All Gens RoAPL XI - Format Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Obviously biased as a gen 8 main, but I'd like to chime in on why I think SM/SS should be added to RoAPL.

As mentioned by goldmason, RoAPL is supposed to be a team tournament that rewards oldgen players for doing well in their respective gen PLs (or circuit even though it was not mentioned), and I think it can fill that very niche for SM/SS even with the team tour representation they have that others have brought up. Larry mentioned Masters League as an example of how the Masters gens have their own team tour that approximates RoAPL, but this tournament is actually meant be a league for players a couple of rungs down from what RoAPL targets (take a look at the signup restrictions to see what I mean). Also saw a lot of OUPL mentions and I think that tournament has been stronger than than the level of players that people in this thread want the tournament to reward - last year's edition had 4 players who started in SS OU for SPL this year (Hayburner, Ox the Fox, SpookyZ and ChrisPBacon) and Fc + Eternal Spirit who started in 2024 playing in the SS slots with other fairly entrenched/established players like Yone/emforbes/QWILY/Suzuya/etc filling out the rest of the cast. The up-and-coming circuit/gen PL enjoyer who's looking to make the next step after some good results is almost certainly not going to get the chance to spread their wings with this tournament. RoAPL would be a real opportunity for players who've shown some results but aren't particularly entrenched in the tournament scene to potentially get exposure, or at the very least build connections of their own for future team tournaments.

Also somewhat confused as to why people think that SM/SS having more representation on team tournaments that are either organised by the relevant RoA subforums themselves/held in other subforums means that they have the right to exclude them out of RoAPL. There is nothing stopping the classic gen RoA subforums from forming a Masters League of their own or to lobby for classic gen representation in side PLs: I recently organised CNPL and it involved ADV/DPP/BW with the possibility of adding RBY/GSC in the future due to feedback from classic gen players that I know - do something if you want representation elsewhere! Like it or not, SM and SS are members of RoA and popular vote does not mean that minority rights can be infringed upon - the RoA community/hosts have a responsibility to ensure that the PL for the RoA community has sufficient representation for all RoA gens. Whether is that done by creating another PL organised and backed (in terms of the CA prize) by the RoA forum to represent fairygens or including SM/SS in RoAPL can be discussed, but since RoAPL is likely the only PL designed to represent oldgens by the RoA subforum this year, I would strongly urge RoA staff to add them to the tournament this year.

Note: no particular comments on how to exactly implement adding SM/SS to RoAPL, but suggestions from MANNAT and violet river seem pretty palatable to me.
 
Last edited:
It seems to me there's plenty of action bias here. I felt like the format is really good and there is no need to change. Please do not drop ORAS

RoAPL is already known as a gen 1-6 tour and regressing from that does not make sense. I somewhat get excluding SM/SS because they are in stour, but ORAS is much more like the classics gens in terms of represenation than Stour gens.

  1. Gen 6 is as RoA as gens 1-5. This idea that roa is gens 1-5 is kind of outdated
  2. Dropping ORAS is not really making any space for anything meaningful for the older gens. I'm not sure how much people are going to prep or even pay attention to 4-5 bo5's every week.
  3. ORAS being in Masters argument does not make sense because ORAS is not in smogon classics. So from the official tours, it has the same representation as the older gens, as it is not in Stour, with one addition of WCoP which was only added last year. I think it is better to define RoAPL as gens not in Stour.
  4. OUPL had only 1 ORAS slot, and the year before 0. The ORAS slot is very shaky.
  5. Why are we making this weird calculus of all the gens having to have equal representation? Every year each tour format is subject to change. It just so happened that it was included in both RoAPL and OUPL this year. It should instead reflect interest, activity, and demand. As for the argument for masterspl, I don't see anything stopping the classic gens of doing a classicPL or something.
  6. ORAS is one of the most popular tiers with the most active community and builders. Dropping it is a huge waste.
Formats I support:
- Keep the same format
- Gens 1-8 x1 slot, plus 2 slots focusing more on classical gens. It could be x2 Bo5 or x2 flex slots that can only be gen 1-5 (each team chooses one). Or a mix of both, but probably the flex slots.

ORAS is not any less loved than gens 1-5 :blobthumbsup:
 
Last edited:
Don't agree ORAS should be drop.
1. ORAS is one part of Ruins of Alph, we should sure about this
2. OUPL only have 1 slot of ORAS, and Masters League is farm tour, ORAS player don't have enough chance.
3. Since 2024, ORAS have many good new players coming, and in 2025, some players like Ruffles make ORAS Forum more active, ORAS have many talent players coming, they need more chance.
4. In 2023 and 2024, ORAS was on RoAPL and don't have anything wrong about it.

I agree keep old format because RBY-BW players also need chance to play and prove themselves, but ORAS should not be ignore.
 
I belive it makes more sense to keep the tour oriented around the oldest gens simply because they are so underrepresented in other tournaments on the site. Most of the within the tournament (especially gens 1, 2, and 4) are much harder to play in team tournaments because of how few they are actually featured in that aren't immediately swarmed with top talent.

RoAPL is different in that the 2x slots per gen allows for newer lesser proven talent to get consistent starting time against the tiers top players in a way that not even generational PLs can provide. By adding the masters gens, you lose this part of the tours appeal and make it almost an SPL-Lite (not too dissimilar from what ADPL is for what it's worth). Even discounting OUPL, the masters gens are just more represented within team tours, whether it be WCoP, Language Based Tournaments, or just other random side tours. I don't mean to sound rude, but it is much easier to play SS or SM in a team tour than GSC or RBY in 9/10 cases.

I think last years slot are great and would encourage they be kept the same, but if there's enough of a demand for a classic Bo5 over ORAS I don't think that's the worst thing in the world
 
- Hugely agree that it should be left up to a gen by gen basis on bo3 vs. bo1, or go one slot bo1 / one slot bo3 for each gen as has been said.
- Make sure that you can lock either bo3 / bo1 depending on which one you want / do not want to do.
- Cutting 2x each tier kill the great spirit this tour has where no slots ends up without support and you get to test and fuck around with your fellow tier player.
- ORAS should be left in and there should be no changes to the tiers of the slots themselves. Leave that discussion for when Gen 10 releases.
 
I think 2x of each tier is a HUGE benefit to the tournament, creates natural opportunities for players to meet and socialize and work together and all that good stuff. I would absolutely never shift away from it.

RoAPL was born as "a tournament for every oldgen OU" originally, but over the years we've seen that not all oldgens are treated equally: STours and Masters and all other kinds of tournaments are shaped to cater to the fairygens and onwards, while 1-5 is stuck in Classic and only Classic. I think as a consequence RoAPL cemented itself as a centerpiece tournament for these communities who don't really get too many other opportunities on this website. I think 2x of each slot gens 1-5 is an absolute must for this reason, it's just great for each and every one of these communities, and they would all suffer a lot were these slots to be cut.

ORAS is stuck between a rock and a hard place, where they don't really belong fully in either basket. However they have been in this tournament a lot in the past (not just a recent addition - they were in RoAPL when SM was CG) and they don't get the full 'newgen' treatment elsewhere in the website either, so I think they have a strong and legitimate claim at belonging here, even if they're not quite like 1-5.
The only real alternative - two Classic Bo5 slots - has some appealing sides too, especially if it becomes the default tiebreaker (which seems to be something with a lot of support regardless of what slots 11-12 end up being). But ultimately I'm just not too sold on it needing to happen week-to-week, I think ORAS has a stronger claim to being a positive addition to this tournament.
14 slots (2x gens 1-6 and 2x classic bo5) is also not insane to me, but might be overcooking

Re: possible expansion to 10 teams, I'm not wholly against it, but I do kind of like keeping the field tighter and the level a touch higher for RoAPL. Individual tierPLs already feature tons of chances and slots for rookies, keeping this tournament as a bit of a more serious proving ground with a healthy mix of veterans and up and comers is the right move IMO, and that's best achieved by keeping the total number of players the same it was.
 
I fail to see the benefits of adding 1-2 Classic Bo5 slots, with the exception of simplifying tiebreak, in comparison to the major negative of gutting an entire gen from the tournament. In the context of RoAPL, representation is worth weighing more heavily compared to Bo3/Bo5/flex slots; proposals to add SM and SS should be given serious consideration instead of just being axed for more of the same stuff we already have.

However, due to the quality of engagement that SM and SS have elsewhere, RoAPL's exclusion of them would not be as significant as the exclusion of ORAS. Representation in Masters is still a step down (due to reasons related to the Swiss format) compared to being a Smogon Tour tier, and SM and SS are also Masters tiers anyways. Masters Bo3 also has the least traction in other tournaments due to the existence of STour Bo3 and Classic Bo5; they are just more traditional formats whose parallel to an official tournament is much more solidly entrenched. The upshot is that inclusion in Masters has not (yet) significantly altered ORAS's position as an oldgen in relation to gens 1-5; and for that reason I believe its inclusion is more valuable right now than say, an alternative format where we have 2x SM or 2x SS > 2x ORAS.

Otherwise, I agree with everything else previously stated on the topic by Metallica126 and RufflesPro. There really has been an explosion in development and activity in ORAS from last year and continuing on to the present, and RoAPL was in fact a place where this was demonstrated. The tier's inclusion showcases all of this; its removal for something that doesn't (or perhaps something that does - redundantly) feels like a bad trade.

For dual slot formats, I think changing the slot structure to go one Bo3 + one Bo1 is a very good idea, subject to considerations from each gen's community - in the case where Bo3 / Bo1 would be actively undesired.

The note made by others regarding Classic Bo5 as a tiebreaker regardless of the format is also a nice idea that incorporates one of the real positives of that slot choice.

tl;dr:
- In support of keeping ORAS
- In support of adding Bo3 slots
- In support of adding Classic Bo5 for tiebreak
- Lean towards keeping the format the same as last year, but open to revision if adding SM and SS
 
Last edited:
Nah, RoAPL with all RoA-supported tiers is basically mini-SPL with no cgen.

However if you wanna do that then take Gen 1-8 slots, plus one tier selected per team per week and you then have ten slots. This kind of format has worked in PPL and side PLs, it's really funny and also brings the need of picking versatile players for "home and away" tiers.

And yeah, ten teams is the right call.
 
Oh I forgot: Classic Bo5 is cool, but it takes A LOT of preps, doing that every week is actually painful. However it has been a thing in BKCPL and some other tours and I think it works for some people.

Wesleyy said:
Bo5 sounds fun, but i highly doubt there being 10 sought after players that would want to play bo5
Click to expand...
I'd like to do it tbh
 
Last edited:
Tours should be bo3, slots are all fine as is.

Bo3 can and will reward good players, plus most of the time you're tackling an opponent with multiple teams in mind to begin with. Most importantly, its implied you're going to dedicate time and inherently agree to giving the tournament your time to do this sort of prepwork that is somehow "too much and a meme".

also, just to help echo what ruffles and metallica said, oras is very much roapl material as much as gens 1-5. cutting it is just shooting yourself in the foot for no reason. roapl should be bringing in as many players so we can have something cool and have 10 teams!!! still think we should have 12 slots regardless, and having a gen as popular as oras would help keep those numbers high.
 
Last edited:
not gonna present yet another biased opinion on why oras should stay from a main player of the tier but i do wanna maybe push the conversation back towards bo3 in all slots, ive always been a very big believer on bo3 being a more competitive environment etc etc and without all the bureaucracy behind sweeping changes to spl we could use a tournament like this as a opportunity to test this out, see how people feel about it
maybe keep the format as is however one of the slots for each gen is best of 3?
even if oras isnt a part of the tournament id just urge everybody to consider best of 3 seriously as a potentially good option :heart:
 
having thought about it some more, i'd like to volunteer some arguments as to why ORAS should not be in this tournament.
it boils down to two things, i think.
1: ORAS was added to the tournament to safeguard its future, in that it didn't have representation in Smogon Tour anymore. However, with the addition of Smogon Masters being a trophy tournament that features ORAS, and OUPL's ORAS representation, the tier is by no means leaning on ROAPL for sustenance. ORAS is played seriously in tournament play enough that it totally could drop from ROAPL.
2: Dropping ORAS reduces bloat in the tour, and maintains the identity of ROAPL.
ROAPL not featuring SS and SM OU directly says that the tournament is not just "for roa gens", it's for a select subset of oldgens. I would strongly argue that the core of ROAPL's identity is the classic gens it features. Having two extra ORAS slots brings this up to a twelve-slot tournament, which for a non-SPL tour is hard to muster the same level of support and care than it is for a ten slot tournament.
I think that ROAPL is best represented in spirit by featuring the gens 1-5, if we maintain the 1-6 format without adding SS and SM then it's really subjective favoritism, given that ORAS has Masters and OUPL just like the others. Is ROAPL just, as RufflesPro said, gens that aren't in stour? Do we add SM in 2027 and expand to 14 slots? That question leads to really arbitrary discussion.

In short, cutting ORAS from the tournament:
- Makes a cohesive identity for ROAPL as the classic-gens tournament
- Reduces bloat in the tournament

And also, with regards to bo3 vs bo1, and how ORAS's inclusion ties in
If we agree that the identity of the tournament is an important thing to nail down(we should) and that it should either be 1-5 or 1-8
Having gens 1-5 with two slots apiece is a huge charm for ROAPL, and it enables us to do this well supported, widely palatable mixed format of having one bo3 slot and one bo1 slot per gen.
Having gens 1-8 means we need to cut the dual slots(sad for part of the charm of the tour) and also makes the bo3 vs bo1 question a lot harder to answer.
ROAPL being 1-5, dual slots per gen, one bo3 and one bo1 looks to be a fantastic format that I would strongly support.
edit - ORAS is also in World Cup, lol. ORAS is heavily, heavily represented without ROAPL.
 
Highly support 2x of each ou from rby to bw.

12 people starting in an unofficial tour leads to poor games and each game not mattering as much
Personally speaking I found this tournament a lot more entertaining when it was less people per team
Oras nowadays has more instances for people to play it than when it was added
 
Just to echo onto River's good post a bit, I think having 2 slots of each gen is the best part about roapl and we definitely lose that adding SM & SS.

I was a complete nobody last year's roapl being 6 months or less into smogon, my managers took a chance on me and I got to start in slot 2.

Would be a shame to gut a tour's ability to shine a light on lesser known players and give them a shot to get their name out there, I don't think there's a better tournament for mid-tier player development on the website.

Also not doing 1x Bo3 1x Bo1 would be an insane troll by hosts
 
I usually don't like posting twice for topics like these but I think there were very interesting points here that I would like to discuss.

Real quick, I support 2 slots with x1 bo1 and x1 bo3

I made arguments for ORAS mainly of 1) popularity, 2) the fallacy of action bias, and 3) lack of meaningful replacement.
There has been interesting points after, ones that hit on different points, at the core of what RoA/RoAPL is.

What is RoA?
In all honesty, Ruins of Alph to me just means any gen that is not current gen. When I click on the roa PS! room, it shows RBY-SS samples, resources, and tournaments. The spotlight ladders are chosen from RBY-SS. When I click on the "RoAPL" tournament schedule, it shows me all the tournament schedules from RBY-SS, and when I click on "RoA" forum, I get subforums from RBY-SS. So I have to ask myself, is RoA not just everything that is not current gen?

This is important to me, because up until recently I was someone who was only on RoA PS! room, hanging there and playing ORAS-SS and making friends. Saying that RoA is only RBY-BW takes away from many player's feelings of belonging to RoA despite never playing 1-5.

When RoA first started in 2014, it was RBY-BW, so I get why many people want to keep that nostalgic feel. But we have to be honest, in 2014 it was RBY-BW because that was "Everything not current gen." It seems absurd, to me, that 11 years and 3 generations later, there's a chance RoAPL will be RBY-BW. Are we still going to argue for RBY-BW in 2027 when Gen 10 comes out? What about when Gen 16 comes out and there are 15 Gens in RoA? This is not a slippery sloap, this will eventually happen (unless nintendo ceases to exist).

I stress this point because when I pointed out that droppin ORAS will not be replaced with anything as meaningful, some people argued that "this tournament is better with 10 slots only anyways." To me, would that not be an issue for the future of RoA? RoA is only set to expand, and the Pokemon community is only set to grow. Tournaments are going to naturally go up in numbers of slots and signups. If many players feel that bigger tournaments is an unwanted weight, that attitude only hinders what we actually want: growing the Pokemon (and RoAPL) community.

I want everyone to be happy and enjoy this tour. Yes, it is true that ORAS is more represented than others, and also true that it is more popular than others. However, if people feel ORAS is an unnecessary weight that slows down this tour, we definitely do not want to force ourselves despite being unwelcome.

As a mod in the RoA subforums, I feel like the weight of my opinion is important. I believe I echo fellow RoA mods in ORAS-SS, as we are being told that we are not as RoA as the other gens despite every indication we are. Removing ORAS is not a small move; it is a statement. Everyone was expecting SM to be added at some point; it is the natural progression. Regressing to RBY-BW and removing ORAS is a statement that RoA is not what we thought it was.

It seems to me that RoAPL has an identity crisis and it needs to be discussed within RoA staff for its future's sake. Is RoAPL not just an extension of RoA, which is every gen that is not current gen? Or is it stricly gens 1-5 even in Gen 16? To me, "Gens that are not in Stour" is a strong middle ground compromise, especially until Gen 10.

Like Violet River mentioned, 2 years from now SV is going to join RoA and SM will drop from Stour. What are we going to do then? Make RoA 14 spots? To me that also seems too much too fast.

Suggestions
1. Make RoAPL Gens 1-5, but make another tournament (RoBPL or smth) that is equally prestigious and equally important, and have it be the other gens, gens 6-8 (could be like x3 slots each + 1 masters bo3 slot). This makes everyone happy: keeps this tour as the OG 5, brings equally important representation of the other tiers, and buys us time until Gen 11 or 12 when we have to deal with this again.
2. Accept the premise that RoAPL is just "everything not current gen" and make this tour include Gens 1-8.
3. Accept the middle ground premise, which is just keep the same format and consider suggestion #1 for next year or 2027.
 
Last edited:
This is something that obviously wouldn't be applied until RoAPL 2026 at the earliest, but I don't know a better place to put this than the format discussion.

I think RoAPL should be a trophy tour.

Trophies are the most sought after accolade on Smogon, the prizes for the best tours on the site. The accessibility for trophies is heavily skewed towards cg and fairy gen players. Classic gen players have SPL, which we share with fairy gen players, and Classic, which is the only trophy tour that truly belongs to the classic gen player base. But Classic is an individual tour, so it's still only one trophy per year. Sheer volume of opportunity for a fairy gen/cg player who never plays classic gens to win a trophy is so much greater than that of a classic gens player who doesn't play fairy gens/cg that somebody who wants to be able to win trophies could easily dismiss classic gens because there's such a lower potential to win trophies.

The most common response for why RoAPL shouldn't be a trophy tour that I've heard in the past when I've brought this up is that RoAPL isn't big/prestigious/good enough. A response that overlooks a simple fact; if you attach a trophy to this tour, it will become big/prestigious/good enough because there's now a trophy on the line instead of only a custom avatar. I'm not claiming that every game in a trophy version of RoAPL will be at an SPL level. It won't, because there are simply more players per tier with a 2 slots per gen format. But with a trophy on the line, enough high end players will sign up that we won't get a playoffs series decided by say, "Peaks at seasonal R6 vs 1500-1650s ladder warrior."

The other main argument I've heard for why RoAPL shouldn't be a trophy tour is that it's a "diet SPL." Frankly I view that as an objectively wrong opinion. SPL is 5 cg slots + 1 slot for every old gen. RoAPL having 2 slots per tier with no gen getting special treatment is a different tournament dynamic entirely. If RoAPL is diet SPL, then you could call any auction based team tour a diet SPL. And even if you still think that RoAPL is diet SPL, considering that SCL is a trophy tour, it's clear that Smogon is not against attaching a trophy to a "diet SPL" tour.

However, by attaching a trophy to RoAPL and attracting higher level talent, we would be crowding out the lesser known/mid level players that this tour gives a chance to. Something that people in this thread have made clear is important to this tour. That's why I'd also like to propose that in addition to making RoAPL a trophy tour next yeat, we also create a new RoA Farmers League tour that serves a similar role to the current RoAPL. Sign-ups would go live after the RoAPL draft, and be open to anybody that didn't get into the main PL. This has precedent as a number of PLs have Farmers Leagues for players who don't get drafted into the main PL, and even SPL has ADPL acting as something of an unofficial farmers league. This way, undiscovered and mid level players still have a tour where they can break out and be seen, while high end classic gen talent are able to have a much deserved extra opportunity each year to win a trophy.
 
Alright these posts are actually getting ridiculous. First 10 teams, then all BO3, then 12 slots, then 14 slots, then all of Gens 1-8 being included, then “make RoAPL a trophy tour” ????????

I appreciate @Maia’s explanation as to why RoAPL changed formats a couple years ago, but given Masters exists now, I implore the hosts, RoA mods, and OU mods to consider my original proposal - give Gens 6-8 a home in OUPL and keep RoAPL as Gens 1-5. Between these two tournaments, this keeps things pretty smooth until Gen 11 comes out at least lol.

I apologize that this isn’t the exact right place to post this, and I understand that it kinda punts the decision over to the OU mod team which could complicate things, but given it is what we had before, I don’t see why it can’t work again (especially now that the existence of Masters + OUPL being back clear up the original issues).

Also want to reiterate that I agree with posts made regarding the cons of expanding to >10 slots and >8 teams, and I also agree with the posts made on the importance and benefits of 2x of each tier.

I am making these posts because in the current landscape of Smogon, these unofficial team tournaments with nonsense formats that somehow are allowed to reward a custom avatar as a prize are a dime a dozen. RoAPL has historically been one of the best unofficials, having the right mix of strong competition and opportunity for those who are not quite ready for SPL. It would be a real shame for this tournament to get bloated with nonsense gimmicks and a garbage format. Not saying 12 slots with ORAS is the end of the world (even though it isn’t preferred), but anything beyond that is just silly.
 
agree with binning oras since it has better representation elsewhere now, agree with classic bo5 as default tb slot, agree that at least one if not both dpp slots should be bo3 as it's been received very favorably in dpppl (with big names signing up exclusively to play it!) and it seems to be what the dpp playerbase wants at large
 
Hi! Nice to see a lot of spirited discussion about a great tournament's format for this year. I just wanted to voice my strong support for the following:

-Two slots each of RBY-BW
-Bo3 in all tiers
-Classic Gens Bo5 for tiebreaker (alongside each team picking a Gen)

As many have mentioned throughout this thread, ORAS is represented now in other tours––including Smogon Masters––and it doesn't make a lot of sense to include ORAS but not USUM and SS in RoAPL (and I don't believe we should include all past Fairy Gens here). The Classic Gens are most sensible for this tour. I also believe that this is a great opportunity to trial run Bo3 slots in a tour setting. Many have called for this in SPL; why not try it out as some of the Gen PL tournaments routinely do? And lastly, neat idea about using a Classic Gens Bo5 as a tiebreaker as well, since historically the format has been unequal in this tour.

I'm looking forward to another year of RoAPL!
 
I think classic Bo5 should only be in tiebreaks as a default if it's in the regular season, as it does not really make much sense to have a format that you're not trying to draft for to suddenly matter in a do or die moment of utmost importance within the tour. I have no strong opinion on Clasic Bo5s inclusion within the tour, it just sounds weird to have it suddenly matter in tiebreak.
 
Beforde deciding which gens and formats should be played in the tour you need to decide fundamentally what this tour is.

If you drop ORAS it can't be called RoAPL, it would be ClassicsPL or something in that regard.
If you are strict with the word RoAPL it would include SM and SS aswell. Not including those, because they are well represented in other tours, including smogtours is a somewhat valid point.
The question of the ORAS representation is a bit difficult, because it is borderline. It being in OUPL, but only with one slot is kind of an weak argument, it being in WCOP a better one. Not having ORAS because its in Masters, when there is Classics as the counterpart is nonsense though.

In my oppinion you can't have it both ways. This being RoAPL and not including at least ORAS.
The fundamental decision that needs to me made is: what is this tour?
Either make it:
1. ClassicsPL - but then make MastersPL aswell
2. Keep it the way it is.
3. Add SM and SS and find a solution to reduce the amount starting spots per team (for e.g. 1 spot per Gen, but add a Classics bo5 or bo3, extra rotating Classics gen each week, Masters bo3, etc.)
 
Most RoA oldgen PLs (as in the individual gen PLs) are starting to include a Bo3 OU slot as one of their slots, and so far from what I’ve seen it’s been ok (for one slot). Theres not really any reason to not try it out in one slot for each gen here and see how it goes, and leave the other slot Bo1. It’s the ultimate best of both worlds where you actually have an opportunity to make all sides happy on that one issue.
 
Zcarlett said:
I think classic Bo5 should only be in tiebreaks as a default if it's in the regular season, as it does not really make much sense to have a format that you're not trying to draft for to suddenly matter in a do or die moment of utmost importance within the tour. I have no strong opinion on Clasic Bo5s inclusion within the tour, it just sounds weird to have it suddenly matter in tiebreak.
Click to expand...
I think this would be awesome actually and lead to extremely hype tiebreaks. Is it the most competitive possible thing that tiebreaks between teams in a 1-5 tour are partially decided by which team has the best classic bo5er? Possibly not. It's super hype to have a tiebreak where every single player can chip in with regards to prep and tests though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top