I think it should be like in karate kid, where they train with their coaches for a long time, and then the coach sits in the audience and is like "you can do it" for the finale.
this is what I was thinking as well. I sometimes give my friends advice as we play, it feels like I am helping them cheat unless I can give both players advice which doesn't always happen so I try to just not do it. Also I don't want them to think I am playing favorites or distracting anyone. I don't feel bad if I only give advice once the match is over. In that case it feels like a speedier version of watching your own replays to look for mistakes. this of course doesn't translate to a professional environment but I think if I feel like its cheating while I am doing it then it must be cheating on some level in a professional setting. Another thing to consider though is the prize money probably has to be split with the coach where as a player with no coach would get the prize money to themselves so there is that tradeoff.
1. Have a designated coach 2. They may only Coach in between matches, not during the match. 3. A time limit. A good 10 - 15 seconds will do. The reason for this time is so that player momentum is not disturbed by something outside of the game. 4. No coaching during Top 8 Double Elimination OR Top 4 Single Elimination.
What about analogizing this to boxing and amatuer wrestling both have multiple coach's and it a one on one sport and in those sports they're expressly allowed and play a big part in helping the competitor prepair, win, or notice things during the fight he may have missed.
Boxing is a physical sport though, so that analogy breaks down. This single instance of gaming is a hybrid sport, but when money is on the line you shouldn't have the outcome decided by who's coach was able to notice more about the opponent than the other. Also how do you adapt this for smaller tournaments where someone might not HAVE a person who is willing or able to coach them? Do they get one provided? Do they simply have to play at a disadvantage? Easier to just take them out. Removes ALL question of who is the better player, doesn't it?
I think you underestimate the mental aspects to combat sports. It's not just about who is the strongest person; it's not a weightlifting competition. Now, I'm no boxer myself, but the amount of mental work that goes into figuring out your opponents tells, the weaknesses they show during a fight, which opportunities that they left and how they responded to you capitalizing, and trying to analyze how you're fighting as well are all things that go into a professional level boxing match. And you have to do it while being punched in the face. I'm not sure where I stand on the "should coaching be allowed in the fgc" thing as a whole, I just bring this up to say that I think boxing would have made a better analogy.
Declaired coaches, only between matches and I like the idea of limited coaching time, so for example 3 minutes per set. If they choose to use 2 Minutes after game 1 they only have 1 Minute left for the rest of the set.
I'm speaking from a Smash perspective, but i think just for time's sake coaching shouldn't be allowed til top 16/top 8, and at that point each player should have a pre-designated on stage coach that they can confer with for a pre designated amount of time in between games/sets. all things being equal I don't mind coaches, I'm on the "it leads to higher quality of play" camp.
I'd say every player should get to designate a "support" player who is allowed to be with them through top 8 and they have to stand/sit in a designated coach area between matches and can confer during timeouts.
I feel like Smash 4 did it right. Each person gets one 30-second timeout in-between a set where they are allowed to get advice. In my opinion, this is a perfect balance of coach and no coach ruling.
There’s something similar done in squash. No talking at all in the games themselves, 90 seconds in between for water and coaching. Any coaching that you can get, your opponent can as well. It’s a much a coaching matchup as it is a player matchup.
I feel the rules on coaching could be this easy. 1. the coach must be designated before the match. 2. the coach will not be present during the game but in between games 2. a time limit (thinking 30 seconds to a minute) The trinity law - Players must be physically present to coach
CMCAdvanced I mean i suppose if the other rules are followed it's fine, I'm just not sure a phone call out is a good way to go. Seems like there's a few problems that can arise
I completely agree with those rules, although I might add that coaching would need to take place off the stage or away from the play area to make sure the coaching is only to benefit one player and not to distract the other.
I say no coaches after top 8. I was playing at a local tournament and in losers the guy had 4 guys walk up to him and give him information while I only had some basic frame data/notes. What bothered me was every match I won or did well something they told him changed the way he fought. I'm not saying I would have won but I did lose confidence on my more sneaky set ups and frame traps everytime this guys coach talked to him. I felt like I lost to a team. This is why I think after top 8 you gotta be on your own. Or if both players agree to coaching. Adding a time limit would be nice too.
There would be an honor imbalance if the solo guy has to vocally ban his opponent's coaches. It needs to be standardized. Once you're in the match you fly solo or you die trying.
I think coaching should be allowed under two regulations. One a player must pick a coach before hand and stick with them. Two say in between a best 2 out of 3 set a coach would only have 15 to 30 seconds to coach. But I think it should still be up to the whoever is running the event.
I'm gonna say coaching should be before and after sets, but not between or during matches in a bracket. Figure it out yourself or get fucked, to put it bluntly. Being told what you did wrong is fine, but save it for after getting kicked to losers. Alternatively, an interesting requirement would be that all coaching must be carried out in a clear speaking voice, so that both players can hear it.
Yo, I lost because my opponent and his coach was speaking in a foreign language I didn't understand, but they knew what we were talking about. That's cheating! /kappa The clear speaking rule probably wouldn't help people who don't speak clearly to begin with.
OR...play your game and f==k them up :) Couching doesn't work against certain players, because they can always switch it up on you. I personally don't care.
The impact of coaching varies at the level of play as well as the level of tournament. I'm sure the top players are well aware of the frame data and set ups, any advice given to them would likely be more towards habits or exploits. At a local level, as demonstrated in the birdie example, something small can change the match and I've seen it a lot personally. One of the things people praise in fighting games is how you need to adapt in a match and be knowledgeable but that's slightly mitigated if people are there to fill in for what you didn't do. Lastly, depends on the game too. You can barely coach someone in 3rd strike, that's mainly footsies individual play. A game like MKX that has many set ups or sf5 that relies on frame data a ton, small advice goes a longer way.
That's true. As much as I like Julio taking that call from Chris (even if Julio said afterwards that he couldn't even make out what Chris was saying) was a bit much. One registered couch per player seems fine.
One coach per player/team, I guess depends on the event. I agree with most of the people I've seem comment. Coach must be designated, between matches only, short time limit and must be present at the event. edit: Other ideas I have seen that I like is, some kind of time out rules could be put in place for between matches.
Honestly? I'm not one to ask about extra perks, but I've always LOVED the quality of these Analysis videos and would love to throw money at y'alls face. Send Patrons a Lawry's Salt Tin or something.
Two Perks: More frequent kickass videos, and maybe a Core A shirt somehow? This channel is so criminally underrepresented in the fgc, you guys need your own section on shoryuken or eventhubs
Coaching is fine but you can't just randomly phone a friend like you're on Who Wants to be A Millionaire. Coaches need to be seen by both players and acknowledged by one another before the game begins and like in boxing defined breaks between rounds need to be set so that it limits how much advice can be given
Your videos are so thorough yet so succinct. I always know that every second of your content will be worth my time. Absolutely perfect (if there is such a thing).
It's pretty simple, YES - to coaching - If it's a team oriented game like League of Legends, Overwatch, Star Craft etc. Because you need a guy to designate & orchestrate different roles. NO - to coaching - If the game is completely a 1 vs 1 duel. You're on your own once you step on the stage and the match has begun. A true champion has to be the complete player that can think and adapt by himself.
Coaching is even more crucial in individual sports compared to team sports. Teammates can observe each other and give advice, you even have a team captain. It would be excessive to expect a fighter or athlete of an individual sport to be able to completely cross-analyze and evaluate their situation while burdening the exhaustion of their sport alone. By that logic if someone is expected to adapt and think completely by themselves in an individual sport, then why shouldn't someone also be expected to do the same in a team sport? They only have 1 role to fill in an entire team of people working together!
>Team oriented game >Starcraft Lol what? Competitively, that game is entirely a 1v1 duel. Team games is a side-thing at best. It's like calling Smash a team game competitively, because they run side 2v2 events. Why even bother sharing your opinion if you have no idea what you're talking about? Which you clearly don't, if you genuinely believe Starcraft is a team game lol... It's also worth noting that I have seen more coaches on stage in the handful of FGC tournaments I have watched than in the literal two decades of Starcraft tournaments I have watched. Coaches are practically absent on stage in Starcraft. Like, entirely.
Simple way to fix this: 1. Only one designated coach. 2. Time limits between games to talk to coach. 3. If use of any device is seen that is not part of the game (cell phones, Ipods, ipads,etc.) by players qualifies as a game/match disqualification, but a coach can have lets say a notebook/notepad. 4. No coaching during a match in between rounds (ex. street fighter) as it could give too much of a sudden edge. I think these are the perfect steps in implementing coaching I do not see a huge problem with coaching it is a great way to promote more strategy and makes the spectator experience better.
I'd be all for banning the coaching of a player while he's playing a set. Fighting games are, generally, one on one games. Fighting games should be kept one on one, and players should do their homework before stepping into the ring.
Professional athletes do their homework, too. They study tape of the game for as many hours as they practice their sets. No one thinks the coaches destroy their ability to make their own decision with their opposition when it comes to game day. The 1v1 is still there.
@Junjun In a real boxing match the physical part is arguably way more present then in a fighting game, which would make the impact of coaching bigger in fighting games.
Adapting and recognizing both you and your opponents' patterns / tendencies is such a ridiculously huge part of FGC now (especially the closer you get to high level play) that I feel like mid-set coaching shouldn't be allowed. It's a part of the game and competition. The time to teach and learn is not in the middle of a tournament match.
as a counter strike player and viewer, I can say this isn't just in fighters. coaches are more restricted (only designated coaches) but until recently, they could speak whenever they wanted. they've just been limited last year to only commenting during half time, pauses, and between games in a match. this has increased the load on players who would originally outsource the mind portion of the game to the coach, acting like a sixth player.
I think we should ban Coaching during matches. Adaptation and reads are very important tools in any player skill-set, and can make the difference in a match. If you do not know something about a particular match then it's your own fault. As you said, it's like cheating, especially in SFV where the execution is less important.
If you're going to compare fighting games to live sports, compare them to combat sports as they are the most comparable. I wanna suggest two things. -some combat sports (mostly western ones like boxing or wrestling) allow for it, and you can listen for people shouting advice during matches, during rounds for that reason. Some it's a HUGE factor, where the coach says everything they need to do between rounds. -others, (usually more formal/traditional ones such as fencing or sport karate) tend to not allow for it because (and this is my speculation here) a match is to be a representation of live combat and they want to keep that part of it; should you be in a real duel or street fight, you won't have a buddy offering advice every 3 minutes. -the simple answer for it in games is to either include it, or dont, and clearly define it. If it's such a factor that it divides people, offer two different divisions
Personally, I think Coaching should be allowed before or after a match, not after a round in a set. But if the tournament allows coaching, have at least one person to coach you and give a set time limit, a solid 30-45 second chat before the next round, that way each match can be swift.
I think one of the follow-up questions should be: What information should players be able to access during a match? There have been instances of players checking their phones for frame data or their personal notes. I have a personal inclination to setting rules for and allowing coaching. However, I also kind of wonder if coaching undermines the elements of observing, reading, etc, instead turning a larger part of the game that tests how well you can follow your coaches instructions. Gerald is right when he says we should set proper expectations for coaches, but I think it's equally valid and equally important to explore what we should expect from players. Totally love the video! Great work! Many thanks!
If a player can win a match over someone else purely from the input of a coach on standby is a bit too unfair for the guy on the receiving end. I think it should be illegal to coach during a match, there should be a time limit on how long a coach can talk between matches, and most importantly, if a player is feeling overwhelmed by other player/coaching teams, he should be able to add a coach to his own team mid-tournament. Like this: let's say I make it to top 8 at EVO without a coach, and I hear that my rival also made it to top 8, and he did it with a good coach. I learn that one of my buddies is at the event, and he says he can help me with the matchup. I should be able to go to a referee and register my partner as the single coach, on the spot, but after that I cannot change my coach or add more. By doing this we can avoid elite players with dedicated coaches having an unfair advantage over smaller players who haven't had the resources or time to build up their own coaching talent.
I used to be a coach of LoL. I agree that it's just a matter of setup some rules... As an example, I'll put some values, thinking about the FGC working... 1 - Limit Time to 1 minute per tactical coaching. 2 - Limit Times to 2 times per Match, always between matches. 3 - Limit to one coach registered to each player. 4 - No Phone Calls, No eletronic devices, just pen and paper allowed to use on coaching. This should be enough to make coaching fair and who doesn't need it or have it don't feel discouraged to play.
I definitely think coaching should be banned in majors where theres real money on the line unless it's team play maybe. Any lack of match up knowledge or frame data should be that players burden. I think it's wrong to be winning and have someone come and tell your opponent how to beat you
Coaching can lead to higher quality matches. I'll use an example similar to the example at around 1:30. So player 1 uses a powerful but punishable kill setup to win game 1. Player 2's coach gives the advice to punish. So player 1 tries the move again in game 2, but player 2 punishes, securing the win. Player 1's coach steps in now, lets player 1 know player 2's on to him, that kill move won't work anymore. Now we're in game 3. The powerful but punishable kill move is off the table, and both players have to adapt. And we have a higher quality game, and set because of coaching. Without coaching, player 1 might have won all the games with a move that's easily punishable (not high level play). If player 2 had punished but player 1 had kept doing what he was doing, he would have got bodied (not high level play). But with the addition of coaches for both players, learning is faster and adaptation in the middle of a set is easier. Not having to wait till you get knocked to losers means all players can learn faster. Faster learning from all players means a faster changing meta, and faster improvement of not only their own skill but the skill of all players in the community. All of this leads to higher quality matches.
As a person that watches MMA this video was kind of a head scractcher to watch. If people can have coaches giving instruction during an actual cage fight and for 1 minute inbetween rounds of said cage fight, then of course people should be able to have coaches while playing a videogame. Only cause for concern is time so just allow the coaches to be there in a way that keeps the event time effecient. At the end of the day all a coach does is provide knowledge and insight from an outside perspective. It's up to the player to have the skills to use that knowledge to their advantage. In your example at 1:24 the advice that you gave was only advantageous because he had the skill & reaction time to execute the punish. Not everyone in the same position would be able to execute that punish just because you gave them the knowledge to do so. Kind of crazy that this is cause for debate and concern in the FGC and tennis lol. In an individual sports the better practitioner typically wins and coaching isn't going to change that so no use in banning it. The people that are salty about coaching are salty because it makes them realize they them selves are not as good as they thought they were or there competition is better than they presumed them to be.
1. Have a designated coach (Coach may not use phone calls or talk to anyone else mid set) 2. 10 seconds between matches. Players can call for a "Time out" if they need more time, but just like in sports, they have limited uses per tournament. 3. If opponent doesn't have a coach, there's no Coaching between matches.
In my opinion mid set coaching should not be allowed. Sure you could use the argument of "It's fair if both players have a coach and both players get 30 seconds with them" but the problem with that is then, when is the win because the player is good or if the coach is good? Even if both players have a coach if one coach is a random person who also plays the game and the other is a professional sports psychologist then a 1v1 game turns into a 2v2 game where you will be left behind if you cannot find a coach better than your opponents.
IVBredTrainer but that literally happens in every sport. I like it when the "worse" team wins because they have a better coach. I like it when the "worse" boxer gets better corner advice and shuts down the more technically skilled fighter. Otherwise sports could be replaced by measuring physical attributes of the athletes and running computer simulations.
doesn't matter, its STILL ultimately up to the player who plays the match, you can have the greatest coach or professional sports psychologist, if the coach tells him, hey you gotta punish that move with this move, or this move is -15 frames, or whatever, EVEN if the player gets advice to do such punishment or what the frame is, its still ultimately up to him to execute, it's not like the coach is there to press a button which will automatically punish a certain move that the player wasn't able to do consistently during his set. So your whole argument saying how it'll turn into a 2v2 or 2v1 if the other guy doesn't have a coach, is retarded. Ultimately, it is the player's hands and fingers and mind that dictates how he performs, and even if he gets the best advice to beat an opponent, if he's under pressure or nerves get to him, he won't be able to execute.
"[...] I think making a standard will also help coaches what kind of role they'll play in the future and plan accordingly." *shows Chinese BBQ through a window*
CSGO rules regarding coaching faced a lot of backlash because the organization's view is the coach is the "six man" which I guarantee no one in any sport believes that. This video is totally one sided with this belief that these pros are a bunch of cookie cutter players that cling on to every word their coach tells them which is just not true.
It's all debatable. Valve stated that it takes away from the 5v5 aspect of the game because a coach can call strategies for the team and mid-round call. The whole scene was starting to shift towards this because players taking the calling role generally performed worse. It's similar to the tennis situation in the video where having a coach with little limitations can increase the level that the game is played at but it also takes away from the core 5v5 gameplay that had been the norm for 15 years.
Exactly, it sort of just removes the really cool aspect of many sports which is how at the highest level, no matter how execution/physical heavy it is, it's still about out-thinking your opponent. When you let everyone have unrestricted coaches, you're essentially saying that the "muscle" part of the game is the important one, and you can leave the "brain" to a secondary person. This skews what kind of player is able to compete at a top level, reducing diversity DotA is a prime example of the opposite, where in-game coaching have never been allowed, and because of it, you can see top players ranging from mechanical beasts with superhuman reflexes, to people who are just really good leaders. In fact, there was even a famous case of an old coach for a team jumping in as a standin and owning, just because of game knowledge and shotcalling.
It's a really complicated question because the FGC has been historically so much more of a socially dynamic competitive scene, and people giving advice to their buddies inbetween matches goes way back to the arcade scene. Taking it away altogether does risk as the video said, making things a little too sterile. But on the other hand it could kind of be seen as an unfair advantage, as what if a more accomplished player with more access to coaching friends goes up against someone who's good but not as accomplished, and whom doesn't have as much of that to their advantage? I think for the time being, it's not so heavy a topic that it requires special attention...but if it reaches the point players might feel like coaches are required or else they're at a major disadvantage, then it might be time to step in. For one thing, time limits should be a definite rule, as well as a strict limit on numbers (no more posse's). I do wonder too if during majors, especially say...the top 8 of a major, if there just shouldn't be a flat out restriction to it during the actual tournament, maybe saving it for before the tournament begins or even big breaks during the finals, but not in the middle of a set.
can you touch on the fact your average joe/intermediate players won't get the luxury of being coached in a tournament and it can be an unfair advantage when up against someone that has it.
No, it should not be allowed. It removes too much of the meta. Plus, the coaches are just random people who pick their favorite player. So, it's unbalanced because, most of the time, only one player gets coached.
Alright... 1. Removed too much of the meta? Literally HOW? How are these two coorelated with eachother in anyway? 2. Coached pick their favorite player. Source for this? This seems like an argument from belief. 3. Unbalanced because most of the time only one play gets coached. Again...how? What are you using for your source?
Albert Meadows happens all the time . If you in say pie team you get a pie coach while mad catz player don't and let's say daigo on pie team that's unfair af . Plus if you in a tourny you should know your matchup
For fighting games, I say no coaching during tournament sets, period. Fighting games are appealing in large part due to the 1v1 aspect of it, why would we want to turn it into a pseudo-2v1?
I like the scientific approach to the matter, other than providing the BGM (which is awesome and should be done by every youtuber) I would love to see the sources you used where it is possible. Great work!
1. Each player designates a coach at the start of the tournament 2. Every set, each player gets a 30 second timeout, which he/she can use in between games 3. During the time out and only then, the coach can come up to the player and do his thing
I'm going from what I'm trying to pick up on. If you've heard the term "man-splain", it's explaining/dumbing down information to a woman with the underlying tone that women are too dumb to understand. Honestly, the term "mansplain" is stupid. And the situation probably looks sexist because of how SJW's view it. Nobody bats an eye when a male athlete is getting coached. Although when the athlete is a female (and the coach remains male), SJWs will assume to this "mansplain" idea. Personally myself, I don't view it as male-female. I saw that image as Coach-Athlete. And there would be far less problems if more people had followed that mindset.
+Core-A Gaming No, don't worry about how often you upload videos. Your content is what actually matters . Quality > Quantity always!! And trust me, you've been delivering it!
Imagine you're at the final table in a poker game and your opponent calls over 5 experts and then dials his mom asking how to play his next hand in secret. Wouldn't that shit would be mad annoying? That's coaching in video game tournaments. A fighting game is a 1 vs 1 match, not a 1 vs 1 + whoever-can-tell you-how-to-win match. When people call some dude on their phone in the middle of grand finals, waiting at the character select screen for 7 minutes, you've reached stupid annoyance levels (outside the game) for your opponent, and for audiences at home. No one wants to see that. Knowing what to do is part of the game. If you're just a piece of hardware that can technically hit buttons correctly without mistake, and your best friend, Master of Match Ups home boy walks over and fills you in on everything and you defeat everyone, but by yourself you couldn't/wouldn't be able to do shit, what does that say? Coach all you want BEFORE the match, but once you get on stage or you're sitting in the chair, that's just you and you're on your own. If you want to coach, coach from the crowd where people are free to say whatever they want. Your homies yelling advice is totally fine, but that means expect your opponent's homies to yell out random shit too if they choose to. That way everyone can hear what they have to say and we're back to a fair playing field, which is what a tournament is supposed to be. Everyone has a chance to pick whatever character is on screen, but not everyone has equal access to experts and coaches. Teams style tournaments are a completely different story. If communities could somehow agree to coaching I'd be for it or have coaching specific tournaments, otherwise eff Coach Fighter.
I love the effort put into your videos, they're all great and remind of how vsauce videos work where you can go in watching for one thing and then hooked on one or two more things in the video and you start learning a lot more than you thought you would when you started. Good job! Keep it up.
I didn't really understand the implications tennis coaches being men have. Does it really matter? To be honest, I was somewhat of a tennis-head in my teens and the fact is tenniswomen do have significantly shorter careers than most males so I think it's not that diffcult to imagine why they would become coaches less often.
Here's what I think: 1.Coaches must be declared when signing up for tournament 2.Coaches are only allowed if both players have a coach 3. There must be a time limit 4. Only in between matches
I think outright trying to prohibit coaching will not work as intended; better to regulate it as it exists instead, and from there I think stuff like limiting it to one person and putting a time limit is fair, though enforcement gets harder when it's something like pools compared to something like top 8 or even top 32, particularly at an event like EVO.
I think coaching should definitely not be allowed. As others have stated it basically makes the game 2vs1. When Hungrybox was asked "what changed this year?" he didn't say anything about himself. All he said was "that guy coached me."
No! Just like Justin implied "No Coach No Victory". He spent no time in the Lab; evolving his character, studying the frame data or how to counter the opponents character. It also negates mind games which is a huge part of FGC. Team sports have coaches to see and make sense of the chaos of the field . Boxing has coaches cause it's hard to concentrate when someone is constantly hitting you in the face, or when one eye is swollen shut and sweat is pouring in to the other eye.
Herv3 I feel like coaching should only happen before a set and only for 90 seconds max. I am pretty much fine with no coaching as well, just wanted to spice this up a bit.
the comparison to boxing is an interesting one, but I prefer it to be like tennis where you just go out there and play and whatever happens happens. none of this phone a friend bs
Not sure if you can say the same about boxing. Boxing is a sport where your body is the most important aspect, that's undeniable. Although you have to be a smart fighter in order to be a good fighter, the mind is not the number 1 thing like it is on a fightan.
I was on finals beating a yoshi with kirby (my main). If the other guy hasn’t had the coaching i would have being able to fight with my main (i had to switch to my secondary: pit. Because the tip of the guy was to camp my kirby. Then, after resorting to my arrows. The guy keep getting coached mid match with encouragement (so i could not remark on errors). Coaching is good. But if you are on finals or another close set. Is kinda unfair as the other has to figure out outa nowhere how to counter the coaching (and is gonna be bad if you dont have a coach yourself)
No coaching. If you don't know then you should go back and hit the grind. Figuring stuff out for yourself is what makes you better than the next person.
El Gato Felix I don't think people are strictly better than anyone, in tournament situations, people tend to do whatever gives them a better chance at winning, something everyone is equally able to accomplish. If you can't secure a coach, there's a good chance you weren't going to win anyway.
When you are on the stage that is your fault for not figuring it out in the first place. If you are playing with your friends or teammates that is one thing This is a one on one competition so it should be treated that way.
El Gato Felix boxing is one on one and coaches are regarded as just as important as the fighters, if not more. In fact, a better coach/a fighter that is willing to listen to his coach often determines the outcome of a fight. Micheal Moorer was having the easiest fight of his life but he disregarded Teddy Atlas's advice on George Foreman's set up. He got knocked out by a 45 year old despite outperforming his opponent.
First, this isn't boxing. Second, your coach should have prepared you for every situation so once you are on stage you don't need them. Third, what I am saying is that once you are on stage you shouldn't get any coaching. Once you are off and won or lost, then sure. Finally, as I said previously, this is a one on one competition so it should stay that way.
In a world where coaches aren't readily available I think it's only fair to use a coach if both players have 1 or more. At the end of the day it's 2+ vs 1 if one guy has coaching staff and the other doesn't. How is that fair?
Coaching is a natural progression of sport and so e-sport. However what has been creeping in to sports everywhere is the American standard of a coach is omnipresent and constantly giving instructions.sports like Football (soccer), rugby (league and union), snooker, cricket coaching while the match is on isn't allowed or restricted to them shouting from the sidelines. Its only at designated times or change over can a coach talk to a team.American sports, baseball, basketball, American football, the coaches are in constant contact with the players and can even interrupt games to communicate to them. This defies the whole purpose of an athlete being prepared and being the best.For me esports is a lot about knowledge, as highlighted in the video telling your friend "ex bullhorn into v-triggers is actually -9" (which make no sense to me) is like telling a chess player which move to look out for and how to counter it.If you are playing a semi competitive game of snooker or pool in the UK an you start giving your friend advise you'll probably angrily hear a phrase along the line of "Who is playing this game, you or him?" Which I think is how it should be.I think short matches coaching is not allowed, longer matches best of 11 for example, 2 mins should be allowed half way through.Sports should be about who is the best on the day, not who can afford the most people around them to help.
Someone else mentioned this previously, but I honestly really like the idea: You may have a single, designated coach with you during any Set. After each Match of the Set, players and their coaches may confer with one another. However, their time for doing so is a fixed pool that does not refresh during the Set. In this way, coaching would work similar to how Football teams have 3 timeouts per quarter; for instance, let's say this pool is 3 minutes for a beat of 5. Then from the time the coach leaves his designated chair to talk to the player, to the time he sits back down, your team loses time from that 3 minute pool. After the next match, coaches once again do their thing with the remaining time. Maybe they spend 2 minutes after the first round completely reworking their strategy, but take on the risk of only having 1 minute total for each followup session in between the next few matches. I think this strikes a fair balance. The only thing that needs to be adjusted is the time pool for each game and number of matches per set. Coaches could evenly spread their time and leave the chat to the basics, or save up some time to maybe take a "time-out" late in a stressful set to give their player a chance to catch their breath and think things through instead of getting floored by the built up momentum. But that strategy would only be effective if you had been VERY conservative with your time after the early matches so that you had a fairly big pool to burn on calming your player down.
I've been playing fighting games my whole life and it shitty to see when players don't sit next to each other, wear headphones, or are isolated in some kind of way. I just feel like I'm old school where the arcade cabinet was standard you stand shoulder shoulder and 20 plus people are yelling in your ear... coach included. I used to play with Julio "the voice" at his pad when Street fighter third strike was still a thing. Even then he was vary good. one of the best around San Jose but fights between us were always very heated. I would be yelling and jumping basically trying anything Break his concentration to gain any kind of advantage. I won our last fight. It's tight to see him professionally now.
outside the actual match is fine, the player can get all the help and info from his/her coach (like information about the characters of the opponent), but once the match starts and until a winner is decided, the coach should not be allowed to interact with the player in any way.
I think you should be able to have a coach to teach you, i don't think a coach should be able to talk to the player during the tournament. The reason for this is because it is the PLAYERS job to know everything he needs/wants to know for the tournament. Like you said about birdie and the frame data, the player should have known that from the start and if you don't then tough luck.
on stage coaching defeats the point of it being 1 on 1. if you lost then you weren't good enough or weren't supposed to win against that particular opponent. if you win while being coached then arguably you didnt win off your own hard work, skill and merrit.
Here are my rules: 1. Must pre-register a coach. I hate it when I see one guy versus another dude and 5 specialists for each of your 5 alternative characters. You are only allowed one coach, and you have to register him when you register. 2. Coaching must be done person to person, NOT person to phone call/text. 3. Advice and other matters can only be given between sets, not during. Breaking this rule is an automatic loss for the first set.
Always looking forward to your new videos that come out, I definitely think coaching should stay, but be regulated to a minute. Maybe also have a limit of how many time a player can coach during that daily session.
I think it should be like in karate kid, where they train with their coaches for a long time, and then the coach sits in the audience and is like "you can do it" for the finale.
This
this is what I was thinking as well. I sometimes give my friends advice as we play, it feels like I am helping them cheat unless I can give both players advice which doesn't always happen so I try to just not do it. Also I don't want them to think I am playing favorites or distracting anyone. I don't feel bad if I only give advice once the match is over. In that case it feels like a speedier version of watching your own replays to look for mistakes. this of course doesn't translate to a professional environment but I think if I feel like its cheating while I am doing it then it must be cheating on some level in a professional setting. Another thing to consider though is the prize money probably has to be split with the coach where as a player with no coach would get the prize money to themselves so there is that tradeoff.
Usually, in real tournaments, the sensei can still couch you while you fight
I remember my sensei one time slap my face because I wasn't listening him
......Like coaching in literally any sport?
@@cryofigment4949 i think sport coaches usually give a bit more advice than "you can do it" though
1. Have a designated coach
2. They may only Coach in between matches, not during the match.
3. A time limit. A good 10 - 15 seconds will do. The reason for this time is so that player momentum is not disturbed by something outside of the game.
4. No coaching during Top 8 Double Elimination OR Top 4 Single Elimination.
What about analogizing this to boxing and amatuer wrestling both have multiple coach's and it a one on one sport and in those sports they're expressly allowed and play a big part in helping the competitor prepair, win, or notice things during the fight he may have missed.
Boxing is a physical sport though, so that analogy breaks down. This single instance of gaming is a hybrid sport, but when money is on the line you shouldn't have the outcome decided by who's coach was able to notice more about the opponent than the other. Also how do you adapt this for smaller tournaments where someone might not HAVE a person who is willing or able to coach them? Do they get one provided? Do they simply have to play at a disadvantage? Easier to just take them out. Removes ALL question of who is the better player, doesn't it?
They should also be allowed a certain amount of time outs. Maybe 2-3. 30 seconds seem long enough as well.
I think you underestimate the mental aspects to combat sports. It's not just about who is the strongest person; it's not a weightlifting competition. Now, I'm no boxer myself, but the amount of mental work that goes into figuring out your opponents tells, the weaknesses they show during a fight, which opportunities that they left and how they responded to you capitalizing, and trying to analyze how you're fighting as well are all things that go into a professional level boxing match. And you have to do it while being punched in the face. I'm not sure where I stand on the "should coaching be allowed in the fgc" thing as a whole, I just bring this up to say that I think boxing would have made a better analogy.
bmoneybesteves Timing out in a fighting game would literally murder the flow and momentum.
limit coach to between matchs and all coaches must be declaired
mfsnakesmfplane time limits too.
Declaired coaches, only between matches and I like the idea of limited coaching time, so for example 3 minutes per set. If they choose to use 2 Minutes after game 1 they only have 1 Minute left for the rest of the set.
mfsnakesmfplane that's a good idea.
I think 1 minute per match is acceptable.
that would be ideal
time limit, only between matches.
now off to cure cancer.
Yudo NeidaNo you already have.
but you are the cancer
@@dirtiestharry6551 what if we all are?
This question was brought to you by Philip the philosopher.
I'm speaking from a Smash perspective, but i think just for time's sake coaching shouldn't be allowed til top 16/top 8, and at that point each player should have a pre-designated on stage coach that they can confer with for a pre designated amount of time in between games/sets. all things being equal I don't mind coaches, I'm on the "it leads to higher quality of play" camp.
Oh shit a real UA-camr
I'd say every player should get to designate a "support" player who is allowed to be with them through top 8 and they have to stand/sit in a designated coach area between matches and can confer during timeouts.
You do smash? Sick
I feel like Smash 4 did it right. Each person gets one 30-second timeout in-between a set where they are allowed to get advice. In my opinion, this is a perfect balance of coach and no coach ruling.
There’s something similar done in squash. No talking at all in the games themselves, 90 seconds in between for water and coaching. Any coaching that you can get, your opponent can as well. It’s a much a coaching matchup as it is a player matchup.
I feel the rules on coaching could be this easy.
1. the coach must be designated before the match.
2. the coach will not be present during the game but in between games
2. a time limit (thinking 30 seconds to a minute)
The trinity law - Players must be physically present to coach
hacksignify why do coaches need to be physically present?
CMCAdvanced I mean i suppose if the other rules are followed it's fine, I'm just not sure a phone call out is a good way to go. Seems like there's a few problems that can arise
I'd trim that 30 seconds to a minute to 30 seconds max. But I agree with all of this.
I completely agree with those rules, although I might add that coaching would need to take place off the stage or away from the play area to make sure the coaching is only to benefit one player and not to distract the other.
i like it but that could be troublesome if we want to add a time limit.
I say no coaches after top 8. I was playing at a local tournament and in losers the guy had 4 guys walk up to him and give him information while I only had some basic frame data/notes. What bothered me was every match I won or did well something they told him changed the way he fought. I'm not saying I would have won but I did lose confidence on my more sneaky set ups and frame traps everytime this guys coach talked to him. I felt like I lost to a team. This is why I think after top 8 you gotta be on your own. Or if both players agree to coaching. Adding a time limit would be nice too.
There would be an honor imbalance if the solo guy has to vocally ban his opponent's coaches. It needs to be standardized. Once you're in the match you fly solo or you die trying.
Also going to use this in my tournament
WTF Izzy? You were here?
Yeah that's just like "coaching in chess" thing
Awe, just got to watching this. Excellent video and kudos on using the green screen. Once you learn to key, you get an instant professional boost.
WatchThisChickGitGud Yeah, it was a fun little change.
Core-A Gaming Next, you gotta put yourself in a game. It's the only way. Lol
I think coaching should be allowed under two regulations. One a player must pick a coach before hand and stick with them. Two say in between a best 2 out of 3 set a coach would only have 15 to 30 seconds to coach. But I think it should still be up to the whoever is running the event.
Agreed with you
another godlike video. so informative not just in fighting games, but pretty much any 1on1 competition.
Mango just got Tafo !!
I'm gonna say coaching should be before and after sets, but not between or during matches in a bracket.
Figure it out yourself or get fucked, to put it bluntly.
Being told what you did wrong is fine, but save it for after getting kicked to losers.
Alternatively, an interesting requirement would be that all coaching must be carried out in a clear speaking voice, so that both players can hear it.
Yo, I lost because my opponent and his coach was speaking in a foreign language I didn't understand, but they knew what we were talking about. That's cheating! /kappa
The clear speaking rule probably wouldn't help people who don't speak clearly to begin with.
OR...play your game and f==k them up :) Couching doesn't work against certain players, because they can always switch it up on you. I personally don't care.
Gotta study the Japanese language matchup Kappa
James Staton Or... we could just let everyone do what they want? If you don't have someone to coach you, sorry.
James Staton like having a coach with you while having a match defeats the purpose of a one on one match
love this. please keep on making more analysis vids
forteexe79 For sure.
Core-A Gaming awesome!
That icon
The impact of coaching varies at the level of play as well as the level of tournament. I'm sure the top players are well aware of the frame data and set ups, any advice given to them would likely be more towards habits or exploits. At a local level, as demonstrated in the birdie example, something small can change the match and I've seen it a lot personally. One of the things people praise in fighting games is how you need to adapt in a match and be knowledgeable but that's slightly mitigated if people are there to fill in for what you didn't do. Lastly, depends on the game too. You can barely coach someone in 3rd strike, that's mainly footsies individual play. A game like MKX that has many set ups or sf5 that relies on frame data a ton, small advice goes a longer way.
that stuff with Julio was ridiculous though, but one registered couch per player should be allowed.
I agree! I hate having to sit on those uncomfortable plastic chairs
MrTibbers xD
That's true. As much as I like Julio taking that call from Chris (even if Julio said afterwards that he couldn't even make out what Chris was saying) was a bit much. One registered couch per player seems fine.
Couches all around!
One coach per player/team, I guess depends on the event. I agree with most of the people I've seem comment.
Coach must be designated, between matches only, short time limit and must be present at the event.
edit: Other ideas I have seen that I like is, some kind of time out rules could be put in place for between matches.
Make a Patreon so I can support you guys.
killingblow528 What kind of perks would you want?
Honestly? I'm not one to ask about extra perks, but I've always LOVED the quality of these Analysis videos and would love to throw money at y'alls face.
Send Patrons a Lawry's Salt Tin or something.
killingblow528 lol, I'll think of something soon.
Core-A Gaming I'd be down with a way to support this level of quality. Your effort in creating these videos are crystal clear. Keep up the work!
Two Perks: More frequent kickass videos, and maybe a Core A shirt somehow? This channel is so criminally underrepresented in the fgc, you guys need your own section on shoryuken or eventhubs
Coaching is fine but you can't just randomly phone a friend like you're on Who Wants to be A Millionaire. Coaches need to be seen by both players and acknowledged by one another before the game begins and like in boxing defined breaks between rounds need to be set so that it limits how much advice can be given
just during matches
Good points being made about coaching. I personally don't like it. Hopefully, there will be a more standard regulation.
Then you should not watch basketball anymore since they coach all game screaming at there players
Your videos are so thorough yet so succinct. I always know that every second of your content will be worth my time. Absolutely perfect (if there is such a thing).
It's pretty simple,
YES - to coaching
- If it's a team oriented game like League of Legends, Overwatch, Star Craft etc. Because you need a guy to designate & orchestrate different roles.
NO - to coaching
- If the game is completely a 1 vs 1 duel. You're on your own once you step on the stage and the match has begun. A true champion has to be the complete player that can think and adapt by himself.
Coaching is even more crucial in individual sports compared to team sports. Teammates can observe each other and give advice, you even have a team captain. It would be excessive to expect a fighter or athlete of an individual sport to be able to completely cross-analyze and evaluate their situation while burdening the exhaustion of their sport alone. By that logic if someone is expected to adapt and think completely by themselves in an individual sport, then why shouldn't someone also be expected to do the same in a team sport? They only have 1 role to fill in an entire team of people working together!
>Team oriented game
>Starcraft
Lol what? Competitively, that game is entirely a 1v1 duel. Team games is a side-thing at best. It's like calling Smash a team game competitively, because they run side 2v2 events. Why even bother sharing your opinion if you have no idea what you're talking about? Which you clearly don't, if you genuinely believe Starcraft is a team game lol...
It's also worth noting that I have seen more coaches on stage in the handful of FGC tournaments I have watched than in the literal two decades of Starcraft tournaments I have watched. Coaches are practically absent on stage in Starcraft. Like, entirely.
What about boxers?
Great video as always man. This is an interesting topic, and I'd love to see coaching more regulated but not eliminated.
Simple way to fix this:
1. Only one designated coach.
2. Time limits between games to talk to coach.
3. If use of any device is seen that is not part of the game (cell phones, Ipods, ipads,etc.) by players qualifies as a game/match disqualification, but a coach can have lets say a notebook/notepad.
4. No coaching during a match in between rounds (ex. street fighter) as it could give too much of a sudden edge.
I think these are the perfect steps in implementing coaching I do not see a huge problem with coaching it is a great way to promote more strategy and makes the spectator experience better.
Man the quality and detail of your videos are so f*cking good!
I can't believe it took me this long to find your videos. You deserve more subs!
I'd be all for banning the coaching of a player while he's playing a set. Fighting games are, generally, one on one games. Fighting games should be kept one on one, and players should do their homework before stepping into the ring.
Professional athletes do their homework, too. They study tape of the game for as many hours as they practice their sets. No one thinks the coaches destroy their ability to make their own decision with their opposition when it comes to game day. The 1v1 is still there.
Into the ring...Its a fucking game
I agree. It's not a one on one of you got a team giving you Intel.
@Junjun In a real boxing match the physical part is arguably way more present then in a fighting game, which would make the impact of coaching bigger in fighting games.
Adapting and recognizing both you and your opponents' patterns / tendencies is such a ridiculously huge part of FGC now (especially the closer you get to high level play) that I feel like mid-set coaching shouldn't be allowed. It's a part of the game and competition. The time to teach and learn is not in the middle of a tournament match.
What if the crowd yells something useful?
each video takes a while but man this is great stuff. will rather have this quality than quantity. Keep it up guys !!! This channel is awesome
as a counter strike player and viewer, I can say this isn't just in fighters. coaches are more restricted (only designated coaches) but until recently, they could speak whenever they wanted. they've just been limited last year to only commenting during half time, pauses, and between games in a match. this has increased the load on players who would originally outsource the mind portion of the game to the coach, acting like a sixth player.
I think we should ban Coaching during matches. Adaptation and reads are very important tools in any player skill-set, and can make the difference in a match. If you do not know something about a particular match then it's your own fault. As you said, it's like cheating, especially in SFV where the execution is less important.
Every one of ur videos are insanely entertaining. Always pumped when u upload!
Sam Rupp Thanks, Sam!
If you're going to compare fighting games to live sports, compare them to combat sports as they are the most comparable.
I wanna suggest two things.
-some combat sports (mostly western ones like boxing or wrestling) allow for it, and you can listen for people shouting advice during matches, during rounds for that reason. Some it's a HUGE factor, where the coach says everything they need to do between rounds.
-others, (usually more formal/traditional ones such as fencing or sport karate) tend to not allow for it because (and this is my speculation here) a match is to be a representation of live combat and they want to keep that part of it; should you be in a real duel or street fight, you won't have a buddy offering advice every 3 minutes.
-the simple answer for it in games is to either include it, or dont, and clearly define it. If it's such a factor that it divides people, offer two different divisions
The editing on these videos always make them engaging to watch. Good job.
Personally, I think Coaching should be allowed before or after a match, not after a round in a set.
But if the tournament allows coaching, have at least one person to coach you and give a set time limit, a solid 30-45 second chat before the next round, that way each match can be swift.
I think one of the follow-up questions should be: What information should players be able to access during a match? There have been instances of players checking their phones for frame data or their personal notes. I have a personal inclination to setting rules for and allowing coaching. However, I also kind of wonder if coaching undermines the elements of observing, reading, etc, instead turning a larger part of the game that tests how well you can follow your coaches instructions. Gerald is right when he says we should set proper expectations for coaches, but I think it's equally valid and equally important to explore what we should expect from players. Totally love the video! Great work! Many thanks!
If a player can win a match over someone else purely from the input of a coach on standby is a bit too unfair for the guy on the receiving end. I think it should be illegal to coach during a match, there should be a time limit on how long a coach can talk between matches, and most importantly, if a player is feeling overwhelmed by other player/coaching teams, he should be able to add a coach to his own team mid-tournament. Like this: let's say I make it to top 8 at EVO without a coach, and I hear that my rival also made it to top 8, and he did it with a good coach. I learn that one of my buddies is at the event, and he says he can help me with the matchup. I should be able to go to a referee and register my partner as the single coach, on the spot, but after that I cannot change my coach or add more. By doing this we can avoid elite players with dedicated coaches having an unfair advantage over smaller players who haven't had the resources or time to build up their own coaching talent.
Its insane that were STILL discussing this 7 years later
Mmatches should be you versus your opponent, if you cant do it on your own then you dont deserve to win.
I used to be a coach of LoL. I agree that it's just a matter of setup some rules...
As an example, I'll put some values, thinking about the FGC working...
1 - Limit Time to 1 minute per tactical coaching.
2 - Limit Times to 2 times per Match, always between matches.
3 - Limit to one coach registered to each player.
4 - No Phone Calls, No eletronic devices, just pen and paper allowed to use on coaching.
This should be enough to make coaching fair and who doesn't need it or have it don't feel discouraged to play.
I definitely think coaching should be banned in majors where theres real money on the line unless it's team play maybe. Any lack of match up knowledge or frame data should be that players burden. I think it's wrong to be winning and have someone come and tell your opponent how to beat you
Well yeah, but it's not just your opponent getting told how to beat you, because if there was coaching allowed then you could have your own coach.
@@moosemeep3694 some people might not have coaches though
@@ashtar3876 That's their choice and they shouldn't interfere at all with the opponent's choice to have one. You don't want a coach? Your problem.
Coaching can lead to higher quality matches. I'll use an example similar to the example at around 1:30. So player 1 uses a powerful but punishable kill setup to win game 1. Player 2's coach gives the advice to punish. So player 1 tries the move again in game 2, but player 2 punishes, securing the win. Player 1's coach steps in now, lets player 1 know player 2's on to him, that kill move won't work anymore.
Now we're in game 3. The powerful but punishable kill move is off the table, and both players have to adapt. And we have a higher quality game, and set because of coaching. Without coaching, player 1 might have won all the games with a move that's easily punishable (not high level play). If player 2 had punished but player 1 had kept doing what he was doing, he would have got bodied (not high level play). But with the addition of coaches for both players, learning is faster and adaptation in the middle of a set is easier.
Not having to wait till you get knocked to losers means all players can learn faster. Faster learning from all players means a faster changing meta, and faster improvement of not only their own skill but the skill of all players in the community. All of this leads to higher quality matches.
This.
If coaching is allowed, is every player guaranteed to get a coach if they ask for one? Like what if you have no friends?
As a person that watches MMA this video was kind of a head scractcher to watch. If people can have coaches giving instruction during an actual cage fight and for 1 minute inbetween rounds of said cage fight, then of course people should be able to have coaches while playing a videogame. Only cause for concern is time so just allow the coaches to be there in a way that keeps the event time effecient. At the end of the day all a coach does is provide knowledge and insight from an outside perspective. It's up to the player to have the skills to use that knowledge to their advantage. In your example at 1:24 the advice that you gave was only advantageous because he had the skill & reaction time to execute the punish. Not everyone in the same position would be able to execute that punish just because you gave them the knowledge to do so. Kind of crazy that this is cause for debate and concern in the FGC and tennis lol. In an individual sports the better practitioner typically wins and coaching isn't going to change that so no use in banning it. The people that are salty about coaching are salty because it makes them realize they them selves are not as good as they thought they were or there competition is better than they presumed them to be.
This channel is a gem
1. Have a designated coach (Coach may not use phone calls or talk to anyone else mid set)
2. 10 seconds between matches. Players can call for a "Time out" if they need more time, but just like in sports, they have limited uses per tournament.
3. If opponent doesn't have a coach, there's no Coaching between matches.
In my opinion mid set coaching should not be allowed. Sure you could use the argument of "It's fair if both players have a coach and both players get 30 seconds with them" but the problem with that is then, when is the win because the player is good or if the coach is good? Even if both players have a coach if one coach is a random person who also plays the game and the other is a professional sports psychologist then a 1v1 game turns into a 2v2 game where you will be left behind if you cannot find a coach better than your opponents.
IVBredTrainer but that literally happens in every sport. I like it when the "worse" team wins because they have a better coach. I like it when the "worse" boxer gets better corner advice and shuts down the more technically skilled fighter.
Otherwise sports could be replaced by measuring physical attributes of the athletes and running computer simulations.
Coaches are guides. The player still does the work, makes the decisions.
doesn't matter, its STILL ultimately up to the player who plays the match, you can have the greatest coach or professional sports psychologist, if the coach tells him, hey you gotta punish that move with this move, or this move is -15 frames, or whatever, EVEN if the player gets advice to do such punishment or what the frame is, its still ultimately up to him to execute, it's not like the coach is there to press a button which will automatically punish a certain move that the player wasn't able to do consistently during his set. So your whole argument saying how it'll turn into a 2v2 or 2v1 if the other guy doesn't have a coach, is retarded. Ultimately, it is the player's hands and fingers and mind that dictates how he performs, and even if he gets the best advice to beat an opponent, if he's under pressure or nerves get to him, he won't be able to execute.
yea exactly, even if the player gets the best advice from a coach, it's ultimately up to the player to execute that.
This is great content! I'm sure this will make its way around the FGC and other communities as well. Excellent work Core-A Gaming!
These videos are awesome. I really like the inclusion of smash content. Keep it up :)
Zachary Grasso Hbox Evo story is too good.
it would be selfish of me to say i hope you never stopped making these videos, cuz man you are great at what you do, keep it up!
"[...] I think making a standard will also help coaches what kind of role they'll play in the future and plan accordingly."
*shows Chinese BBQ through a window*
This is one of my favorite channels now!
ありがとうございました!
csgo is also currently having a coach issue you used to be able to talk during rounds now u can only talk during the 4 30 second timeouts
Jeremy Lin Actually had a part about that but it got cut out.
CSGO rules regarding coaching faced a lot of backlash because the organization's view is the coach is the "six man" which I guarantee no one in any sport believes that. This video is totally one sided with this belief that these pros are a bunch of cookie cutter players that cling on to every word their coach tells them which is just not true.
It's all debatable. Valve stated that it takes away from the 5v5 aspect of the game because a coach can call strategies for the team and mid-round call. The whole scene was starting to shift towards this because players taking the calling role generally performed worse.
It's similar to the tennis situation in the video where having a coach with little limitations can increase the level that the game is played at but it also takes away from the core 5v5 gameplay that had been the norm for 15 years.
Exactly, it sort of just removes the really cool aspect of many sports which is how at the highest level, no matter how execution/physical heavy it is, it's still about out-thinking your opponent.
When you let everyone have unrestricted coaches, you're essentially saying that the "muscle" part of the game is the important one, and you can leave the "brain" to a secondary person. This skews what kind of player is able to compete at a top level, reducing diversity
DotA is a prime example of the opposite, where in-game coaching have never been allowed, and because of it, you can see top players ranging from mechanical beasts with superhuman reflexes, to people who are just really good leaders. In fact, there was even a famous case of an old coach for a team jumping in as a standin and owning, just because of game knowledge and shotcalling.
It's a really complicated question because the FGC has been historically so much more of a socially dynamic competitive scene, and people giving advice to their buddies inbetween matches goes way back to the arcade scene. Taking it away altogether does risk as the video said, making things a little too sterile.
But on the other hand it could kind of be seen as an unfair advantage, as what if a more accomplished player with more access to coaching friends goes up against someone who's good but not as accomplished, and whom doesn't have as much of that to their advantage?
I think for the time being, it's not so heavy a topic that it requires special attention...but if it reaches the point players might feel like coaches are required or else they're at a major disadvantage, then it might be time to step in. For one thing, time limits should be a definite rule, as well as a strict limit on numbers (no more posse's). I do wonder too if during majors, especially say...the top 8 of a major, if there just shouldn't be a flat out restriction to it during the actual tournament, maybe saving it for before the tournament begins or even big breaks during the finals, but not in the middle of a set.
5:40 omg... infiltration HAD more hair at some point in life? WOW.
then he started wearing a hat all the time until he got the hair from his ass surgically placed on his head.
Core A, your video game essays are just remarkable. Subscribed.
can you touch on the fact your average joe/intermediate players won't get the luxury of being coached in a tournament and it can be an unfair advantage when up against someone that has it.
SUCH a well done video, especially with the incorporation of all that research. subscribed!
No, it should not be allowed. It removes too much of the meta. Plus, the coaches are just random people who pick their favorite player. So, it's unbalanced because, most of the time, only one player gets coached.
Actually if coaching becomes standard then it will become a paid position and be much more available.
I'm a coach for hire, contact for rates and being on retainer
Alright...
1. Removed too much of the meta? Literally HOW? How are these two coorelated with eachother in anyway?
2. Coached pick their favorite player.
Source for this? This seems like an argument from belief.
3. Unbalanced because most of the time only one play gets coached.
Again...how?
What are you using for your source?
Albert Meadows happens all the time . If you in say pie team you get a pie coach while mad catz player don't and let's say daigo on pie team that's unfair af . Plus if you in a tourny you should know your matchup
I would say have some coach legal tournaments and sons that don't
For fighting games, I say no coaching during tournament sets, period. Fighting games are appealing in large part due to the 1v1 aspect of it, why would we want to turn it into a pseudo-2v1?
Dope video as usual Gerald.
Thanks, Jeff.
Your editing skills are out of this world. Nice videos man!
you need to be on excellent adventures gerald. also do u have psn?
I was going to ask when the next analysis video was but you read my mind! Thank you!
Don’t know what that random shot of food was at the end but it was delicious and I’m glad I saw it
I like the scientific approach to the matter, other than providing the BGM (which is awesome and should be done by every youtuber) I would love to see the sources you used where it is possible. Great work!
let coaches talk between games in a set like doc in punchout between the rounds.
1. Each player designates a coach at the start of the tournament
2. Every set, each player gets a 30 second timeout, which he/she can use in between games
3. During the time out and only then, the coach can come up to the player and do his thing
Sorry, what's the implication of having a male tennis coach?
I'm going from what I'm trying to pick up on. If you've heard the term "man-splain", it's explaining/dumbing down information to a woman with the underlying tone that women are too dumb to understand.
Honestly, the term "mansplain" is stupid. And the situation probably looks sexist because of how SJW's view it. Nobody bats an eye when a male athlete is getting coached. Although when the athlete is a female (and the coach remains male), SJWs will assume to this "mansplain" idea. Personally myself, I don't view it as male-female. I saw that image as Coach-Athlete. And there would be far less problems if more people had followed that mindset.
Lintleth fucking SJWs generalizr every bullshit
I thought the implication was that they are in a relationship.
The male tennis coach will garunteed bone your wife. That's what male tennis coaches do.
That was an impressively well thought out and researched. I have now subscribed.
Make more videos more often
beaconcontrol inc. Trying :)
I am glad I am subscribed to you, you make such awesome videos
+Core-A Gaming No, don't worry about how often you upload videos. Your content is what actually matters .
Quality > Quantity always!! And trust me, you've been delivering it!
andresgv10
I second that. I'd rather get one awesome video per month or two than 4 or 5 mediocre videos the same timespan
Imagine you're at the final table in a poker game and your opponent calls over 5 experts and then dials his mom asking how to play his next hand in secret. Wouldn't that shit would be mad annoying? That's coaching in video game tournaments.
A fighting game is a 1 vs 1 match, not a 1 vs 1 + whoever-can-tell you-how-to-win match. When people call some dude on their phone in the middle of grand finals, waiting at the character select screen for 7 minutes, you've reached stupid annoyance levels (outside the game) for your opponent, and for audiences at home. No one wants to see that.
Knowing what to do is part of the game. If you're just a piece of hardware that can technically hit buttons correctly without mistake, and your best friend, Master of Match Ups home boy walks over and fills you in on everything and you defeat everyone, but by yourself you couldn't/wouldn't be able to do shit, what does that say?
Coach all you want BEFORE the match, but once you get on stage or you're sitting in the chair, that's just you and you're on your own.
If you want to coach, coach from the crowd where people are free to say whatever they want. Your homies yelling advice is totally fine, but that means expect your opponent's homies to yell out random shit too if they choose to. That way everyone can hear what they have to say and we're back to a fair playing field, which is what a tournament is supposed to be. Everyone has a chance to pick whatever character is on screen, but not everyone has equal access to experts and coaches.
Teams style tournaments are a completely different story. If communities could somehow agree to coaching I'd be for it or have coaching specific tournaments, otherwise eff Coach Fighter.
RIP Lunchables
MasterIcarus7 SHADE theres a good chance JFalls's coaching helped Thunderz win set 2
we definitely don't call him coach jfalls for nothing
I love the effort put into your videos, they're all great and remind of how vsauce videos work where you can go in watching for one thing and then hooked on one or two more things in the video and you start learning a lot more than you thought you would when you started. Good job! Keep it up.
I didn't really understand the implications tennis coaches being men have. Does it really matter?
To be honest, I was somewhat of a tennis-head in my teens and the fact is tenniswomen do have significantly shorter careers than most males so I think it's not that diffcult to imagine why they would become coaches less often.
Here's what I think:
1.Coaches must be declared when signing up for tournament
2.Coaches are only allowed if both players have a coach
3. There must be a time limit
4. Only in between matches
I think outright trying to prohibit coaching will not work as intended; better to regulate it as it exists instead, and from there I think stuff like limiting it to one person and putting a time limit is fair, though enforcement gets harder when it's something like pools compared to something like top 8 or even top 32, particularly at an event like EVO.
I think coaching should definitely not be allowed. As others have stated it basically makes the game 2vs1. When Hungrybox was asked "what changed this year?" he didn't say anything about himself. All he said was "that guy coached me."
Yes coaching should not be aloud In actual competitive play. Practice yes but actual tournament play no.
This is the best laid out set of arguments for and against coaching. Thanks!
No! Just like Justin implied "No Coach No Victory". He spent no time in the Lab; evolving his character, studying the frame data or how to counter the opponents character. It also negates mind games which is a huge part of FGC.
Team sports have coaches to see and make sense of the chaos of the field .
Boxing has coaches cause it's hard to concentrate when someone is constantly hitting you in the face, or when one eye is swollen shut and sweat is pouring in to the other eye.
Well put video! I hope this makes it to the top guys at EVO. Standardize the rules so that there would be a time limit for coaching.
Fighting games should be one on one affair. Coaching makes it 2-1 and that's pretty much cheating.
Herv3 Well I guess the same can be said about boxing.
ReviewRapeUSA interesting point. Are you suggesting that coaching should be limited between games won on the character select screen?
Herv3 I feel like coaching should only happen before a set and only for 90 seconds max. I am pretty much fine with no coaching as well, just wanted to spice this up a bit.
the comparison to boxing is an interesting one, but I prefer it to be like tennis where you just go out there and play and whatever happens happens. none of this phone a friend bs
Not sure if you can say the same about boxing. Boxing is a sport where your body is the most important aspect, that's undeniable. Although you have to be a smart fighter in order to be a good fighter, the mind is not the number 1 thing like it is on a fightan.
I was on finals beating a yoshi with kirby (my main). If the other guy hasn’t had the coaching i would have being able to fight with my main (i had to switch to my secondary: pit. Because the tip of the guy was to camp my kirby. Then, after resorting to my arrows. The guy keep getting coached mid match with encouragement (so i could not remark on errors).
Coaching is good. But if you are on finals or another close set. Is kinda unfair as the other has to figure out outa nowhere how to counter the coaching (and is gonna be bad if you dont have a coach yourself)
No coaching. If you don't know then you should go back and hit the grind. Figuring stuff out for yourself is what makes you better than the next person.
El Gato Felix I don't think people are strictly better than anyone, in tournament situations, people tend to do whatever gives them a better chance at winning, something everyone is equally able to accomplish. If you can't secure a coach, there's a good chance you weren't going to win anyway.
You do realize you wont figure out the problem itself unless someone actually tells you to...
When you are on the stage that is your fault for not figuring it out in the first place. If you are playing with your friends or teammates that is one thing This is a one on one
competition so it should be treated that way.
El Gato Felix boxing is one on one and coaches are regarded as just as important as the fighters, if not more.
In fact, a better coach/a fighter that is willing to listen to his coach often determines the outcome of a fight. Micheal Moorer was having the easiest fight of his life but he disregarded Teddy Atlas's advice on George Foreman's set up. He got knocked out by a 45 year old despite outperforming his opponent.
First, this isn't boxing. Second, your coach should have prepared you for every situation so once you are on stage you don't need them. Third, what I am saying is that once you are on stage you shouldn't get any coaching. Once you are off and won or lost, then sure. Finally, as I said previously, this is a one on one competition so it should stay that way.
In a world where coaches aren't readily available I think it's only fair to use a coach if both players have 1 or more. At the end of the day it's 2+ vs 1 if one guy has coaching staff and the other doesn't. How is that fair?
I think 30 seconds is the most they should be allowed to coach their friends.
Coaching is a natural progression of sport and so e-sport. However what has been creeping in to sports everywhere is the American standard of a coach is omnipresent and constantly giving instructions.sports like Football (soccer), rugby (league and union), snooker, cricket coaching while the match is on isn't allowed or restricted to them shouting from the sidelines. Its only at designated times or change over can a coach talk to a team.American sports, baseball, basketball, American football, the coaches are in constant contact with the players and can even interrupt games to communicate to them. This defies the whole purpose of an athlete being prepared and being the best.For me esports is a lot about knowledge, as highlighted in the video telling your friend "ex bullhorn into v-triggers is actually -9" (which make no sense to me) is like telling a chess player which move to look out for and how to counter it.If you are playing a semi competitive game of snooker or pool in the UK an you start giving your friend advise you'll probably angrily hear a phrase along the line of "Who is playing this game, you or him?" Which I think is how it should be.I think short matches coaching is not allowed, longer matches best of 11 for example, 2 mins should be allowed half way through.Sports should be about who is the best on the day, not who can afford the most people around them to help.
im gay
THANKYOUBASEDGOD BLAZEITUP hahahaha
Congrats?
More women for me.
Hey, that's pretty good!
*I'm
Someone else mentioned this previously, but I honestly really like the idea:
You may have a single, designated coach with you during any Set. After each Match of the Set, players and their coaches may confer with one another. However, their time for doing so is a fixed pool that does not refresh during the Set. In this way, coaching would work similar to how Football teams have 3 timeouts per quarter; for instance, let's say this pool is 3 minutes for a beat of 5. Then from the time the coach leaves his designated chair to talk to the player, to the time he sits back down, your team loses time from that 3 minute pool. After the next match, coaches once again do their thing with the remaining time. Maybe they spend 2 minutes after the first round completely reworking their strategy, but take on the risk of only having 1 minute total for each followup session in between the next few matches.
I think this strikes a fair balance. The only thing that needs to be adjusted is the time pool for each game and number of matches per set. Coaches could evenly spread their time and leave the chat to the basics, or save up some time to maybe take a "time-out" late in a stressful set to give their player a chance to catch their breath and think things through instead of getting floored by the built up momentum. But that strategy would only be effective if you had been VERY conservative with your time after the early matches so that you had a fairly big pool to burn on calming your player down.
I've been playing fighting games my whole life and it shitty to see when players don't sit next to each other, wear headphones, or are isolated in some kind of way. I just feel like I'm old school where the arcade cabinet was standard you stand shoulder shoulder and 20 plus people are yelling in your ear... coach included.
I used to play with Julio "the voice" at his pad when Street fighter third strike was still a thing. Even then he was vary good. one of the best around San Jose but fights between us were always very heated. I would be yelling and jumping basically trying anything Break his concentration to gain any kind of advantage. I won our last fight. It's tight to see him professionally now.
''I won our last fight'' who gives a shit? its just a game get a life
these videos are amazing edited. I love watching these, keep it up
Just ban coaching
outside the actual match is fine, the player can get all the help and info from his/her coach (like information about the characters of the opponent), but once the match starts and until a winner is decided, the coach should not be allowed to interact with the player in any way.
I think you should be able to have a coach to teach you, i don't think a coach should be able to talk to the player during the tournament. The reason for this is because it is the PLAYERS job to know everything he needs/wants to know for the tournament. Like you said about birdie and the frame data, the player should have known that from the start and if you don't then tough luck.
on stage coaching defeats the point of it being 1 on 1. if you lost then you weren't good enough or weren't supposed to win against that particular opponent. if you win while being coached then arguably you didnt win off your own hard work, skill and merrit.
Dude this is a lot of interesting stuff to think about. Thank you
Great video, super well thought out and with a depth of research some of the bigger guys could learn from.
Here are my rules:
1. Must pre-register a coach. I hate it when I see one guy versus another dude and 5 specialists for each of your 5 alternative characters. You are only allowed one coach, and you have to register him when you register.
2. Coaching must be done person to person, NOT person to phone call/text.
3. Advice and other matters can only be given between sets, not during. Breaking this rule is an automatic loss for the first set.
Loved the reference to on-court coaching in women's tennis. Great videos my dood.
Always looking forward to your new videos that come out, I definitely think coaching should stay, but be regulated to a minute. Maybe also have a limit of how many time a player can coach during that daily session.
Yo, I love your videos. Interesting topics, great research, good visuals. Excellent work.