Tournament TLT V: Tours' Leaderboard Tournament

Nol

Searching for the truth in the lost and found
is a Battle Simulator Administratoris a Super Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributor
PS Admin
1630956932379.png

Banner by the lovely sirDonovan | Approved by me
Welcome to the fifth iteration of the Tours' Leaderboard Tournament (TLT)! This is a tournament held by the Tournaments Room that focuses individual play rather than the team tour event BLT (Best Leaderboarders Tournament). This year's iteration will be hosted by myself and Ax!

What is TLT and how do I participate?

Every time a scripted tournament is held in the room, the top four players are given a certain number of points based on the prominence of the tour. There are also four official tournaments every day, the formats of which decided on beforehand in our monthly schedule. Every time someone receives points from a tournament, it is documented by our room bot, Lady Monita. Points from both regular and official tours count towards qualifying!

The first cycle of qualifications will begin on September 15th. Both cycles in October and the first cycle in November will also be qualifying cycles. The top eight players on the leaderboard from each of these cycles will automatically be qualified to play, and the ninth and tenth player will qualify as subs.

You can find the schedule of officials here.

Good sportsmanship in the Tournaments room is required to participate in TLT. Overwhelming toxicity, collusion, or otherwise going out of your way to bypass the anti-scouting measures in the room will not be tolerated and will result in a ban from competing in TLT. If you are a victim of any of these during our room tours, please contact a staff member (with room %, @, or #) with relevant screenshots as evidence.

In order to play, you must confirm that you are playing before the end of the next cycle (for the first three cycles) or before week one goes up (for the last cycle) using the format below:

PS! Name:
Timezone:
Once qualifying is over, players will face off in a best-of-three bracket for the first five rounds and a best-of-five bracket for the remaining rounds. This tournament is double elimination, so if you're defeated once, you will move to the losers bracket for a second shot at victory!

What tiers will be played and how will they fit into a best of three/five format?

The tiers that will be played are:
SS Ubers
SS OU
SS UU
SS RU
SS NU
SS PU
SS LC
SS DOU
SS Monotype

In order to fairly determine the three of these nine tiers played in each individual matchup, players will take turns locking and eliminating tiers among themselves. They'll both lock one tier, followed by eliminating three tiers, thus leaving three tiers to be played. The lower seeded player will lock the first tier, followed by the higher seed player. Then the lower seeded player will eliminate the first tier, followed by the higher seed player, and it will repeat in that order two more times. The higher seed player picks what tier is played first of the three tiers. After that, the loser of game one picks which of the two tiers is played for game two. Naturally, game three will be played in the last remaining tier.

(Example: Ax is seed #1, while Nol is seed #16. Nol, the lower seed, decides to lock PU, followed by Ax locking RU. At this point, neither PU nor RU can be eliminated. Nol, the lower seed, chooses to first eliminate Ubers. Ax follows with OU. Nol then eliminates LC, and Ax eliminates Doubles OU. Nol then eliminates NU, and Ax eliminates Monotype. So thus the three tiers that would be played are PU (what Nol locked in), RU (what Ax locked in) and UU (the tier that didn't get banned). Of these tiers remaining, Ax, the higher seed, chooses to play RU first. Ax then loses game one, and chooses to play UU next. Should it go to game three, the tier to be played will be PU.)

From Round Six on, the process will be the same, except players will eliminate two tiers instead of three for a total of five to be played.

How will seeding be determined?

Seeding is determined through your points earned in qualifying cycles. The cycle in which the player earned the most points will be used for seeding calculations, not a sum of all cycles. Whoever earned the most points in all four cycles is the first seed. Whoever earned the second most points is the second seed, and so on. In the event of a tie in points among the 32 competitors, points earned in TLT formats will be added up for each tied user. The one with more points in TLT tiers will become the higher seed.

How will substitutes work?

In the event of an inactive player, substitutes will be available for all of week one as well as the loser's bracket of week two. The order of players picked to be a substitute is the same as the seeding process described above. The person with the most points from these eight users will be the first to be substituted in, and so on.

Point transfers

The room owners can transfer leaderboard points that people have between their own alts. On this note, I wanted to remind everyone of a policy we have where we won't transfer points between alts within 48 hours of the cycle ending. The second part of the rule states that, you may have points transferred no more than twice during a cycle. This rule exists because our leaderboard is public, and we don't want people getting 40 points on a few different alts and combining them together on the last day of a cycle to suddenly jump ahead of people. Finally, we firmly check that the alt is yours before transferring points, so please don't request to have points transferred from a friend, or you will be heavily punished and we may take this feature away. If you have any questions about this rule, this thread probably isn't the best place, but feel free to pm any member of the tours room staff.

To make it clear, it's fine to use an alt to qualify for TLT, as long as you confirm your spot in the thread after qualifying. Using a bunch of different alts and constantly asking to have points transferred is forbidden.

Activity Calls & Extensions

Make contact with your opponents early! The most effective way of proving communication is to post a VM on your opponent's Smogon wall to try and set a date for the battle. If you do this via any other medium, save logs and screenshots so that in the event of an activity call, you get it to go your way. Leave timezones, preferred time to play, and be specific. If neither party displays active scheduling and the set doesn't get done, the match will be coinflipped. We will grant slight extensions if needed, though please try not to make a habit of it every week.

Length

The tournament is expected to last about two and a half months. If you're not willing to commit to playing one set a week for this range of time, please consider qualifying carefully.

Will there be prizes?


The champion of this year's TLT will win a $100 Amazon gift card!

Player entry in the Hall of Fame: The winning player will be recorded in the Hall of Fame which is displayed on our website for all to see!

Feel free to use this thread to discuss TLT and ask any questions you may have. However, we will be moderating this thread and will delete any posts that are deemed offensive, irrelevant, or anything of the sort so do make sure to keep things civil. We hope to see you all in Tournaments chat! Good luck, and have fun!
 
Also I'll make this a separate because its a separate issue. Wouldnt it make more sense for there to be 1 ban before either player picks?

Lets say here ( and this is a TOTALLY random example), I play against my friend Crunchman

He picks DOU, because hes very good at it, and I'm fucking terrible at it.

I then pick LC, because ive had recent experience playing it a lot on ladder and playing in LPL, so I'm confident I know the tier better than he does.

We then pick a random third tier.

I dont see how this is any better than playing what is basically a bo1, since the chances of each other winning in our good tier is extremely slim.

Wouldnt it be better for all 3 games to be played in tiers both players are fine with playing? Especially with "odd tier", like doubles, Uber and lc, which not many players are as likely to have a good handle off, as well as the ever unviable monotype, its just makes more sense to have both players play a bo3 where all 3 games are somewhat common ground, rather than having 2 blowout games and 1 viable middle ground game?

Everything ive said here also applies to what I think of BO5.
 

Nol

Searching for the truth in the lost and found
is a Battle Simulator Administratoris a Super Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributor
PS Admin
Since play offs will take place after the release of BDSP, will tiers be locked in November for the rest of the tour?
We know nothing about the BDSP release and if it will even be compatible with SwSh. We'll make a decision on that once we know more.

Also I'll make this a separate because its a separate issue. Wouldnt it make more sense for there to be 1 ban before either player picks?

Lets say here ( and this is a TOTALLY random example), I play against my friend Crunchman

He picks DOU, because hes very good at it, and I'm fucking terrible at it.

I then pick LC, because ive had recent experience playing it a lot on ladder and playing in LPL, so I'm confident I know the tier better than he does.

We then pick a random third tier.

I dont see how this is any better than playing what is basically a bo1, since the chances of each other winning in our good tier is extremely slim.

Wouldnt it be better for all 3 games to be played in tiers both players are fine with playing? Especially with "odd tier", like doubles, Uber and lc, which not many players are as likely to have a good handle off, as well as the ever unviable monotype, its just makes more sense to have both players play a bo3 where all 3 games are somewhat common ground, rather than having 2 blowout games and 1 viable middle ground game?

Everything ive said here also applies to what I think of BO5.
If you and your opponent want to agree to ban a tier first, that's up to you.
 

sasha

cold nights
is a Pre-Contributor
Also I'll make this a separate because its a separate issue. Wouldnt it make more sense for there to be 1 ban before either player picks?

Lets say here ( and this is a TOTALLY random example), I play against my friend Crunchman

He picks DOU, because hes very good at it, and I'm fucking terrible at it.

I then pick LC, because ive had recent experience playing it a lot on ladder and playing in LPL, so I'm confident I know the tier better than he does.

We then pick a random third tier.

I dont see how this is any better than playing what is basically a bo1, since the chances of each other winning in our good tier is extremely slim.

Wouldnt it be better for all 3 games to be played in tiers both players are fine with playing? Especially with "odd tier", like doubles, Uber and lc, which not many players are as likely to have a good handle off, as well as the ever unviable monotype, its just makes more sense to have both players play a bo3 where all 3 games are somewhat common ground, rather than having 2 blowout games and 1 viable middle ground game?

Everything ive said here also applies to what I think of BO5.
I feel like if you're gonna grind TLT and sit there and play room tours, you should half expect to know the metagames of each tiers to a simple degree or just be able to play around it regardless. Luthier, last years winner is a solid all around player and I'm sure he won a lot of games playing metas he was unfamiliar with. I mean when I qual'd for TLT last year grinding room tours and theyre loading up Godking Balanced Hackmons Pikachu Roar of Time metagames for roomtours we still had to adapt and win those to get points and what not. I still definitely had the motivation to learn the real tiers that were in TLT playoffs anyway because I wanted to do well. I never really had an issue with it last year when I played tiers I wasn't particularly well versed in because you still have time to prep/practice those tiers before you play since banning happens before you play your opp iirc. I'm not really gonna get into the Monotype unviable comment because like lol no use in explaining it to someone who won't put in effort to play the meta but idk it seems kind of naïve to assume that you're not gonna have to get out of your comfort zone to win a tournament that requires a time commitment and requires you to know more than 1 meta. If you're already accepting now that you aren't gonna win in tiers you aren't familiar with, TLT probably won't be your cup of tea.
 
Last edited:
I feel like if you're gonna grind TLT and sit there and play room tours, you should half expect to know the metagames of each tiers to a simple degree or just be able to play around it regardless. Luthier, last years winner is a solid all around player and I'm sure he won a lot of games playing metas he was unfamiliar with. I mean when I qual'd for TLT last year grinding room tours and theyre loading up Godking Balanced Hackmons Pikachu Roar of Time metagames for roomtours we still had to adapt and win those to get points and what not. I still definitely had the motivation to learn the real tiers that were in TLT playoffs anyway because I wanted to do well. I never really had an issue with it last year when I played tiers I wasn't particularly well versed in because you still have time to prep/practice those tiers before you play since banning happens before you play your opp iirc. I'm not really gonna get into the Monotype unviable comment because like lol no use in explaining it to someone who won't put in effort to play the meta but idk it seems kind of naïve to assume that you're gonna have to get out of your comfort zone to win a tournament that requires a time commitment and requires you to know more than 1 meta.
Yup, TLT is basically just another homefield advantage tour. The tour is a measure of ability in all tiers, as opposed to how good you are in certain ones. I tend to lock my opponents worst meta instead of my best, for example, because it trips them up (just so happens that last TLT everyone's worst meta was my best one). There's a reason TLT predicts always turn up pretty accurate compared to other tours, and that's because the best player is decided by lesser weaknesses as opposed to greater strengths (e.g. you can be the best DOU player, but if you are just slightly worse in all the other tiers, you're probably going to lose the matchup).
 
I feel like if you're gonna grind TLT and sit there and play room tours, you should half expect to know the metagames of each tiers to a simple degree or just be able to play around it regardless. Luthier, last years winner is a solid all around player and I'm sure he won a lot of games playing metas he was unfamiliar with. I mean when I qual'd for TLT last year grinding room tours and theyre loading up Godking Balanced Hackmons Pikachu Roar of Time metagames for roomtours we still had to adapt and win those to get points and what not. I still definitely had the motivation to learn the real tiers that were in TLT playoffs anyway because I wanted to do well. I never really had an issue with it last year when I played tiers I wasn't particularly well versed in because you still have time to prep/practice those tiers before you play since banning happens before you play your opp iirc. I'm not really gonna get into the Monotype unviable comment because like lol no use in explaining it to someone who won't put in effort to play the meta but idk it seems kind of naïve to assume that you're not gonna have to get out of your comfort zone to win a tournament that requires a time commitment and requires you to know more than 1 meta. If you're already accepting now that you aren't gonna win in tiers you aren't familiar with, TLT probably won't be your cup of tea.
Yes, people should be playing out of there comfort zone..... thats like.... litteraly the whole point of what I wrote lol. Unless ofc you think grinding in tours room for 2 weeks is a good indication of learning any given tier at a high level. Anyone qualifying will still probably have a tier in which they are the most proficient.

The idea behind my post is that you shouldnt just rely on being great at one tier, and then get a win in a glorified bo1, you should be good at all of them.

Again, if both players can just pick there best tier every set, assuming both players are sorta evenly match, the expected result would be, a great majority of the time, that they both win the tier that they main.

Lets take the example of Luthier. Luthier has a qualified for grand slam playoffs, smog tours playoffs, played in many important team tours: congrats, that exactly the profile of a player who 1. would be proficient at many tiers and who 2. wouldnt need to rely on his main as a counter pick.

Luthier (assuming he was still an Lc main at the time) prob wouldnt have had a shot at counter picking his Lc, but also wouldnt have been counter picked to doubles by a doubles main. In which case, both players play a bo3 where they are both more likely to have overlapping experience.


We still have this atm: the third game Is a game on "neutral" grounds. Tho as anyone ever can tell you: bo1 are notoriously frustrating for how likely a fluke would be to happen.

The idea is too make it so that a player who is slightly better who have 3 neutral ground games to prove they are better than the opponent, rather than each playing their main and then having 1 neutral grounds game.

" oh but you can win on your opponents counter pick", yeah if your just straight up a better player, in which case you wouldve won anyways on 3 neutral grounds games.

"You still have time to prep", yeah you should know all the tier, but by avoiding the most polarized tiers, you would, in fact, have 3 tiers in which you would have a more comparable prep time, and then the player with better prep would have a better shot at winning a higher % of the time, since again, you aren't playing super polarized tiers for 2/3 of your set.

"but idk it seems kind of naïve to assume that you're not gonna have to get out of your comfort zone to win a tournament that requires a time commitment and requires you to know more than 1 meta" My proposed ruleset DOES make you play more than 1 tier, and even makes it so you cant just counter pick your own best tier all the time. WOW! its almost like your logic supports my claim, amazing how that works really.

" I'm not really gonna get into the Monotype unviable comment because like lol no use in explaining it to someone who won't put in effort to play the meta", Yeah that jab at mono was in bat faith. Mono does have significant issues but, at the end of the day, it still belongs in the pool. I dont even remember the point I was trying to make with one, especially considering mono would prob be the least polarized tier when I think about it more.

Oops :X

At the end of the day, I think we can both play on either ruleset, even tho I think mine makes more logical sense for my idea of the tournament, that doesnt mean that my idea of what the tour should be is necessarily the correct one, and your still entitled to your opinion on how the tournament should be ( even the to agrees with you so theres prob more merit to it then I gave it credit).

My idea was too have who was on best, on average, at all 9 tiers. While my current understanding of the current ruleset is that it measure which players are strongest at each other tiers, with a neutral tie break. We can agree to disagree.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top