in 5th. Shoudl I be villified online for not letting someone I don't like in?

Posted By Vrecknidj on 04/29/2008 7:11 PM
This year, Niles, IL is having a qualifier on Mother's Day. Would that be a good day for the "one day only qualifier"? If not, why not?

Posted By greyhaze on 04/30/2008 8:32 AM
Qualifiers are whole day events, and a pain in general. But, if there were only 1 to choose from, how hard would you try to schedule around it vs the other way around. I think ppl would try harder to book that time for the qualifier and shuffle the other stuff. GenCon only happens 1/yr, you either book it or you don't. Adding the flexibility means being able to be lax, but if there were one, it would just mean shuffling priorities. I don't think it'd be that detrimental. However, all the tough love aside, I'm still more of the mind set that I'd rather see invitations passed down.

Posted By Thenameless on 04/30/2008 9:32 AM
I am of the camp that qualifers in different areas should be held on different dates. Things happen in life that can prevent one from attending a qualifier on a certain date - business, weddings, serious illness, birth of a child, prior commitments, etc. Yes, one could also argue that GenCon itself is only held on one date, but only so much can be done for the whole community. I think it's a nicer idea to try to get as many people as possible to GenCon, and while I could be wrong, I believe that holding qualifiers on different dates over a ~2 month period, has a better chance of getting more people there.

Posted By CoyoteNomad on 04/27/2008 1:42 PM
Vintage uses the existing rankings. The ratings are up on the wizards site. I was pretty stoked to see myself at 5th in the world after a few of the qualifiers have been run. I probably won't be able to maintain it, but if there were more events run in Oregon, look out.

Posted By Turboman on 04/30/2008 10:37 AM
This is the problem in general with the format for rankings they use.  It is why it was abused and falsified before and it is why rankings don't necessarily mean much.

Posted By sienar on 04/30/2008 10:47 AM

That was discovered and corrected.

The vast majority of the top ranked players have proven themselves top level competition to be worthy of being highly-ranked players.

Posted By Turboman on 04/30/2008 11:01 AM
The format for rankings is still flawed, they still use the same format.

Posted By sienar on 04/30/2008 10:43 AM
Let me be the one to prod the 800-lb gorilla over there in the corner.

Why is traveling to a qualifier even considered stealing? Where does it state that 'locals' have a right to invites?

Posted By greyhaze on 04/30/2008 11:30 AM

Another of the problems with this current format is the spread of invites/tickets. If there really is such a huge community in SoCal, why don't they get more invites/tickets awarded to that area, it only seems logical. Places really should be awarded by turnout, not just a nearly arbitrary number of awards.