arsenette
Administrator
Rambling Rican
Posts: 16,617
Staff Member
|
Post by arsenette on Aug 17, 2016 2:55:46 GMT -5
Before obstacle replica training and qualifiers existed in SASUKE, everyone was a wildcard because there was NO WAY of knowing who would do well. The show literally cobbled together 6 no-names who were all invited as "wildcards" at some point or another and lo and behold we were given the Sasuke All-Stars. AKA, the standard by which most of us hold all other competitors to. Also, from a TV ratings perspective, it would be a huge mistake to have Vegas just be a sausage fest. You don't get a wildcard into the olympics if you mess up in the trials. But you do get direct entry if you are representing a heavily underrepresented country. Women are in the vast minority in ANW, especially the Vegas finals which I'm sure a lot of people are tuning in to watch who didn't bother to watch the qualifiers. So they deserve some representation. It's not taking away any of the 15 spots promised to each region. /thread You are under the illusion that ANW is the Olympics. Hell one can argue that the best people aren't even selected to even RUN qualifiers. If it were the Olympics they would be in the line up instead of snubbed each season. So your entire premise is moot. ANW is a TV show beholden to ratings. Wildcards only became divisive because some people want all qualifiers. That's not going to happen. Historically ratings prove that. For ANW to survive it needs that mix of qualifiers and wildcards to be viable on television. That mix is what keeps people interested. Again, ratings prove that. Considering that more women watch ANW than men, and women have been the headliners since ANW got HUGE with Kacy's run, they would be crazy to ignore women especially when they are doing very well. Heck, one can argue that they should have 20% wildcards to add those cusp competitors that people were clamoring for. You aren't going to please everyone especially when the loudest fans have polarizing opinions. Some want a pure sport and others want an entertaining variety show with equal representation of the genders. Considering that women rule in ANW ratings, the former will never happen.
|
|
|
Post by dudesky1000 on Aug 17, 2016 8:37:01 GMT -5
Before obstacle replica training and qualifiers existed in SASUKE, everyone was a wildcard because there was NO WAY of knowing who would do well. The show literally cobbled together 6 no-names who were all invited as "wildcards" at some point or another and lo and behold we were given the Sasuke All-Stars. AKA, the standard by which most of us hold all other competitors to. Also, from a TV ratings perspective, it would be a huge mistake to have Vegas just be a sausage fest. You don't get a wildcard into the olympics if you mess up in the trials. But you do get direct entry if you are representing a heavily underrepresented country. Women are in the vast minority in ANW, especially the Vegas finals which I'm sure a lot of people are tuning in to watch who didn't bother to watch the qualifiers. So they deserve some representation. It's not taking away any of the 15 spots promised to each region. /thread You are under the illusion that ANW is the Olympics. Hell one can argue that the best people aren't even selected to even RUN qualifiers. If it were the Olympics they would be in the line up instead of snubbed each season. So your entire premise is moot. ANW is a TV show beholden to ratings. Wildcards only became divisive because some people want all qualifiers. That's not going to happen. Historically ratings prove that. For ANW to survive it needs that mix of qualifiers and wildcards to be viable on television. That mix is what keeps people interested. Again, ratings prove that. Considering that more women watch ANW than men, and women have been the headliners since ANW got HUGE with Kacy's run, they would be crazy to ignore women especially when they are doing very well. Heck, one can argue that they should have 20% wildcards to add those cusp competitors that people were clamoring for. You aren't going to please everyone especially when the loudest fans have polarizing opinions. Some want a pure sport and others want an entertaining variety show with equal representation of the genders. Considering that women rule in ANW ratings, the former will never happen. We are basically saying the same thing you know :/ As for my olympics analogy, actually, it does work, because there is a regional limit on how many competitors can represent each region in Vegas. Of course, it is only an analogy, not me saying I actually believe ANW is anything like the olympics other than the trial/wildcard aspect! Plus, we both know the olympics is just fluffed up NBC-fueled USA propaganda. ANW is no different.
|
|
arsenette
Administrator
Rambling Rican
Posts: 16,617
Staff Member
|
Post by arsenette on Aug 17, 2016 9:20:45 GMT -5
You are under the illusion that ANW is the Olympics. Hell one can argue that the best people aren't even selected to even RUN qualifiers. If it were the Olympics they would be in the line up instead of snubbed each season. So your entire premise is moot. ANW is a TV show beholden to ratings. Wildcards only became divisive because some people want all qualifiers. That's not going to happen. Historically ratings prove that. For ANW to survive it needs that mix of qualifiers and wildcards to be viable on television. That mix is what keeps people interested. Again, ratings prove that. Considering that more women watch ANW than men, and women have been the headliners since ANW got HUGE with Kacy's run, they would be crazy to ignore women especially when they are doing very well. Heck, one can argue that they should have 20% wildcards to add those cusp competitors that people were clamoring for. You aren't going to please everyone especially when the loudest fans have polarizing opinions. Some want a pure sport and others want an entertaining variety show with equal representation of the genders. Considering that women rule in ANW ratings, the former will never happen. We are basically saying the same thing you know :/ As for my olympics analogy, actually, it does work, because there is a regional limit on how many competitors can represent each region in Vegas. Of course, it is only an analogy, not me saying I actually believe ANW is anything like the olympics other than the trial/wildcard aspect! Plus, we both know the olympics is just fluffed up NBC-fueled USA propaganda. ANW is no different. My back always gets up when I hear anyone comparing ANW or even Sasuke for that matter to the Olympics or organized Olympic level sport. So I apologize on that. I think anyone asking for this to be run as a sport honestly doesn't know wtf they want. That would be the end of every "favorite" person they have and the backbone of the show (either of them).
|
|
|
Post by mayhudson on Aug 17, 2016 16:50:17 GMT -5
I just wished they gave athletes that got close to the top 15 another chance instead of using wildcards as a marketing scheme
|
|
|
Post by issach99 on Aug 17, 2016 17:24:39 GMT -5
Hard work doesn't get you anywhere. Being a woman does. That's the message being sent, but NBC doesn't care.
|
|
|
Post by notamulti on Aug 17, 2016 17:44:08 GMT -5
How would you guys like it if Sasuke had 0 female competitors?
|
|
DonalM
Nakata Daisuke
Posts: 953
|
Post by DonalM on Aug 17, 2016 20:50:03 GMT -5
How would you guys like it if Sasuke had 0 female competitors? Barring wildcards, NBC has 3 in the finals, and they are very likely to represent the women far better than any of the wildcards will.
|
|
|
Post by nylacrosse15 on Aug 20, 2016 9:15:43 GMT -5
NBC has developed a bad reputation: If you are a woman, then you are automatically going to Vegas, so if you are a woman, then you are going to Vegas, regardless of how well you did in City Qualifiers/Finals.
|
|
SuperTiger
Yamada Kōji
Kunoichi-san
*meyolow*
Posts: 1,187
|
Post by SuperTiger on Aug 20, 2016 9:35:04 GMT -5
I honestly don't see what the issue is with women wildcards. I mean let's be real the course is significantly harder for female athletes than for male athletes. The only exception I think there should be with wildcards is that if someone makes the 3rd stage in the previous tournament, or at any point becomes a finalist they should snag a wild card if they don't make the top 15.
Also I echo the sentiment that if they just did top 20 straight from each region it would be so much more boring. ANW already doesn't feel that exciting to me personally. The mystery factor provided by wild cards does add some allure to the show.
|
|
|
Post by TCM on Aug 20, 2016 13:24:51 GMT -5
People are still whining about this, huh. Just think how some of you sound. The list of competitors will always, *always* skew towards men. And sure, it sucks to have some people like David miss his first ever Vegas finals, on top of general treatment by the show. The argument is there he has earned a shot at Vegas. At the same time, he's never cleared Vegas Stage 1. Mental flukes, bad obstacles, they've all played their part. But if you get bitter at the idea of a woman getting a wildcard for some jackass reasoning like "Hard work doesn't get you anywhere. Being a woman does." you should also have a problem with giving it to a competitor solely based on previous laurels even though he didn't make it to the wall in City Finals. And I've read people here mocking anyone who has failed before the wall in a city finals before.
Like other people have said:
- It's a TV show. - Sasuke hasn't had a dedicated trials in years, they have their own audition process that involves 0 on-site obstacle work, so, literally everyone is a wildcard. - There is no obligation to give someone an invite, just like there's no obligation to show their run (see: Stage 4 finalists getting cut in future broadcasts [Nagasaki, Kong] or not even getting invited to compete [Okuyama in 28]). - Ratings have shown, like with the original Ninja Warrior broadcasts, women have an edge in the demographic department. So why not capitalize on that?
Now, sure, it's silly to give someone a wildcard and not show their run in qualifying, but that doesn't need a gender designation to call out as poor form. I've wanted a Women of ANW for a while now (initially as a special, if it went well, make it its own thing), but from the sounds of people getting up in arms about wildcards, I can already hear the 'why do they get to be on twice' hack arguments already. So sometimes I wonder if it should be anything more than my random pipedream.
If you're bitter about women being the wildcards, I feel like there's something you need to confront about some of you, because trying to use David as a martyr is a liiiittle much. Considering the fact he had walk-on (much less twice) to even get on the show, the idea he was prevented from getting a wildcard because he doesn't identify as a woman shouldn't even be entertained.
|
|
|
Post by issach99 on Aug 20, 2016 20:45:37 GMT -5
People are still whining about this, huh. Just think how some of you sound. The list of competitors will always, *always* skew towards men. And sure, it sucks to have some people like David miss his first ever Vegas finals, on top of general treatment by the show. The argument is there he has earned a shot at Vegas. At the same time, he's never cleared Vegas Stage 1. Mental flukes, bad obstacles, they've all played their part. But if you get bitter at the idea of a woman getting a wildcard for some jackass reasoning like "Hard work doesn't get you anywhere. Being a woman does." you should also have a problem with giving it to a competitor solely based on previous laurels even though he didn't make it to the wall in City Finals. And I've read people here mocking anyone who has failed before the wall in a city finals before. Like other people have said: - It's a TV show. - Sasuke hasn't had a dedicated trials in years, they have their own audition process that involves 0 on-site obstacle work, so, literally everyone is a wildcard. - There is no obligation to give someone an invite, just like there's no obligation to show their run (see: Stage 4 finalists getting cut in future broadcasts [Nagasaki, Kong] or not even getting invited to compete [Okuyama in 28]). - Ratings have shown, like with the original Ninja Warrior broadcasts, women have an edge in the demographic department. So why not capitalize on that? Now, sure, it's silly to give someone a wildcard and not show their run in qualifying, but that doesn't need a gender designation to call out as poor form. I've wanted a Women of ANW for a while now (initially as a special, if it went well, make it its own thing), but from the sounds of people getting up in arms about wildcards, I can already hear the 'why do they get to be on twice' hack arguments already. So sometimes I wonder if it should be anything more than my random pipedream. If you're bitter about women being the wildcards, I feel like there's something you need to confront about some of you, because trying to use David as a martyr is a liiiittle much. Considering the fact he had walk-on (much less twice) to even get on the show, the idea he was prevented from getting a wildcard because he doesn't identify as a woman shouldn't even be entertained. A woman gets to the third obstacle in regionals. Wild card. A man who has been to Stage 3 gets to the fifth obstacle in the Finals. No wild card. If you don't see the problem, I really feel sorry for you.
|
|
|
Post by TCM on Aug 20, 2016 22:24:21 GMT -5
People are still whining about this, huh. Just think how some of you sound. The list of competitors will always, *always* skew towards men. And sure, it sucks to have some people like David miss his first ever Vegas finals, on top of general treatment by the show. The argument is there he has earned a shot at Vegas. At the same time, he's never cleared Vegas Stage 1. Mental flukes, bad obstacles, they've all played their part. But if you get bitter at the idea of a woman getting a wildcard for some jackass reasoning like "Hard work doesn't get you anywhere. Being a woman does." you should also have a problem with giving it to a competitor solely based on previous laurels even though he didn't make it to the wall in City Finals. And I've read people here mocking anyone who has failed before the wall in a city finals before. Like other people have said: - It's a TV show. - Sasuke hasn't had a dedicated trials in years, they have their own audition process that involves 0 on-site obstacle work, so, literally everyone is a wildcard. - There is no obligation to give someone an invite, just like there's no obligation to show their run (see: Stage 4 finalists getting cut in future broadcasts [Nagasaki, Kong] or not even getting invited to compete [Okuyama in 28]). - Ratings have shown, like with the original Ninja Warrior broadcasts, women have an edge in the demographic department. So why not capitalize on that? Now, sure, it's silly to give someone a wildcard and not show their run in qualifying, but that doesn't need a gender designation to call out as poor form. I've wanted a Women of ANW for a while now (initially as a special, if it went well, make it its own thing), but from the sounds of people getting up in arms about wildcards, I can already hear the 'why do they get to be on twice' hack arguments already. So sometimes I wonder if it should be anything more than my random pipedream. If you're bitter about women being the wildcards, I feel like there's something you need to confront about some of you, because trying to use David as a martyr is a liiiittle much. Considering the fact he had walk-on (much less twice) to even get on the show, the idea he was prevented from getting a wildcard because he doesn't identify as a woman shouldn't even be entertained. A woman gets to the third obstacle in regionals. Wild card. A man who has been to Stage 3 gets to the fifth obstacle in the Finals. No wild card. If you don't see the problem, I really feel sorry for you. My enjoyment of a season is not based around a concept that's a privilege. Nor do I need to get upset about women competitors getting attention, regardless of skill level. I've been following the American saga of Sasuke/ANW since people were hyped about Ninjafest and ANC1 back in 2007. I've watched every ANW season, I can count the number of episodes I've missed on one hand. All women wildcards doesn't even make my top 10 of ANW fault, because I wouldn't consider it one. Go ahead and feel sorry, my life is unaffected by condescension whose best argument is 'wah, women.' So you can miss me with that.
|
|
|
Post by matt723894 on Aug 20, 2016 22:51:27 GMT -5
My opinion on this is just I think it's overall a horrible decision by NBC. Why would you waste all these spots people who 70% of them your not going to show in the first place. The only people they're going to show is Duran, Catanzaro, the Philly girls who don't qualify, and maybe one more person, probably Reid or Weberly. Why would they waste a wilcard on Cassie Craig, or Jeri D’Aurelio, when they could use it on someone they could actually show.
|
|
|
Post by TCM on Aug 21, 2016 0:12:21 GMT -5
They're wildcards. They're already low on the totem pole. The record number of wildcards to clear in a Vegas tournament is 3. Only five wildcards have cleared, ever.
ANW 4: No clears (4 digested/cut out of 10) ANW 5: 3 clears (9 digested/cut out of 25) ANW 6: 2 clears (5 digested/cut out of 12) ANW 7: No clears (6 digested/cut out of 10)
5 being an outlier because there's so many, around half get cut anyways. So expect around half to be cut or digested again.
ANW prefers showing fails to clears in Vegas. They cut or digested 18 out of 38 clears last year in Stage 1 which is virtually half since half of 38 is 19; and all those people qualified. There is 0 evidence to suggest the influx of women wildcards is impacting their edit.
|
|
DonalM
Nakata Daisuke
Posts: 953
|
Post by DonalM on Aug 21, 2016 0:49:49 GMT -5
One of these days they're gonna f*** up and have themselves a Sasuke 19.
|
|
arsenette
Administrator
Rambling Rican
Posts: 16,617
Staff Member
|
Post by arsenette on Aug 21, 2016 3:09:33 GMT -5
I think the people that are complaining the most want ANW to be American men only. Period. No women at all even though the show would not be big if it wasn't for those "damn women". Sexist as that is.. that seems to be the synopsis. God forbid this show be a ratings powerhouse because women are the demographic that carry this show. If it wasn't for Kacy's run it would be off the air by now. ANW has been on for years and no one gave a damn. It would be preposterous for NBC to snub the women who are literally the only reason why they are on the air.
|
|
|
Post by GlobalNinjaFan on Aug 21, 2016 5:09:35 GMT -5
How is this even an argument?
Yes, some women DO deserve wildcards. Some don't. At the end of the day it is up to NBC's discretion to allocate them, and as unfair as it might be, if they want all women, it'll be all women and there is nothing you can do about.
Do I feel bad for strong male athletes getting shafted because the wildcards have been all female for 2 seasons on the run? Of course I do. It isn't fair, that's for sure. But again, NBC does what brings viewers in. If it was up to me, I'd randomly draw them from City Finals failures. But it isn't. So complaining is pointless.
|
|
arsenette
Administrator
Rambling Rican
Posts: 16,617
Staff Member
|
Post by arsenette on Aug 21, 2016 7:09:59 GMT -5
How is this even an argument? Yes, some women DO deserve wildcards. Some don't. At the end of the day it is up to NBC's discretion to allocate them, and as unfair as it might be, if they want all women, it'll be all women and there is nothing you can do about. Do I feel bad for strong male athletes getting shafted because the wildcards have been all female for 2 seasons on the run? Of course I do. It isn't fair, that's for sure. But again, NBC does what brings viewers in. If it was up to me, I'd randomly draw them from City Finals failures. But it isn't. So complaining is pointless. I highlighted the reason it is still an argument. It is fair that's why there's an argument. The minority agree with you in principle and are complaining. You at least know it is out of your control so you just go with it. Others feel compelled to expose their sexism in full view as a valid justification.
|
|
|
Post by GlobalNinjaFan on Aug 21, 2016 8:45:18 GMT -5
How is this even an argument? Yes, some women DO deserve wildcards. Some don't. At the end of the day it is up to NBC's discretion to allocate them, and as unfair as it might be, if they want all women, it'll be all women and there is nothing you can do about. Do I feel bad for strong male athletes getting shafted because the wildcards have been all female for 2 seasons on the run? Of course I do. It isn't fair, that's for sure. But again, NBC does what brings viewers in. If it was up to me, I'd randomly draw them from City Finals failures. But it isn't. So complaining is pointless. I highlighted the reason it is still an argument. It is fair that's why there's an argument. The minority agree with you in principle and are complaining. You at least know it is out of your control so you just go with it. Others feel compelled to expose their sexism in full view as a valid justification. Except I don't believe it is. The only thing more arrogant than people making loud, ranty posts about Wildcards in the face of futility are people that take the moral high ground to shut down the opposing viewpoint they disagree with. Accusing anyone who doesn't believe all ten wildcards deserve to go to women of being sexist is frankly ludicrous. I'm not saying that the women don't deserve an extra chance. I'm just saying that there are men that deserve a shot. If Geoff had made a slip up in the City Finals and failed to qualify, yet a Wildcard went to a woman who failed the second obstacle in the qualifiers of the same region I would have a problem. I'm not saying this is the case all the time, but in that case it WOULD annoy me. I'm saying that unapologetically.
|
|
arsenette
Administrator
Rambling Rican
Posts: 16,617
Staff Member
|
Post by arsenette on Aug 21, 2016 12:43:35 GMT -5
I highlighted the reason it is still an argument. It is fair that's why there's an argument. The minority agree with you in principle and are complaining. You at least know it is out of your control so you just go with it. Others feel compelled to expose their sexism in full view as a valid justification. Except I don't believe it is. The only thing more arrogant than people making loud, ranty posts about Wildcards in the face of futility are people that take the moral high ground to shut down the opposing viewpoint they disagree with. Accusing anyone who doesn't believe all ten wildcards deserve to go to women of being sexist is frankly ludicrous. I'm not saying that the women don't deserve an extra chance. I'm just saying that there are men that deserve a shot. If Geoff had made a slip up in the City Finals and failed to qualify, yet a Wildcard went to a woman who failed the second obstacle in the qualifiers of the same region I would have a problem. I'm not saying this is the case all the time, but in that case it WOULD annoy me. I'm saying that unapologetically. Discrimination because of gender is sexism. The majority of the arguments are because of that. You asked a question as to why it is an argument and you immediately took it personal as if I was attacking you. Geez that is your problem. Don't ask a question if you don't want the answer. It is annoying to have to placate your feelings when answering your questions.
|
|