Tournament Doubles Derby Format Discussion

[kaori]

Art by NinjaSnapple ​

Welcome all to the first stages of the Doubles Derby, a new and exciting team tournament being introduced for the Doubles OU community. This tour aims to provide a highly competitive environment to spotlight and develop Doubles tiers that don't get nearly as much attention as some of the other tiers such as previous generations. This tournament has been discussed quite a bit on Discord as is, but we would like to get a more formal dialogue started on the forums as well. The hosting team (myself and bunnyy) would like to begin the discussion process early so that we can hopefully reach a community consensus on the general direction of tiers and other organizational matters regarding this new tournament. Before that, I'd like to outline some general things that have already been decided on.

• The timeline for the tournament is currently as follows:​
  • Discussion thread will be up for quite a while, with manager signups beginning on July 2nd and running until July 9th.​
  • Following this, a buffer week will be taken for art to be created for teams. We would love to see various DOU community members contribute to this, so if you have any interest/experience with making logos, please feel free to reach out to me! This buffer week will conclude on July 16th.​
  • Player signups will then run from July 16th until a day before the draft. Managers and the hosting team will schedule the draft to occur sometime from July 28th to July 30th.​
  • Week one will be posted July 30th once rosters have been submitted.​
  • The regular season will conclude by September 3rd. Playoffs will run for two weeks barring any tiebreaks, resulting in the conclusion of the tournament by September 17th ideally.​
• 
  
• As for managers, we would love to see some new faces managing teams. Slight preference will be given to those that have not recently managed in DPL or been captains in DWCOP. Do note that this does not exclude those that have managed in the past, nor does it guarantee a spot for new managers.
• As far as teams and number of slots, it's been decided that for the first iteration of the tour, we will have 6 teams and 8 slots. More on which tiers will be included below.
• Deadlines for games to be played and roster submission will be strictly enforced. Any games scheduled at or beyond the deadline, unless previously communicated to the hosting team due to extreme scheduling difficulties, will result in dead games. Any manager that does not submit a roster before the deadline will have the lineup from the previous week used.
• Most importantly, to fit the name of the tournament, teams will have horse themed names. For those looking for inspiration, me and some others already made a list of possible names, with various references to either Pokemon names or famous race horses and so on.

Tiers

On to subjects of discussion, the primary one as always is what tiers to include in the tournament. The tiers up for consideration are SV DOU, SV DUU, SV Doubles Ubers, SV National Dex Doubles, SV Doubles Little Cup, DPP DOU, and ADV DOU. As a reminder, we only have 8 slots available. For the sake of transparency, the hosting team is currently favoring the following format:

2x SV DOU / 1x SV DUU / 1x SV Doubles Ubers / 1x SV Doubles Little Cup / 1x National Dex Doubles / 1x DPP DOU / 1x ADV DOU

However, this has been the subject of much discussion in the Doubles Discord, with some proposing things like 2 DUU slots. We appreciate any and all feedback on the matter.

Currently, we are planning on an auction-style draft much like DPL as it is a proven format that works better than any other tournament I've participated in on this site. If anybody has any ideas for a different format, I would love to hear them.

Managers

We would like to cover a couple topics that always come up with the team tours we run. Whether or not managers can play or not has more or less been a closed case in favor of managers being able to play, and my current thought is to implement the same manager pricing format DPL uses. We could either start with a clean slate at a set price like 10k, 15k, and so on, or we could use DPL wins as a metric with the same formula as DPL. This is certainly not set in stone either way and I would greatly appreciate on this.

Co-managers were introduced in this most recent edition of DPL, and I would be curious to know what people think of how those went. If we want to keep co-managers, should we have them sign up together, or allow managers to pick their co-managers after managers have been selected? We would retain the rule that only one of the two managers can play in the tournament.

If anybody has any other pressing concerns or comments about anything else, please feel free to comment those as well. I appreciate any and all feedback on this, and I hope we can all come together to make this tournament a success!

 

[Amaranth]

comanagers are good for "having more than one person available to handle activity situations and provide subs" purposes

allow them from signup or if you want to signup solo and then promote one of your players that is also fine

i heartily recommend this

 

[Hugo]

I would absolutly love this

 

[Mizuhime]

• As for managers, we would love to see some new faces managing teams. Slight preference will be given to those that have not recently managed in DPL or been captains in DWCOP. Do note that this does not exclude those that have managed in the past, nor does it guarantee a spot for new managers.

Kinda on the fence about this one tbh. I'm not entirely sure how to word it without sounding like a bitch, but having less than great managers can really make a team tour pretty awful as a player and make it feel as if the tournament is dragging on forever.I understand the want for new managers but I think the hosting team has to be very careful with this regardless of the aforementioned. Regardless, I hope it works well and we can find people to challenge the usual crop of managers we have.

2x SV DOU / 1x SV DUU / 1x SV Doubles Ubers / 1x SV Doubles Little Cup / 1x National Dex Doubles / 1x DPP DOU / 1x ADV DOU

Mostly fine with this as well, Would love to see 2 uu but it doesn't seem like that will happen and this is going to keep the vast majority happy outside of the people who hate sv ou.

Currently, we are planning on an auction-style draft much like DPL as it is a proven format that works better than any other tournament I've participated in on this site. If anybody has any ideas for a different format, I would love to hear them.

Why not snake? Is that something we want to avoid doing with newer managers? I feel as if auction is probably harder to do for a new manager to be completely honest. Snake takes the pressure of bidding off on a newer manager and lets them actively think about their next pick while they're waiting. I can see the reasoning for both, just wondering.

Co-managers were introduced in this most recent edition of DPL, and I would be curious to know what people think of how those went. If we want to keep co-managers, should we have them sign up together, or allow managers to pick their co-managers after managers have been selected? We would retain the rule that only one of the two managers can play in the tournament.

Im not a fan of selecting co-managers after selected, kinda lets people who didn't or shouldn't get picked as a manager sneak in to a position. They should be forced to sign up together.

On the topic of co-managers, whenever it is possible I am 100% in favour of having them. Makes it infinitely easier as manger, and doubling back to the newer managers preference, having someone help them would ease them into leading a team. Potentially you could even pair newer managers with a "mentor" if you will, have it so newer managers are meant to sign up with someone who has led a team before in any tournament, so they could guide them if you will instead of throwing them to the wolves. Tricky to do though cause the "mentor" may just end up taking over which defeats the purpose.

 

[Smudge]

I'll preface this by saying I'm interested in managing so take what I'm about to say with that in mind. That being said, I don't have an angle here. It's just my genuine thoughts.

On formats:

I think this 8 is ideal. I only really have concerns about the DUbers player selection, however with community outreach, I think that this can be worked around. Personally, I have a shortlist of people who aren't really DOUcord/Doubles room regulars that I want to contact to sign up to play that slot because I think they're quality players that would be great for competition.

I remember discussion about ADV being a BO3 slot, but that probably needs to be re-evaluated if Lati gets banned, as I know the massive amount of speed ties was the driving factor there, and it will be reduced if the ban goes through.

On Managers:

I'd prefer it stay the way it was in DPL as I think the system works well. At least, it worked well for our team.
I think that for this iteration, whatever the credit limit is, it should be 10% of that. (i.e. 120k, 12k self buy) I think carrying over DPL record disincentivizes skilled managers from managing and playing a bit too much, especially due to the lack of tier overlap. If there's a different formula, then that might be ok. I think that the previous scaling is a bit too much for this tour, where the stakes aren't as high.

If there are concerns about toxic people "sneaking in" to positions of co manager, then that should be addressed separately. It shouldn't be a reason to prevent someone from playing. If you are going to force both to sign up for that reason, then you should be able to self buy both, it only seems fair to me.

On the draft:

I think auction is probably the best, but why don't we try some mock drafts with both it and snake? Could help get a feel for it.

 

[Teals]

I don't have any preferences in regards to most of the things brought up, but I feel 2x Duu slots is probably more in theme with the tour and is only appropriate to do so. Despite me personally having more interest in dou currently with the new mons release, the tour is to develop underplayed formats so duu should probably get the spotlight.

 

[big pichu]

With regards to comanagers and the drafting process, I want to match up with DPL as much as possible, mostly because if this is a sorta proving ground for new managers, itd probably benefit them to have things be similar (although obviously no one knows the future (except for three people in a government facility))
Having comanagers from the outset seems smart, especially if theres newer managers who could use assistance with draft planning.
10% selfbuy makes sense
i really like the idea of having selfbuy be a flat percentage of the total.
I am curious about "We would retain the rule that only one of the two managers can play in the tournament.", since in DPL if comanagers were assigned after the draft, they could both play, and I'm wondering if thats gonna be the same if both options (two managers from the start, as well as assigned managers later) are available.
I think having both options is good tho, having a manager that can help from the start is smart and beneficial for new managers, but sometimes you just need to assign a comanager partway through due to the nature of the beast. Toxic managers should be handled like any other toxic user anyways imo, and placed in ADX Smogon or exiled onto the ice or sent to the great big farm in the sky or whatever happens to problem people.
The format list is based and I support it wholeheartedly

 

[bagel]

I think the proposed format list is probably the best. As someone that played DUU during DPL I don't think its the right format to get 2 slots. The tier is pretty volatile due to tier shifts that can suddenly drop huge threats and totally change the meta. I know I didn't enjoy having to scramble in the new meta / having no relevant scouting available for opponents. I do expect bans in DOU to happen / change the meta of course, but they will never be as impactful as tier shifts in DUU.

Reasons I am pro 2x DOU and not just anti 2x DUU

• SV DOU is still the most accessible tier and gives room for good players that haven't had the time to branch out and play these other tiers.
• 2x SV DOU allows for much more roster flexibility, as most people could reliably slot into SV DOU compared to DUU.
• Team tours are maybe the best place for meta development, and having more opportunities for post-home SV DOU to get attention in this environment is good.
• People don't need to play the other tiers in Derby to get exposed and potentially interested in playing them in the future. 2x DOU widens the potential player pool and brings more eyes to these formats.

I do have worries about the DUbers player pool and NatDex generally as a balanced format (a more personal opinion, others disagree), but I think both of these potential issues will hopefully clear up in the time until Derby actually starts. Both of these formats probably benefit a lot from having a highly competitive spotlight shined on them by being featured in Derby, so I'm not champing at the bit for them to be removed by any means. I also don't know what would be the options to replace them. I've heard Partner's in Crime being thrown around, but it feels more OM than "Doubles" to me. I think doubling up on most of the other tiers could cause playerbase issues (It would probably be difficult to find 12 established DPP players while filling ADV/DLC as well, and vice versa).

Re: Manager stuff
Choosing co-manager at signups is good, choosing after draft is good. Having someone else officially allowed to make decisions when manager goes AWOL is good. Self-buy being a % of budget or a fixed number is fine, with this being the first iteration of this tournament with a lot of unknowns I don't see a problem with either method.

Looking forward to Derby, keep up the good work hosts!

 

[kaori]

On the draft:

I think auction is probably the best, but why don't we try some mock drafts with both it and snake? Could help get a feel for it.

Mizu brought this up as well, but Snake isn't currently a consideration for the time being due to the poor track record its had elsewhere on the site. I played and managed SSD when the format was used and it was generally pretty bad. I think the auction format works and works well.

I remember discussion about ADV being a BO3 slot, but that probably needs to be re-evaluated if Lati gets banned, as I know the massive amount of speed ties was the driving factor there, and it will be reduced if the ban goes through.

I don't personally play ADV so I would appreciate ADV community feedback here for sure post-Latias decision.

I am curious about "We would retain the rule that only one of the two managers can play in the tournament.", since in DPL if comanagers were assigned after the draft, they could both play, and I'm wondering if thats gonna be the same if both options (two managers from the start, as well as assigned managers later) are available.

I'm currently leaning towards using the same system as DPL as far as managers having the option to sign up solo or with another co-manager, and allowing drafted players to be either appointed co-managers or given permission to make submissions and substitutions. I'm very against both managers being able to sign up together and self-buy without either going to auction.

Self-buy being a % of budget or a fixed number is fine, with this being the first iteration of this tournament with a lot of unknowns I don't see a problem with either method.

I've seen the flat % come up a few times, which I think is probably preferable to using DPL prices, and I've seen 10% twice already. It feels maybe a bit low to me for a manager buy, something like 13 or even 15% I think is fair to the interest of balance and not discouraging managers from signing up.

Speaking of the % of budget, something I've discussed privately is the idea of expanding the number of bench slots. As it stands, there are 8 playing slots and 2 bench slots. The idea would be to monitor signups, and if there is a surplus of good players, expanding the budget by ~20k and requiring two additional bench players. This would expand the player pool by a minimum of 12 people, and we also have 2 less teams in Derby versus DPL, so if we assume a similar amount of qualified signups, or even a bit less, this should be doable. Excluding qualified players is never good, but I want to wait for signups to happen before I would commit to this. Additionally, there is the concern that managers will simply spend more on top players. Curious to know what people think about this one, and I appreciate all the feedback and discussion so far.

 

[kaori]

Manager signups are approaching Sunday, and after nearly a month we finally have some more discussion that's happened on Discord. I'm gonna write this here so everyone has a better record of what's been talked about:

- Tiers: Most of these are locked into place, but I want to bring forth the idea of taking out the Doubles Ubers slot to replace it with a second DUU slot. Fitting a second DUU slot has been something I've wanted to do, but the format to this point had been pretty limiting in being able to do that. I took a look at DUbers activity since Home dropped, and there's been virtually no activity on Discord or on the forum thread, including no posts in the entirety of June. Especially given that this is happening right after a huge meta shakeup, I'm finding it harder to justify including the tier. Curious if anyone has strong opinions on this or not.

- We discussed at length the amount of playoff slots for this tour. Basically, any option has some significant drawbacks with 6 teams in the tour (this will not change), but as of right now I'm thinking about running 4 slots for playoffs. Bye weeks are awful, like really awful, and I think by keeping teams in contention longer, 4 is better than 2 playoff teams.

- Manager pricing: this was only touched on briefly, but as of right now I'm still leaning towards 1 self-buy at 13k. This price could change if we get a lot of signups and end up being able to add bench slots, but as of now that's where I stand on this.

I appreciate forum posts a lot for getting feedback but I'll try to read Discord as much as I can too. I've made transparency a priority in this, so whatever feedback I do get is what we'll be rolling with. Say your piece now or don't, basically. Manager signups will be up Sunday afternoon.

 

[Smudge]

On DUbers:

I think removing the DUbers tier in favor of a second DUU is questionable/bad.

I am extremely concerned about how volatile DUU is going to be in its first month. It definitely had balance issues in pre-home, this was expressed by a few people in the DPL survey/team dumps and was pretty observable, at least imo, and I expect these to be greatly exacerbated by how the DOU meta has changed in the last month. We'll have to see how it turns out in a couple days with usage stats, I guess.

DUbers is stable in its metagame ban wise, and while there's not a ton of community engagement atm, the limited number of DOU slots means people who want to play in the tour at all and don't get slotted in SVDOU will be "forced" to pick up a new tier. (this is okay! and good! they might like it!) This happens in DPL, it motivates players that want to prove themselves work hard and try to provide more value to their team. I think it's quite healthy for the development of the playerbase.

On playoff slots:

I really don't want to see a bye week. I haven't experienced it personally but having listened to what others said I definitely believe that a bye week or two to three in worst case can lose you a lot of momentum.

Regarding either locked in or out of playoff contention: I said this earlier in the discord, but I'm wondering where we get this idea that the best and most competitive players are so willingly taking their foot off the gas just because they are in the lead or out. Either way, people are usually still competing for their own record as it's a matter of personal pride. Maybe it's a naive take or just my mentality but I can't imagine doing so.

On manager pricing:

12.5-13k or if the credits increase from 100k that percentage seems reasonable, not much else to say.

 

[zee]

pretty happy with the 6 -> 4 playoff route, yeah one or two teams are gonna be chilling in week 4/5 but avoiding the bye week and giving more people the chance to play fun formats is pretty sick

i would like for dubers to remain in the tour so long as people are intending to play it. this is a call to action for ladder players to come out from hiding and let the hosts know you wanna play in derby. personally its a tier im really excited to build for if given the chance but i cant play every tier myself and my heart's set on adv. 2x duu might be a stretch anyways with some of the more established players maybe preferring to dpp or dlc, but honestly most people's preferred tiers are still a question mark for me atp and i imagine the hosts as well. really think all interested players should talk about what they wanna play to give hosts and managers a better clue. but again if the pool looks way less competitive than the other tiers im fine to axe dubers.

maybe cringe elitist tourbro take: 2x dou/duu 1x duu/dou 1x dpp 1x dlc 1x adv/natdex if signups are looking slim isnt terrible. fun formats and all but i still wanna see some good quality games.

1 self buy good, im also not super unopposed to the post draft assistant managers thing from dpl but dont think its the end of the world if assmans are required to join upfront.

 

[AIRedzone]

taking out the Doubles Ubers slot to replace it with a second DUU slot.

I fully agree with this take; I think having 2xDOU and 2xDUU puts the proper emphasis on this being the premier lower tiers tour. DUbers activity, both on the thread and in DOUCord, is all but nonexistent. Ladder is rarely a good gauge for tour activity, but even ladder seems about as active as it was pre-home, with the top ladderers somewhat disconnected from the rest of the doubles playerbase. This is why I believe DUbers would be okay to drop from Derby, but I would love to hear arguments in favor of it from people who are excited to play it. From zee's post right above this one:

i would like for dubers to remain in the tour so long as people are intending to play it. this is a call to action for ladder players to come out from hiding and let the hosts know you wanna play in derby.

More important than DUbers' shortcomings are DUU's merits.

• Personally, DUU was far and away the most fun tier to be involved in as a builder in DPL, and I know this view is shared by others even if to a small extent. It was exciting to play as well as to watch, and even the games that didn't involve established Doubles superstars drew attention from the playerbase. Judging by DPL standards, DUU lends itself to high-quality gameplay.
• DUU is the most accessible Doubles format outside of DOU, based off of ladder activity and discussion in the PS doubles room. Further, including two DUU slots takes some of the pressure off of each individual DUU player, making it ideal for newer players who want to get their start to be slotted in. It also has more building resources dedicated to the tier than DUbers, which means new players can navigate better through shifts.
  • EDIT FOR CLARITY: when I say newer players, I mean players that might not be well-known within the doubles community or active in DOUcord, not necessarily players new to a format. It's unsurprising that managers wouldn't want to draft players who just started out a tier or don't have any results yet, including ladder success. Also, I misremembered the list of resources available to players for DUU and DUbers, so this point does not hold much merit. I stand by the rest of my argument, however.

• I am extremely concerned about how volatile DUU is going to be in its first month. It definitely had balance issues in pre-home, this was expressed by a few people in the DPL survey/team dumps

  I disagree with this take for a couple of reasons:
  • First, we have slightly more than a month for the DUU meta to develop before the start of Derby. Meta development during this time will be super-accelerated by the DUU Seasonal tour, so I am confident we will reach a stable meta by the time Derby starts.
  • Second, during DPL, mid-season drops benefitted the tier greatly by giving us more checks and alternatives to the dominant paradox mons. While it's impossible to predict that this sort of thing will happen again, I think it's far more likely that we end up with a more balanced meta rather than a less balanced one after the dust settles from the first month of DUU seasonal.
  • Third, I personally think a mild amount of volatility is healthy for a teamtour. The aforementioned drops during DPL generated hype in the DUU channel and rejuvenated our building efforts. People were eager to see how players would adapt to the changes in the tier, and we saw some real creativity in post-drop teambuilding. This is obviously a view that isn't going to be shared by everyone, but I wanted to get it out there anyway.

As a DUU fan, I'd love to have two slots for the tier, but if there are solid arguments in favor of DUbers I would be happy to see it get representation in this tour.

As for the manager discussion, I want to bring up a point made by bunnyy: with each tier in this tour being wildly different, it makes sense for there to be two playing managers to make up for the knowledge gaps that may arise in terms of knowing every tier. One of the arguments against two playing managers for DPL was that it would allow for pairs of very experienced players to form an incredibly strong core before ever going to draft. This is likely an even larger problem for Derby than for DPL given the tier specialization required and the fewer number of teams, so the logistics of implementing two playing managers would be quite tricky to handle. Regardless, I'm interested in what everyone here has to say about this.

 

[Actuarily]

I should start with I think all tiers should be included in this tournament, but as Dubers is the point of conversation, I’ll post why I think we should have Dubers over a 2X slot of another tier. I think Doubles Ubers should be included for a couple of reasons:

1. This is a tour of doubles lower tiers & tiers that have previously not been included in team tournaments (with a few DOU slots as it’s the main smogon doubles tier), to not include Dubers in that seems out of place.

2. The idea for a doubles lower tier tournament really started when Dubers was not included in DPL 8, and then to not include it here again is just repeating that.

3. While Dubers doesn’t have as much of a forum presence thus far, it has like far far far more games than the other tiers, the Dubers ladder has like 4x the amount of ladder games of all the other lower tiers combined. (Here’s ladder games in the most recent month we have stats for, May, of each lower tier that has a ladder:
Dubers : 42,756
DUU: 9,398
DPP DOU: 823
Doubles LC: 372

As you can see, the fact is Dubers activity is thriving.)

I get that Dubers doesn’t quite have the same forum presence at the moment, but that’s not the end-all-be-all for a tier. I played Dubers in Maushold cup, and found it extremely easy to get into via playing on the ladder. So what other tiers have in forum resources, Dubers makes up for in ladder activity.

 

[ryo yamada2001]

I made peace with DUbers's inclusion as long as we can guarantee it is supported after Derby through something like a lower tier Doubles circuit as zee and I repeatedly suggested, and I felt we were making progress towards this internally but above post left me dumbfounded and wanting to clarify my position.

I believe we, as hosts, have a responsibility to think critically about our tournament format & structure and consequently make the right decisions -- or at least ask the right questions -- based on serious arguments rather than vague feelings. The initial purpose of the Doubles Derby from kaori and I was to include young Doubles tiers with small but dedicated playerbases that did not yet receive serious representation -- e.g. DPP and NatDex DOU. We did not mean for this to be an introductory tournament for speculative tiers, but rather a competitive environment for our established and lesser represented playerbases.

Point two is a bizarre misrepresentation: our conception for Derby was completely unrelated to the DPL 8 debacle. It was simply not considered. Even the earliest conversations for an additional lower tier team tournament we could find are traced back to Memoric in September 2021, several months before DUbers's exclusion. It is really confusing this point is made and, even as I talked about it to Actuarily in private about it, do not want that point to stand publicly.

My issues with DUbers's inclusion was that its sudden call for inclusion is incongruent with how we have neglected to support it up to now and plan for it in the future. Whereas other tiers established themselves with the prerequisite resources (think of sample teams and viability rankings), introductory kickoff tournaments (DPP, NatDex), extensive roomtour representation (DPP, ADV), and long-running circuits (DLC, DUU); DUbers has had none of that this generation. Allocating a Derby slot is inconsistent with the attention we've given it so far and out of place in what should ostensibly be a competitive tournament for our established tiers. As I see it, without earlier concerted efforts from its player base and no plans to support it further, DUbers would only exist competitively for Derby.

While my preferred course of action would be to not include DUbers for the time being but to establish a lower tier circuit for it so we can see it thrive with an actual involved userbase, I am also fine with including DUbers and guaranteeing we can support it in the future through this lower tier circuit. For now I will help with the tier's development which will hopefully lead to establishing resources; I will be hosting room tournaments throughout the day in the Doubles room, have included DUbers in the scheduled room tournament cycle, and have asked for a pingable role to increase awareness of these tournaments. If you're interested in seeing this tier represented please come join them and prove to the hosts that this is a viable format that deserves to be in Derby; your presence and involvement is the best way to make yourself heard.

 

[NinjaSnapple]

The Doubles Derby now has a logo!