12:28 PM] Raze: https://twitter.com/Snek_Splatoon/status/1097548025818312704 [tweet about requiring teams playing in ssg to play in other tourneys]

Snek (@Snek_Splatoon)
So with all the teams entering SSG and not really any other tournaments. I'm debating a new rule which requires each registering team to show evidence of their team having played in at least 1 open entry event that's not BNS or 2 BNS events in the last 2 months. thoughts?

Twitter
[1:42 PM] SAC | Nathan: ew
[1:44 PM] SAC | Nathan: :fishoRAGE:
[1:48 PM] SAC | Nathan: Best thing us TOs of these tourney's for the newer scene can do, is to advertise the opens
[1:48 PM] SAC | Nathan: Deejay made me realize this today, and I have no problem encouraging others to go play like BnS or some big open
[3:19 PM] LavaLeaf: What if teams are actually new? Surely it'd make more sense for them to enter SSG or a lower-level tourney before playing in something larger
[3:20 PM] LavaLeaf: maybe only implement the rule if they've played in an SSG event before
[3:21 PM] LavaLeaf: but I agree that it's a problem if teams only enter beginner tournaments and never transition into what should be more mainstream events
6:51 PM] David: I'm not sure what the issue surrounding SSG is. Was SSG ment to be an intro into the competitive scene and teams were going to leave it after a while to take place in other things?
[7:23 PM] Kbot: Effectively, yes. It was meant to be for lower level teams, and then it became a part of the Splatoon Amateur circuit
[7:23 PM] Yoshi: People do not enter other tourneys, they only play SSG when SSG and other amateur tourneys are supposed to be a stepping stone essentially
[7:43 PM] SAC | Nathan: That's what we made them for, but I guess we have to do a better job of telling them to go enter other events as well.
[7:43 PM] SAC | Nathan: We ban teams and then send them off to play in other events
[7:44 PM] SAC | Nathan: Factors go into not being able to play other events, such as work schedule/availability
[7:44 PM] SAC | Nathan: And if I'm being honest, what events are on Saturdays that are running on an off week of SSG, like?
[9:05 PM] David: Still I think the reality is that not evey team will grow out of that beginner phase
[9:05 PM] Sampson: So in order to break the SSG trap, does SSG have to make space for or advertise intermediate tourneys?
[9:06 PM] David: I think it's still important that players that just want to play at a lower level still have a place they can compete
[9:09 PM] Sampson: I feel as if SSG having to make space for other tourneys, harms the nature of the tournament by sacrificing availability
[9:10 PM] Sampson: The SAC ends with an invitational for the top 8 teams right?
[9:23 PM] isJolTz: So SSG there are people just forming teams and competing, which is the opposite of introducing completely new people trying with some friends to see how to play in a tourney setting.

Kinda like myself for last week, but it was a pickup with some people who had much less experience than I did, so it made a little more sense because i was guiding the tourney experience. The issue is individual players with obvious skill need to be caught ahead of time, and that takes prior knowledge and effort to sift through.
[9:25 PM] isJolTz: It also discourages trying in a way because then more people who have those nerves are trying to form teams with those of a like mind. Having some experienced people to help through the process is fine, but to what extent is the issue
[9:25 PM] isJolTz: The teams being formed that are an issue have experienced players with less than stellar tourney results stomping the people who have almost no tourney results
[9:26 PM] isJolTz: Or just the teams that compete in ssg
[9:36 PM] Sampson: Hmm this seems like too fine a line to cross :thinking:  Is it worth the effort to find someone who is experience with tourneys yet isn't too experienced? Those people would be few and far between I feel like and would cause an unfair playing field for those who may not get that kind of teammate
[9:36 PM] Sampson: I'm all for having an experienced helping hand guide new teams,  but this just seems too rare of an occurrence to be that effective.
...
[bit about aidz asking about the TO doc--something about running his own midlevel tourney?]
...
1:07 AM] The One: yea i think so too but single/double elim and limited map pool just wont happen rn TOs arent open enough to it
[1:07 AM] The One: baby steps
[6:11 AM] David: I think people are looking at it wrong. Instead of asking why aren't people entering more tournaments. Why not ask why they are entering things like LUTI and SSG?
[7:28 AM] LavaLeaf: As a former player who's been part of numerous low-level teams in the past, it's preferable to enter those events because they feel much more winnable
[7:30 AM] LavaLeaf: Or it at least felt like we could achieve something instead of losing R1 (maybe R2) in every tournament we entered
[7:32 AM] LavaLeaf: It's so demoralising to practise for an event, plan it specifically into our schedule, then lose to some big team almost immediately with no clear lesson to be learnt because the skill gap was so huge
[7:34 AM] LavaLeaf: That's why less harsh tournament formats exist, but even then, double elimination usually only gives an extra round or two and you know you're going to lose at some point anyway
[7:36 AM] LavaLeaf: In groups of 4 teams, if you're lucky enough to be seeded into a group where advancing to the bracket is realistic, you're almost guaranteed to lose in the bracket's first round
[7:38 AM] LavaLeaf: Young Ink doesn't exist anymore but it was something that we really looked forward to. It was a beginner's tourney through and through: a Swiss stage first, with multiple rounds against teams of similar ability, then one of two brackets depending on your score in the Swiss stage
[7:39 AM] LavaLeaf: The reason this was so popular with new teams is because the feeling of achieving something that held any merit was actually tangible
[7:40 AM] LavaLeaf: It's a real morale-boost
[7:41 AM] LavaLeaf: Plus you'd have a training session with a higher-level team as a prize if you won
[7:44 AM] LavaLeaf: I feel that the aim of beginner tournaments should be to give teams this morale-boost, to show them that performing well in the competitive scene isn't impossible
[7:44 AM] LavaLeaf: They'd enter other tournaments and possibly get smashed, but they'd still hold the belief that it's possible to do well because they did just that in the beginner tourney
[7:45 AM] LavaLeaf: So they'd practice and keep going
[7:45 AM] AIDz: But that’s not what’s happening though snek and otrhers said most teams participating in ssg only stay in ssg
[7:46 AM] AIDz: They don’t move on to bigger tourneys most of the time
[7:46 AM] LavaLeaf: Compare this to a team who hasn't had any beginner's experience, and don't have the belief of "We can do this". The chances of them disbanding after their first real event is pretty high
[7:46 AM] Sampson: Probably for the same reasons leaf said
[7:46 AM] Sampson: They want to stay with that secure feeling or winning
[7:46 AM] AIDz: That’s not good
[7:46 AM] Sampson: They want that sense of progress
[7:46 AM] LavaLeaf: Yep
[7:47 AM] Sampson: I know, but they're staying in their comfort zone/safe space because that's what they feel is best for them because they may not know any better or are too scared to try
[7:48 AM] LavaLeaf: Improving in anything required stepping out of a comfort zone, but that takes effort so people prefer if they don't have to do it
[7:48 AM] Sampson: I think something like a Intermidiate/underdog bonus for bigger prizepot tourneys like BnS or Project Dorado sweetening the pot could help
[7:49 AM] Sampson: The best thing SSG and Uppertier tournaments can do is guide/urge those stagnant teams into the deep end
[7:50 AM] AIDz: I agree with the first things
[7:50 AM] AIDz: Thing
[7:52 AM] Sampson: There could also be step by step league of tournaments of sorts to help usher them in and out of SAC, but I feel like that solution is too time consuming and overworks the already hardworking TOs of the community
[7:52 AM] Sampson: I think having an intermediate cup could help usher teams through the pipeline, but for all I know they could also end up clogging that as well :/
[7:54 AM] LavaLeaf: The difficulty of knowing where to draw the line between the strength of different teams also returns
[7:56 AM] Miko: Is there no team rating system
[7:56 AM] Sampson: There is no universal one I'd say
[7:56 AM] LavaLeaf: The best thing we have is LUTI divisions, which are not perfect and can quickly become outdated
[7:56 AM] Sampson: LUTI has their own
[7:57 AM] Miko: Oh I was thinking maybe ranking teams like 1-5 stars or something
[7:57 AM] LavaLeaf: Is there any objective way of giving a team their rating?
[7:58 AM] Sampson: Besides results I'd argue no
[7:58 AM] LavaLeaf: You could look at tournament results, but there's such a wide variety of teams that have never played against each other that procedurally ranking teams in an accurate way is impossible
[7:59 AM] LavaLeaf: they could also say "but we beat them in a scrim so why are they rated higher???"
[7:59 AM] LavaLeaf: I don't think it's possible to rank teams really
[8:00 AM] Sampson: Purely objectively no you can't
[8:01 AM] Sampson: But that falls for most if not all competitive games
[8:01 AM] LavaLeaf: Yeah, course
[8:02 AM] LavaLeaf: And in most cases, not having an accurate ranking system is fine
[8:03 AM] LavaLeaf: we have a rough idea which we can use for tourney seeding
[8:03 AM] Sampson: Is it even worth the trouble of trying to rank these teams?
[8:03 AM] Sampson: I know it can help define who needs to stay or leave out of beginner level tourneys
[8:04 AM] LavaLeaf: Only if it's accurate, which is the problem
[8:04 AM] Sampson: But I feel like some teams might purposely skewer their ranks
[8:05 AM] LavaLeaf: I like Sendou's ladder idea and I wish more teams took part in it
[8:05 AM] Sampson: Oh I haven't thought about the ladder in a while
[8:06 AM] Sampson: That hardly ever gets advertised and the actual tourneys only come out every once and a while
[8:06 AM] LavaLeaf: The tourneys are good but it's the ladder that I think would be beneficial to more people
[8:06 AM] LavaLeaf: It's kind of like a self-sorting ranking system
[8:07 AM] LavaLeaf: 3 divisions of teams (which teams can move between dependent on performance), and they can challenge teams ranked higher than them to move into their spot on the leaderboard
[8:08 AM] LavaLeaf: from my perspective it'd even be helpful for newer teams
[8:08 AM] LavaLeaf: They won't reach 1st, but they can beat teams ranked close to them and still feel the same sense of progression
[8:10 AM] LavaLeaf: teams would set their own boundaries rather than external TOs trying to classify teams
[8:11 AM] Sampson: I enjoy that ladder idea, but what about the bottom tiers
[8:11 AM] LavaLeaf: There'd be a number of bottom-tier teams
[8:12 AM] LavaLeaf: They'd compete against each other
[8:12 AM] Sampson: I'm enjoying the idea so far
[8:12 AM] Sampson: I don't see any major obvious conflicts
[8:13 AM] Sampson: Only thing I might see as an issue could be moral or toxicity
[8:13 AM] Sampson: But that naturally comes with a ladder
[8:20 AM] LavaLeaf: they're fringe competitors, but they still want to compete
[8:20 AM] Sampson: The ladder system may help for advancement of true competitors
[8:20 AM] Sampson: But for those who wish to be stagnant or don't care enough
[8:21 AM] Sampson: They'll be stuck at the bottom and I'm not sure how well they'll receive that or enjoy that
[8:22 AM] LavaLeaf: that's not something TOs can fix
[8:25 AM] Sampson: True
[8:26 AM] LavaLeaf: For these fringe competitors, I don't think SSG should force them to enter other events
[8:27 AM] LavaLeaf: The problem is when serious competitive players who perform consistently well in low-tier tournaments don't progress to the next stage
[8:28 AM] LavaLeaf: a barrier would be useful
[8:30 AM] Sampson: I think a hard barrier is necessary and useful, but I don't want to ward players off or aware from reaching that ceiling either
[8:30 AM] Sampson: The more I think about it the more an intermediate player reward seems like a good idea
[8:31 AM] LavaLeaf: How do you decide who deserves an award? And what award would they get?
[8:32 AM] LavaLeaf: the reward imo should be their self-regulated sense of progression
[8:36 AM] Sampson: I feel like players who go out into the deeper end of tournaments like BnS should be incentivized to continue doing so
[8:40 AM] LavaLeaf: There was a time when beginner tournaments were nowhere near as frequent as they are now. If teams were serious about improving, they had to scrim constantly and collectively think of techniques to advance, then throw themselves into the deep end. A reward for doing this would certainly be nice, but if teams are really looking to improve, they should do this anyway because they know that it's necessary for them
[8:41 AM] Sampson: Yeah, but we don't have to throw them into the deep end and structure tournaments like how they used to be
[8:42 AM] Sampson: If teams weren't struggling to advance into the the deep end we wouldn't be having this conversation though
[8:43 AM] LavaLeaf: There are lots of teams that do struggle, but there are also teams/players that are the same level as teams in more mainstream tournaments but are still stuck in SSG
[8:44 AM] LavaLeaf: maybe a hard barrier wouldn't be good, but at the very least serious encouragement from TOs with clear reasons why teams should enter bigger events would help
[8:46 AM] LavaLeaf: maybe a bit of mindset stuff to prevent teams losing motivation if they lose early in the bigger events as well
[8:53 AM] Sampson: I don't know that push feels too weak, yeah if a team can only play at the times of SSG then that makes sense, but otherwise they shouldn't be staying around as they aren't amateurs
[8:57 AM] SAC | Nathan: No one is staying around, to be honest
[8:58 AM] SAC | Nathan: Because of SAC we can't ban them yet. My goal is to get newer teams that haven't been in one of our tournaments to come join, I want to grow our tournaments.
[8:59 AM] SAC | Nathan: Teams finding experienced players to play with them is because of SSG's rule that you can play with a Division 2 player.
[9:00 AM] SAC | Nathan: Teams that aren't working their way up our staying in our tournaments. We can't ban teams that aren't winning.
[9:01 AM] SAC | Nathan: I agree with David, not every team will grow out of a beginner phase, so they stick in our tournaments. Not that they shouldn't go participate in others, but that's the path they choose
[9:02 AM] LavaLeaf: But what's the reason for them not growing out? Is it because they don't want to, or because they're not trying enough?
[9:02 AM] SAC | Nathan: Well, you kinda answered that.
[9:03 AM] SAC | Nathan: I do believe, in some way teams are "scared" or are "pushed away" from entering more open events.
[9:03 AM] SAC | Nathan: Just because getting stomped scares them
[9:03 AM] SAC | Nathan: The other reason is because either they aren't improving, or they don't want to, like you said.
[9:04 AM] SAC | Nathan: I think people are upset with the number of entrants SSG is receiving. And then other tournaments aren't receiving the same?
[9:12 AM] LavaLeaf: There's an important distinction to make between teams that have the end-goal of becoming a high-ranking competitive team, but don't want to be forced to practise more than simply playing in SSG, and teams that have an end-goal of playing in tournaments just for the fun of it.

Teams that perform well in SSG may be scared of playing in bigger events, even if they know that it's necessary in the path to becoming a competitive team in the long term. SSG is comfy for them. It should be made clearer to them that in order to progress, they have to play in bigger tournaments
[9:13 AM] SAC | Nathan: I never really imagined the more skilled teams in our tournaments would be the ones scared of advancing.
[9:13 AM] SAC | Nathan: I always thought it would be the ones who have less experience, and don't do so well in open tournaments.
[9:14 AM] SAC | Nathan: Once we ban these teams that are performing well, I'm sure they'll move on. But SAC is a big reason why we're getting so many entrants, the competition that it provides within the lower level scene is something that the lower level teams value and want to work towards
[9:15 AM] SAC | Nathan: If anyone is not participating in an event and participating in ours, it's because they want to work toward SAC so they can make playoffs.
[9:16 AM] Sampson: I'm assuming because SAC Playoffs are a reachable goal?
[9:17 AM] LavaLeaf: the competition amongst lower level players is definitely a positive thing, and I don't see any reason why people should complain about that. It's when teams who should be able to go toe-to-toe with those in "regular" events don't enter those events
[9:18 AM] LavaLeaf: even if they're doing it for SAC, it's not like taking part in SSG and other events is mutually exclusive
[9:18 AM] SAC | Nathan: And those teams will be moving on after this season
[9:18 AM] Sampson: Will they be hard blocked from attending any SAC tourneys next season?
[9:19 AM] SAC | Nathan: They'll be banned. Of course we don't want them to keep participating in our events, when they have a lot of potential to go do well in opens.
[9:19 AM] SAC | Nathan: I think our job is to kind of send them off, to play with other mid-level/high level teams once they become overqualified for our events.
[9:20 AM] Sampson: Alright that's what I expected
[9:20 AM] Sampson: Now the question is what they'll do once they're banned
[9:20 AM] SAC | Nathan: Personally, I want them to keep improving.
[9:20 AM] SAC | Nathan: And keep going far in the community
[9:21 AM] SAC | Nathan: Because the teams we're producing rn are like the next mid-level teams
[9:22 AM] Sampson: Yeah same for me, I guess at this point it's up to their drive and passion
[9:22 AM] Sampson: Does this issue extend beyond top 8 though?
[9:22 AM] Sampson: Are there truly mid level teams stuck in the pipeline as well?
[9:22 AM] SAC | Nathan: Are you asking if teams will move on even if they don't make Top 8?
[9:23 AM] SAC | Nathan: Bit confused on your question there
[9:24 AM] Sampson: Yeah
[9:25 AM] SAC | Nathan: I'm sure we'll look at some teams in T16 to decide whether they'll need to be banned or not, but the teams that aren't in T16 or T8 will likely keep playing our events
[9:25 AM] Sampson: Then that issue seems to be sorted out
[9:26 AM] LavaLeaf: still think it would be useful to encourage them to enter other events at the same time
[9:26 AM] SAC | Nathan: We will
[9:26 AM] Sampson: I'm confused on why people like The One are upset at people for staying in the amateur pipeline if SAC was designed to kick them out anyway
[9:26 AM] SAC | Nathan: I don't think I've said this yet, but if GSM would not have been on SAC weekends I would've promoted them to go play.
[9:27 AM] SAC | Nathan: I have no idea, Sampson. Right now I'm just trying to explain why they are staying in our events, and trying to figure out what events people want us to send them to.
[9:27 AM] SAC | Nathan: Like, I've promoted other tournaments before when FSC isn't running
[9:30 AM] LavaLeaf: maybe make SSG less frequent so that if teams want to play in a competitive atmosphere between events, they have to either scrim or play other tournaments
[9:31 AM] Sampson: I think for sure you guys should promote and focus on other tourneys in the SAC for all players
[9:32 AM] Sampson: I also agree with Lavaleaf that the schedule should be adjusted for season 2 with other tournament's schedules to allow them to participate in other tournaments while in SAC
[9:32 AM] SAC | Nathan: The problem is no one is contacting us so we can prevent overlap
[9:32 AM] SAC | Nathan: I've only had 1 person do that
[9:33 AM] SAC | Nathan: So if we want to "adjust" schedules to fit other tournaments schedules we need to communicate
[9:33 AM] LavaLeaf: it's weekly right now, right? surely there are teams who aren't in top 16 but are happy to enter exclusively SSG, because they think it gives them enough competitive experience to allow them to improve
9:33 AM] SAC | Nathan: No, bi weekly
[9:33 AM] LavaLeaf: ah right
[9:33 AM] LavaLeaf: what about Fresh Start Cup?
[9:34 AM] SAC | Nathan: Well yes Lavaleaf, the teams that aren't at the Top of the SAC leaderboard are glad to enter SSG.
[9:34 AM] Sampson: There's for sure another tournament that runs on the off week of SGG no?
[9:34 AM] SAC | Nathan: Despite knowing they aren't going to make Top 8.
[9:34 AM] Sampson: That's why they have so many entrants
[9:35 AM] SAC | Nathan: Because there is another tournament on the off week of SSG?
[9:35 AM] Sampson: Ah no, I was wondering if SSG had another tourney that runs during it's off week
[9:35 AM] Sampson: I know Sit Back Saturdays is a thing now
[9:35 AM] SAC | Nathan: SAC doesn't run two weeklies.
[9:36 AM] Sampson: Sorry worded my question weird my bad
[9:36 AM] Sampson: I'll fix that up
[9:36 AM] SAC | Nathan: To answer Lavaleaf's question, FSC runs bi-monthly
[9:36 AM] Sampson: If there was another tournament that happens on the week SSG isn't running
[9:38 AM] Sampson: The schedule for the SAC tourneys seems pretty free and it'd think time devoted to advertising those tourneys that run during the off periods for the SAC tourneys could really help
[9:39 AM] SAC | Nathan: I mean like I haven't heard much of Sitback Saturdays
[9:39 AM] SAC | Nathan: Tournaments are not promoted well
[9:40 AM] Sampson: Yeah that's another issue
[9:40 AM] Sampson: I know scheduling together tournaments is hard and you guys are overworked and may not have a lot of free time
[9:41 AM] SAC | Nathan: I mean
[9:41 AM] SAC | Nathan: It can happen
[9:41 AM] Sampson: But I feel like tourneys should work better to help support each other and be more aware of each other's tourneys
[9:41 AM] SAC | Nathan: This ^
[9:41 AM] Sampson: Based off of the tweet's from Snek and a couple other players
[9:42 AM] Sampson: It feels like a lack of communication between TOs AND Players on schedules and events
[9:42 AM] Sampson: Project Dorado is an amazing tourney that gets near no advertising
[9:42 AM] SAC | Nathan: SAC's schedule was pretty much planned all at once, in the off season, when we're planning events, I wouldn't mind getting together with a few other TOs
[9:42 AM] Sampson: I would really enjoy that
[9:43 AM] SAC | Nathan: Only time I see Project Dorado is when Mario says something about it on Twitter
[9:43 AM] SAC | Nathan: Like promotes it
[9:43 AM] SAC | Nathan: I see 0 advertising on discord
[9:43 AM] Sampson: And I'd love to see more advertising for the circuit through TOs you work with and vice versa for SAC
[9:44 AM] Sampson: You have to actively look for it
[9:44 AM] SAC | Nathan: I have to go digging to find an advertisement?
[9:44 AM] Sampson: I'm not saying they should be layed out on a silver platter
[9:44 AM] SAC | Nathan: What I'm saying is
[9:44 AM] SAC | Nathan: Make it more known
[9:44 AM] SAC | Nathan: Inkacademy, LUTI are very popular spots for advertising
[9:45 AM] Sampson: We have public noticeboard hell
[9:45 AM] SAC | Nathan: I shouldn't have to go look for your advertisement, especially if you want people to come play in your tournament
[9:45 AM] Sampson: I just went there and found out about padding pool two minutes ago
[9:45 AM] Sampson: I think the issue is in a server so large
[9:45 AM] Sampson: And with tons of taps
[9:45 AM] Sampson: *tabs
[9:45 AM] Sampson: It's hard to see when they're advertised or updated
[9:46 AM] Sampson: I'd enjoy a pingable role for those who are searching for tournaments
[9:49 AM] Sampson: Is tournament player a pingable role?
[9:50 AM] Nutter the squirrel: @tournament player
[9:50 AM] Nutter the squirrel: lol
[9:51 AM] Revolution03: Theory proven true
[9:51 AM] Nutter the squirrel: @academy
[9:51 AM] Nutter the squirrel: lnao
[9:52 AM] SAC | Nathan: Then let's put advertisements at the top of our servers
[9:53 AM] SAC | Nathan: Kbot's forecast is helping a bit tweeting out a few times a week
[9:53 AM] SAC | Nathan: But stuff needs to be advertised here too.
[9:53 AM] SAC | Nathan: There are servers with promotion channels, but yes, that aren't on the top.
[9:54 AM] LavaLeaf: scheduling is certainly another issue, but just going back to what the attitude towards new teams in SAC should be

1) Teams that are overqualified for SAC are still taking part in events for new teams (already been discussed a lot and they'll be restricted from entering once SAC is over, fine)
2) Teams that are not good enough to perform well in bigger tournaments, even though their aim is to reach that level one day, are growing at a slower rate than they should because they're only playing in SSG. They're neither scrimming enough nor are they playing in other tournaments. Please encourage this to happen more. Teams shouldn't think that playing in a beginner tournament is enough to improve.
[10:02 AM] SAC | Nathan: I know SqSS uses like Swiss - Top 32 or smth
[10:03 AM] SAC | Nathan: BnS uses Swiss
[10:03 AM] SAC | Nathan: But once they encounter a format where you get easily knocked out they will shy away
[10:05 AM] LavaLeaf: which is why they come back to SSG
[10:05 AM] LavaLeaf: but right now, it looks like there are teams only entering SSG, not the other events
[10:05 AM] SAC | Nathan: I just said that :fishoRAGE:
[10:06 AM] SAC | Nathan: Yeah I don't know what's up :shrug:
[10:06 AM] SAC | Nathan: I think SSG is the only weekend event getting 50+ teams
[10:06 AM] Sampson: Check Snek's tweet for that
[10:06 AM] LavaLeaf: so what I'm saying is you should encourage them to enter those other events more
[10:07 AM] SAC | Nathan: When SqSS runs, we don't mess with it. We know SQSS is a well ran tournament and hard to compete with
[10:07 AM] SAC | Nathan: But, yeah we can encourage them to play BnS more
[10:08 AM] LavaLeaf: not even just BnS, because not all teams can play at that time
[10:08 AM] LavaLeaf: SMC, Sitback Saturdays, 4v4 Sundaes, whatever
[10:09 AM] Sampson: ^
[10:09 AM] LavaLeaf: you don't have to advertise for these events
[10:09 AM] Sampson: If you don't even want to waste time on all of them
[10:09 AM] Sampson: I'd even promote the #tournaments in snek's crosswalk
[10:09 AM] SAC | Nathan: Rip didn't mean to delete
[10:09 AM] LavaLeaf: just make it clear that these things exist
[10:10 AM] LavaLeaf: and that teams should not only be playing in SAC
[10:10 AM] LavaLeaf: at the very least, encourage them to scrim more
[10:10 AM] Sampson: I'd even promote it as a way to do better in the SAC or fun things to do besides the SAC
[10:11 AM] LavaLeaf: teams are scared of scrimming too for some reason
[10:11 AM] SAC | Nathan: I don't know why if that's the case
[10:12 AM] Sampson: That can be promoted in the SAC, but iirc AIDz is working on that for mid levels
[10:12 AM] Sampson: If not already present in squid arena
[10:12 AM] Sampson: Which may be a victim of lack of knowledge/advertisment again :/
[10:12 AM] SAC | Nathan: Squid Arena is more of an individual-player based thing
[10:12 AM] Sampson: True
[10:12 AM] Sampson: Spawn Pad would be a nice place for that to happen
[10:13 AM] Sampson: But I haven't seen much activity in terms of scrims/tourneys there
[10:13 AM] SAC | Nathan: Spawn Pad has a TON of new players in it
[10:13 AM] SAC | Nathan: They should do something with them
[10:13 AM] Sampson: I'd argue some, not all are pretty inactive
[10:14 AM] Sampson: Spawn Pad was hard pushed and advertised and has a ton of resources and staff,but I haven't seen or heard much out of it tbh
[10:14 AM] SAC | Nathan: You just reminded me it exists
[10:15 AM] Sampson: Yeah it's under the radar which should be the opposite of what it is
[10:15 AM] Sampson: They ran Jumpstart a month or so ago
[10:15 AM] Sampson: Their first tournament for the spawn pad and FAs/Beginners
[10:15 AM] Sampson: After being made in the summer
[10:18 AM] SAC | Nathan: Can you dm me the tweets talking about ssg please?
[10:18 AM] Sampson: Sure
[10:18 AM] SAC | Nathan: Thanks
[10:18 AM] Sampson: Just tweets on it or other stuff?
[10:19 AM] SAC | Nathan: Uhh if you have other stuff, then both
[10:19 AM] Sampson: Okay, man that was non descript
[10:19 AM] SAC | Nathan: ?
[10:19 AM] SAC | Nathan: Oh :joy:
[10:20 AM] SAC | Nathan: Yeah, I just want to read them and possibly use this conversation to explain what's happening
[10:32 AM] "newt: is there a Saturday/Sunday tourney coming up?
I forget if there's one or not
[10:34 AM] water: h
[10:35 AM] "newt: two day not one or the other
[10:35 AM] "newt: hi water
[10:36 AM] Sampson: There's 4v4 sundaes
[10:36 AM] crys: more weeklies/bi weeklies that arent on Friday/Saturday/Sunday imo
[10:36 AM] Sampson: Sitback Saturdays
[10:36 AM] Sampson: A death match tourney this Saturday
[10:36 AM] water: hi newt
[10:36 AM] water: i was too lazy to click mark all as read
[10:36 AM] crys: Overtowered in a good example but only open for eu pretty much
[10:38 AM] Sampson: There's more than I've listed in #public-noticeboard  if you want more options
[10:38 AM] "newt: there isn't a Saturday to Sunday (two day) coming up? I thought I read of one
single day is easier
I just need to call off work :pacKMS:
[10:40 AM] "newt: I probably read an old tweet
I've been bested gg
[10:43 AM] Sampson: The two day is the invitational
[10:43 AM] Sampson: That's restricted to certain top players
[10:44 AM] "newt: yeee inkvitational
I think I was thinking of sqss
[10:47 AM] "newt: unless that's not two days and it's too early in the morning
[10:50 AM] Sampson: It's 2 day iirc
[10:50 AM] Sampson: Not sure if it's running this week though
[10:57 AM] The One: Inkvitatonal 2 day and rhis wwwk
[10:57 AM] The One: Week
[11:55 AM] David: A few points
 1. Everyone learns at a different rate
2. 50+ teams in a tournament is a huge success
3. New players/teams aren’t fodder to make tournaments look better.
[12:13 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: guys, competitive gaming is not a freaking class system
[12:14 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: stop viewing new teams as fodder to make tournaments look good
[12:14 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: people play competitively because they want to play
[12:14 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: if people don't feel comfortable going to certain tournaments, don't force them
[12:18 PM] LavaLeaf: I think one of the reasons people have such strong opinions about this is because of the huge disparity in numbers between "mainstream" events and "new team" events
[12:18 PM] LavaLeaf: there are more new/low-level teams than "normal" teams
[12:19 PM] LavaLeaf: is that standard in a competitive scene?
[12:19 PM] SAC | Nathan: Thank you David for those points :clap::clap::clap::clap:
[12:19 PM] SAC | Nathan: Won't you always have more newer players than top players?
[12:20 PM] LavaLeaf: top players, sure
[12:20 PM] LavaLeaf: mid-level players, I don't think so
[12:20 PM] SAC | Nathan: There are more newer teams than mid-level right now
[12:20 PM] LavaLeaf: why?
[12:21 PM] SAC | Nathan: just look at SAC? Wouldn't mid-level be described as just below top level?
[12:21 PM] David: Yeah mid level is a hard thing to nail down
[12:22 PM] David: Would you call team of X ranked players mid level?
[12:22 PM] SAC | Nathan: no
[12:22 PM] David: What would you call them?
[12:23 PM] SAC | Nathan: uhhh
[12:24 PM] LavaLeaf: there is such a diverse range of skill levels in X rank
[12:24 PM] SAC | Nathan: ^
[12:24 PM] SAC | Nathan: So I can't nail a level to a thing like X rank
[12:24 PM] David: But it does show a certain level of individual skill
[12:25 PM] LavaLeaf: seeing as Nathan is one of the primary organisers of SAC, an amateur circuit
[12:25 PM] LavaLeaf: What's the average rank of teams that enter?
[12:26 PM] SAC | Nathan: I've seen a lot of X, but there's some B/A/S/S+ players too
[12:26 PM] LavaLeaf: BASS
[12:26 PM] SAC | Nathan: BASS+
[12:27 PM] David: Lol we’ll called them bass+ players from now on
[12:28 PM] SAC | Nathan: I mean, there are also a group of low-level X teams as well
[12:29 PM] SAC | Nathan: So there's your low X teams, and teams of BASS+
[12:29 PM] LavaLeaf: literally the only way you can determine a team's skill level is to compare them to other teams and have a kind of relative ranking
[12:29 PM] SAC | Nathan: and then you have the Top 8 which are probably 2300-2400+
[12:30 PM] LavaLeaf: but because there are so many so-called "new" or "low-level" teams taking part in only SAC, it's difficult to judge their real skill levels
[12:30 PM] SAC | Nathan: yeah
[12:31 PM] SAC | Nathan: Compared to others, they are LL
[12:31 PM] SAC | Nathan: And then we have LUTI who does seeding...
[12:31 PM] SAC | Nathan: and so the teams that are in like Div 5-7 are LL teams
[12:32 PM] SAC | Nathan: And then you have Div 3-4 which are "upcoming"
[12:32 PM] SAC | Nathan: We describe our Top 8 teams as "upcoming"
[12:32 PM] David: LL = low level?
[12:32 PM] SAC | Nathan: Yes
[12:32 PM] LavaLeaf: love live!
[12:32 PM] SAC | Nathan: I have a couple of acronyms I use
[12:33 PM] SAC | Nathan: NIU = Newer/inexperienced and upcoming teams
[12:33 PM] SAC | Nathan: Gets tiring to write this out so you have to use an acronym :joy:
[12:34 PM] LavaLeaf: but I still think it's weird how there are more new teams than mainstream/mid-level/upcoming teams
[12:34 PM] SAC | Nathan: I... Don't know?
[12:35 PM] LavaLeaf: surely new teams shouldn't make up the bulk of a competitive scene
[12:35 PM] SAC | Nathan: And to be honest... There are even more we just haven't reached them yet
[12:35 PM] SAC | Nathan: You think there should be more TT/Mid-level teams?
[12:35 PM] SAC | Nathan: TT = Top teams
[12:36 PM] LavaLeaf: well it should be like one of those normal distributions or whatever
[12:36 PM] LavaLeaf: https://dietassessmentprimer.cancer.gov/images/learn/distribution2.jpg
12:36 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: it's not a normal distribution at all
[12:37 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: it doesn't need to be that at all
[12:37 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: did you know that for a game like dota
[12:37 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: the average mmr is 2-3k
[12:37 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: that's the low end of the spectrum that goes from 1k to 9k
[12:37 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: the majority of any playerbase is always going to be low skill
[12:38 PM] LavaLeaf: that makes sense
[12:38 PM] SAC | Nathan: Well you're kinda always growing with new players, and then it takes time to become a Mid-level/TT team
[12:38 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: a competitive scene does not thrive on having strong teams/midlevel teams
[12:38 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: it thrives merely on having people in it
[12:39 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: which means that low-level people are participating in it as well
[12:39 PM] LavaLeaf: what should tournaments that aren't aimed at low-skill teams aim to do?
[12:39 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: if you want people to go do other tournaments, then you have to actively showcase them
[12:39 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: honestly? there's no real place for anyone new to get information
[12:40 PM] BestTeaMaker 🍵: and it's been a problem since the start

[they keep going on improvement of the recording/vod scene from here, can grab that if you want but it's not really as relevant or interesting]