First Warhammer40k GT results

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Insectum7**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You people realize the same list would've won without the Tactical Marines right?

Unless it had to hold objectives with ObSec or face any vehicles at range. Even 72 Assault Cannon shots with all the rerolls will struggle to kill more than a single Rhino equivalent a turn.

**NenkotaMoon**

Damn, one tournament and Dakka is gone nuts.

Hell seeing these forums, you'd think pure Guard would dominate.

**Slayer-Fan123**

Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You people realize the same list would've won without the Tactical Marines right?

Unless it had to hold objectives with ObSec or face any vehicles at range. Even 72 Assault Cannon shots with all the rerolls will struggle to kill more than a single Rhino equivalent a turn.

Um no? 3 Razorbacks will inflict 9 wounds under the Rowboat aura, so not including the odd Stormbolter, HK Missiles, and weapons from the Stormraven you should be getting 2 dead Rhinos a turn.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
For the record, 3 Stormbolters would inflict the last wound under the Rowboat aura. Where are you getting "struggling" from?

**Insectum7**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You people realize the same list would've won without the Tactical Marines right?

Unless it had to hold objectives with ObSec or face any vehicles at range. Even 72 Assault Cannon shots with all the rerolls will struggle to kill more than a single Rhino equivalent a turn.

Um no? 3 Razorbacks will inflict 9 wounds under the Rowboat aura, so not including the odd Stormbolter, HK Missiles, and weapons from the Stormraven you should be getting 2 dead Rhinos a turn.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
For the record, 3 Stormbolters would inflict the last wound under the Rowboat aura. Where are you getting "struggling" from?

So what I said was completely accurate? 72 Assault Cannon shots will struggle to kill two Rhinos in a turn. 72 x .888 x .555 x .5 = 17.74, which is less than two Rhinos.

Of course the Stormraven adds to that, but that wasn't the statement.

The six Lascannons give you another (6 x .888 x .888 x .83 x 3.5 = ) 13.7 REQ wounds, just in case you're wondering.

**Melissia**

Yeah, seriously, don't underestimate the durability of a rhino.

**Wonderwolf**

NenkotaMoon wrote:
Damn, one tournament and Dakka is gone nuts.

Hell seeing these forums, you'd think pure Guard would dominate.

Why? Just because they are too powerful, doesn't mean there's not worse cheese out there. Or just because there's worse cheese out there, doesn't mean it's too not strong/point efficient, etc...

A book/list that is in the ... say ... top 30% of things in 40K is still better than 70% of stuff in 40K and likely in need of a slight adjustment, even though it may not make the top 5% of things you only ever see of tournaments (hence why tournament results and lists are far too biased and small of a sample to adequately judge balance issues for the game as a whole).

**Time of madness**

I wonder what the daemon player ran?

**Amishprn86**

Wonderwolf wrote:
NenkotaMoon wrote:
Damn, one tournament and Dakka is gone nuts.

Hell seeing these forums, you'd think pure Guard would dominate.

Why? Just because they are too powerful, doesn't mean there's not worse cheese out there. Or just because there's worse cheese out there, doesn't mean it's too not strong/point efficient, etc...

A book/list that is in the ... say ... top 30% of things in 40K is still better than 70% of stuff in 40K and likely in need of a slight adjustment, even though it may not make the top 5% of things you only ever see of tournaments (hence why tournament results and lists are far too biased and small of a sample to adequately judge balance issues for the game as a whole).

None of that matters if you know the meta and take a counter meta list and hope to fight those lists, it has happen before and will happen again. Are those list consider broken? Heck no, but they are counter meta.

**Kdash**

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gunzhard wrote:
Marmatag wrote:
Roboute Guilliman lists have been strong since 8th dropped. This isn't news.

You don't see Grey Knights on that list (and they have a codex), you don't see Blood Angels on that list, you don't see Space Wolves on that list, you don't see anything besides Ultramarines on that list, solely because of Guilliman.

Everyone screams Guilliman is overpowered, but without him, marines are garbage. Just look at the other factions for proof.

I don't disagree that Guilliman is really powerful, but I thought the 2nd place SM was Raven Guard? ...and Blood Angels and Space Wolves are terrible examples because they still use the Index, while Grey Knights are kind of on a branch of their own. I don't believe you are being truly objective here.

Yeah 2nd place was RG.

Sagittarii Orientalis wrote:
I am surprised to see a list with plenty of tactical squads taking the first place.
More so because I always thought Intercessor Squads were more solid troop choices, compared to tactical squads.

That said, the post from Warhammer Community mentioned primaris marines doing well on the scene.
I wonder if the Space Marines list on the second place featured considerable number of primaris marines.

The RG army was mainly Primaris Marines, with added Contemptor, Contemptor Mortis and Mortis dreadnoughts and a single Lascannon Stormtalon. No special characters or anything were part of the list.

Intercessors, Aggressors, Hellblasters, a captain and a librarian.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Xenomancers wrote:

I look forwards to your impending tournament win, since you know how to optimize the list of even the winner of THIS tournament.

You know with the information from this link it is entirely possible that this guy never faced a good army.

**Nazrak**

Melissia wrote:
I mean, outside of the special characters, it's a fairly standard marine list fluff-wise, so if you find that boring maybe you just find marines boring.

Yeah, except it really isn't. A proper fluffy marine list would have ten man squads with a special and heavy in each, and would have more rhinos than razorbacks.

This person's clearly just taken min Tac squads just to spam lascannons and to unlock Twin Assault Cannon Razorbacks. Bit of a stretch to claim this is proof that tacs are a great unit when they're hanging with Bobby and a tonne of R'backs.

Nowt wrong with this if that's the way you want to play, of course, I'd just prefer it if the rules were set up so that "in keeping with the lore" and "the best list" weren't mutually exclusive.

**Kdash**

Xenomancers wrote:

knowing what to expect against a strong AM list is laughable. They can beat you multiple way because literally ever unit in their codex is better than yours. I mean - these are some real uphill battles from the start. You almost can't call them battles. It's how I know he didn't face any legit AM armies. Do you really think this guy would have a chance against a supreme command russ division with a baneblade? And a batallion composed of conscripts commissars and mortars? NO - nothing stands a chance against that.

You can see a picture of part of the AM list he faced on the Tabletop Tactics instagram and facebook. Pretty neat looking red tank theme.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

MarkM wrote:
Xenomancers wrote:

The more important Rules Pack question is did they use Swiss pairing or that random pairing gak used previously?

I believe it was Swiss style - i.e those that won the first game played each other, then the winners played each other etc etc

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amishprn86 wrote:
MagicJuggler wrote:
Hollow wrote:
Xenomancers wrote:
Galas wrote:
Xenomancer you are the deffinition of armchair general

How much arrogance.

I'm really not being arrogant. Tactical marines do suck. I am just trying to help you guys understand that tournaments are like lotteries - your army composition being stronger is like buying more tickets. However - a guy that bought more tickets can still lose to the guy that bought 1. This guy could have boguht more tickets by making a better composition but it didn't matter - he won anyways.

But it isn't though, is it? If you did a little research on who actually won this heat then you would see it's Lawrence from Table Top Tactics (Great Youtube channel and website by the way) He placed 1st here and has done so for many different tournaments (as well as placing 2nd, 3rd etc.)

The same Lawrence that pulled off a 7e ITC Dark Eldar win with mass Reaver Jetbikes? Yeah, I can buy it.

That was at No-Retreat wasnt it? with HEAVY restrictions to many factions i believe. (If my Memory is right, and i think it is, b.c i talked to him about it that it was a friendly tournament).
Spelling

His LVO 9th place list was mainly Dark Eldar last Jan.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

drbored wrote:
Adeptus Ministorum placing top 15? Sisters of Battle soon.

Also, the tacs were a cheap way to get Razorbacks on the table. Given Lascannons, they can cover a large area of the field and throw lascannon shots down field, with re-rolls from the HQs, so those things are going to hit and they're going to do damage.

I’m surprised the SoB player ended up 15th. He was on 4 max wins and on table 1 going into the final game. He lost to the Daemons player but I’d have expecting it to still have placed him higher.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

argonak wrote:
Lord of War: Roboute Guilliman

HQ: Tigurius

HQ: Space Marine Captain with Teeth of Terra (relic)

Troops: 6 Tactical Squads (lascannon in each squad. Sergeants carrying chainsword and bolt pistol)

Dedicated Transport: 6 Razorbacks (Twin assault cannons)

Flyer: Stormraven Gunship (lascannon, multi-meltas, hurricane bolters)

Hmmm. Wouldn't it make more sense to bring 3 tactical squads for the CPs, and then 3 more devastator squads? You get free sigmums with devestators, and he's clearly using the 3 troop slot detachment. You can even get 3 cherubs then if you can scrounge up 5 more points.

Potentially yes, but you've got to take into account that 1 tac lascannon squad is 90 points, while 1 dev unit is 170 (with cherub). Potentially worth swapping 2 units for 1 dev unit, but, then you don't have the 4 ablative wounds and less mobility etc.

Also, interesting to note, that the top 3 players (at least) all finished the event on 5 max wins each (the top 6 players going into the last game were all on max wins, and as the last game was Relic, the winners would have auto got a max win). The only reason Lawrence won overall was due to the "bonus" point system GW seem to run - sportsman votes and painting votes. Personally i think these (esp painting) should be separate, and i will never understand why they think using the Relic mission is a good idea.

Also, as this was GW held event, you have to also understand the level of terrain. Essentially its an "8 piece standard" terrain table, with (based on warhammer fest) the chances of any of it being LoS blocking being around 1%. Gunline armies would have likely had a stronger than usual advantage.

**Corrode**

Xenomancers wrote:
knowing what to expect against a strong AM list is laughable. They can beat you multiple way because literally ever unit in their codex is better than yours. I mean - these are some real uphill battles from the start. You almost can't call them battles. It's how I know he didn't face any legit AM armies. Do you really think this guy would have a chance against a supreme command russ division with a baneblade? And a batallion composed of conscripts commissars and mortars? NO - nothing stands a chance against that.

lol

**Jackal**

It's funny.
People can guess all they want about what someone did and who they faced.
But without knowing, it's pointless.

This sadly does not matter though, as some people will insist they know better and disregard any facts shown to them.

What's also been missed is the actual players ability too.
I've seen countless net lists get torn apart and underdog armies push past them as alot relies on how the lists are used.

This also comes down to play style.
Even with the same army, 20 random players would use it differently throughout a game.
So while X unit may be better to you, they may prefer Y or Z unit as it fits how they play alot better.

**tneva82**

Blacksails wrote:
But I keep hearing marine players complaining that tactical marines are the worst unit in the game!

But are the tacticals good or is Guillimann and razorback good?

Do you bring tacticals for tacticals or unlock razorbacks...In otherwords are tacticals just least lousy razorback spam.

**Corrode**

tneva82 wrote:
Blacksails wrote:
But I keep hearing marine players complaining that tactical marines are the worst unit in the game!

But are the tacticals good or is Guillimann and razorback good?

Do you bring tacticals for tacticals or unlock razorbacks...In otherwords are tacticals just least lousy razorback spam.

As has been pointed out numerous times, the tacs aren't required to unlock Razorbacks. You can take one DT for each other choice in the detachment, so he could have taken literally anything else instead and still got 6 Razorbacks in. Taking the tacticals was a conscious choice.

**AaronWilson**

Xenomancers wrote:
You guys are a bunch of clowns if you think this has anything to do with the tactical squads. This is all about drop number. He easily could have replaced 6 tactical squads with 3 preditors and trippled his las cannon number. It only would have cost him 1 command point. Which means Jack gak to a space marine player anyways - our strategems suck immensely - and even less to an ultramarine. I mean let's get real here - his list is not optimized - he didn't even give his tactical sargents bolters.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Insectum7 wrote:
Xenomancers wrote:
Tactical squads are the worst unit in the game lol. 6 razors with Guilliman and a storm raven being -2 to hit because of Tiggy is pretty good though.

It's questionable why he even included 6 troops at all because he only had 1 battalion. I guess he figured he has to put something inside them to keep his drops low and go first every game (which I'm sure is the reason he won first anyways).

Why didn't he take a close combat unit for his storm raven? seems silly not to when it's basically impossible to take out at -2 to hit. Seeing armies like this winning a GT makes me feel pretty good about winning one myself. Considering this list is not optimized.

To optimize this list you remove all the tac squads - you take 3 scout squads with a missile launcher and you put a unit of company vets with combi flamers or thunder hammer storm shields in the raven.

YES! Do damage slower, that will ensure efficiency!

Yeah...because assaulting a line of lemon russ with thunderhammer vets that can't fall back and shot isn't a winning strategy. I can safely tell you this army did not face imperial guard. He would have lost easily.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Unit1126PLL wrote:
Xenomancers wrote:
Tactical squads are the worst unit in the game lol. 6 razors with Guilliman and a storm raven being -2 to hit because of Tiggy is pretty good though.

It's questionable why he even included 6 troops at all because he only had 1 battalion. I guess he figured he has to put something inside them to keep his drops low and go first every game (which I'm sure is the reason he won first anyways).

Why didn't he take a close combat unit for his storm raven? seems silly not to when it's basically impossible to take out at -2 to hit. Seeing armies like this winning a GT makes me feel pretty good about winning one myself. Considering this list is not optimized.

To optimize this list you remove all the tac squads - you take 3 scout squads with a missile launcher and you put a unit of company vets with combi flamers or thunder hammer storm shields in the raven.

Wow, I'm impressed with your knowledge, tac squads must indeed be garbage.

I look forwards to your impending tournament win, since you know how to optimize the list of even the winner of THIS tournament.
You know with the information from this link it is entirely possible that this guy never faced a good army.

Man that's awkward as Lawrence played against Both Russ/Conscript Spam & 3 IG Superheavies.

**Blacksails**

tneva82 wrote:
Blacksails wrote:
But I keep hearing marine players complaining that tactical marines are the worst unit in the game!

But are the tacticals good or is Guillimann and razorback good?

Do you bring tacticals for tacticals or unlock razorbacks...In otherwords are tacticals just least lousy razorback spam.

Clearly the only logical conclusion we can pull from this is that tacticals are the absolute worst unit in the game, and an active handicap. Guilliman alone handled every 2k list, by himself, while the tacticals did literally nothing.

The only logical line of thought, right? I mean, it couldn't possibly be that tactical marines aren't terrible trash and might actually be a solid troop choice, cause that would be insanity.

**tneva82**

Corrode wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Blacksails wrote:
But I keep hearing marine players complaining that tactical marines are the worst unit in the game!

But are the tacticals good or is Guillimann and razorback good?

Do you bring tacticals for tacticals or unlock razorbacks...In otherwords are tacticals just least lousy razorback spam.

As has been pointed out numerous times, the tacs aren't required to unlock Razorbacks. You can take one DT for each other choice in the detachment, so he could have taken literally anything else instead and still got 6 Razorbacks in. Taking the tacticals was a conscious choice.

So what choices marines have in troops that's worth it? If you can take scouts instead then ok but that tells you just that tacticals are better than scouts. Okay he could go for some other choises by different detachments but that costs more points(=less razorbacks) and less command points.

Sometimes to get enough of the real meat you just have to take something that itself is crappy for the points. Waste 5 points to get 10 points elsewhere.

Not to mention it's just 1 tournament. One tournament=meaningless. He could simply have been rolling hot that day enough to compensate for lousyness of tacticals. And IG players might still be painting 8th ed optimized list(quite likely since quite literally everything that was good in 7th is crap in 8th and vice versa for IG). I know if I needed to paint competive IG army from scratch again to 8th ed standards 6 months would be optimistic for that. Especially if I would attend tournament with painting scores with intention of trying to win the tournament as I would need to work harder than usual for the painting then.

**sossen**

He didn't need 5 tac squads to unlock the razorbacks, with two HQs and a flyer he only needed three other units. Three is also the minimum amount of troops required for the battalion detachment that he used. I'd like to hear him elaborate on his reasons for including five units and if he genuinely considers them worthwhile.

**Gaz Taylor**

Jackal wrote:
It's funny.
People can guess all they want about what someone did and who they faced.
But without knowing, it's pointless.

This sadly does not matter though, as some people will insist they know better and disregard any facts shown to them.

What's also been missed is the actual players ability too.
I've seen countless net lists get torn apart and underdog armies push past them as alot relies on how the lists are used.

This also comes down to play style.
Even with the same army, 20 random players would use it differently throughout a game.
So while X unit may be better to you, they may prefer Y or Z unit as it fits how they play alot better.

100% agree with this. I know for a fact that I could take Lawrence's army and I would not win the event. I think I would stand a good chance at getting through to the GT final but I wouldn't take it for granted. I think what some people are missing about this is...

(1) Lawrence is a very good player and plays quite a few games (well it is his job now)
(2) Lawrence has done well at events in the past (winning a few of the No Retreat events and often finishing quite highly)
(3) This was a GW GT. Anything could happen as you could be facing anything or have some horrible luck!
(4) Soft scores are a thing at GW GTs, so you can't assume you will win just upon your games

**AaronWilson**

You totally need to take into the fact JUST how experienced Lawrence is. He's been playing 40k or a LONG time now and has huge experience of both the game mechanics and events.

He won events last year with the 7th ed Deldar dex, he came 2nd at no retreat used deldar in the endex as well. It doesn't take anything away from his gross list, but you have to give some credit to Lawrence.

**Kdash**

AaronWilson wrote:
You totally need to take into the fact JUST how experienced Lawrence is. He's been playing 40k or a LONG time now and has huge experience of both the game mechanics and events.

He won events last year with the 7th ed Deldar dex, he came 2nd at no retreat used deldar in the endex as well. It doesn't take anything away from his gross list, but you have to give some credit to Lawrence.

No-one is taking anything away from Lawrence. He's a fantastic player and a great guy.

Beyond Lawrence, 2nd place was another Marine list and other BobbyG lists did extremely well at the event. That is the point people are looking at in relation to the "omg Guard are OP and beat everything" argument, from which the point of this thread comes from.

As such, people are starting to use these results to question lists and just how strong some armies actually are.

**Nazrak**

Kdash wrote:
AaronWilson wrote:
You totally need to take into the fact JUST how experienced Lawrence is. He's been playing 40k or a LONG time now and has huge experience of both the game mechanics and events.

He won events last year with the 7th ed Deldar dex, he came 2nd at no retreat used deldar in the endex as well. It doesn't take anything away from his gross list, but you have to give some credit to Lawrence.

No-one is taking anything away from Lawrence. He's a fantastic player and a great guy.

Beyond Lawrence, 2nd place was another Marine list and other BobbyG lists did extremely well at the event. That is the point people are looking at in relation to the "omg Guard are OP and beat everything" argument, from which the point of this thread comes from.

As such, people are starting to use these results to question lists and just how strong some armies actually are.

Just a thought: the fact you see more Bobby G lists than, say, Conscript Spam lists may not *necessarily* tell us a great deal about the relative power/brokenness/whatever you want to call it – I'd wager there are a lot more Bobby G lists out there, given how much lower the hobby barrier to entry is in terms of time/cost, and this is obviously going to skew the stats.

**XT-1984**

I went to this GT with Death Guard and 250 points of Nurgle Daemons.

I won 3 out of 5 and got 5 votes for Favorite Player / Army Presentation and qualified for the finals in 24th place.

I love Tabletop tactics but I spoke to the people Laurence played and more than one of them was complaining about his gaming etiquette. Saying that his Gullimans auras had a longer range than anyone elses, and that he would move pieces far further than he should have. They told me he was a dirty cheat lol! Perhaps they were bitter, I can't say for certain.

I also went with a friend who got seized on 4 times there and came 70thish. He is a great player who should have qualified and if Lawrence had of been seized on 4 times I seriously doubt he would have won overall.

Just remember that before buying yourself an Ultramarines army.

**Jackal**

If people would have had those issues, then they would have called it out.
If you know someone is cheating you then you speak up.

Sounds more like a case of excuses for losing.

I do agree in terms of luck though.
Naturally it does play it's part and can make or break games quite easily.

**Kdash**

Nazrak wrote:
Kdash wrote:
AaronWilson wrote:
You totally need to take into the fact JUST how experienced Lawrence is. He's been playing 40k or a LONG time now and has huge experience of both the game mechanics and events.

He won events last year with the 7th ed Deldar dex, he came 2nd at no retreat used deldar in the endex as well. It doesn't take anything away from his gross list, but you have to give some credit to Lawrence.

No-one is taking anything away from Lawrence. He's a fantastic player and a great guy.

Beyond Lawrence, 2nd place was another Marine list and other BobbyG lists did extremely well at the event. That is the point people are looking at in relation to the "omg Guard are OP and beat everything" argument, from which the point of this thread comes from.

As such, people are starting to use these results to question lists and just how strong some armies actually are.

Just a thought: the fact you see more Bobby G lists than, say, Conscript Spam lists may not *necessarily* tell us a great deal about the relative power/brokenness/whatever you want to call it – I'd wager there are a lot more Bobby G lists out there, given how much lower the hobby barrier to entry is in terms of time/cost, and this is obviously going to skew the stats.

It's hard to say without the full stats.,but i agree that the abundance of Bobby G has to be factored in and balanced vs other lists. I'd expect Bobby G lists to have a lower win-loss ratio due to the abundance, however, this will not mean that Bobby G is "balanced" or "over powered". Likewise, Conscript armies potentially have a higher win-loss ratio due to the amount of lists containing it, compared to Bobby G lists, but, it doesn't always mean they are the most over powered lists. It doesn't matter if you consistently win 4 out of 5 games if someone else is winning 5 out of 5.

**Amishprn86**

Yep, playing some friendly games in to flush out my list, just did BRB missions, all random rolls for the 12 missions and random rolls for table type.

Got Secure and control with Long ways 3x in a row.

Tournaments are just as RNG as everything else.

**stratigo**

Dr. Mills wrote:
Would you look at all that pure Astra Militarum! Anyone would think with their new OP PLZ NERF! Codex, that they would be in the positions 1 to 5.

Guess Imperium soup really was the OP force, rather than a pure Astra Militarum army. But hey, that's just my opinion.

Astra Militarum is the most represented codex in that list. I guarantee the imperium ones had guard, and I bet the Genestealer cults had guard too.

I bet AM players are currently experimenting to see if any of the new units are worth shifting the old index meta.

**Arkaine**

Nazrak wrote:
Kdash wrote:
AaronWilson wrote:
You totally need to take into the fact JUST how experienced Lawrence is. He's been playing 40k or a LONG time now and has huge experience of both the game mechanics and events.

He won events last year with the 7th ed Deldar dex, he came 2nd at no retreat used deldar in the endex as well. It doesn't take anything away from his gross list, but you have to give some credit to Lawrence.

No-one is taking anything away from Lawrence. He's a fantastic player and a great guy.

Beyond Lawrence, 2nd place was another Marine list and other BobbyG lists did extremely well at the event. That is the point people are looking at in relation to the "omg Guard are OP and beat everything" argument, from which the point of this thread comes from.

As such, people are starting to use these results to question lists and just how strong some armies actually are.

Just a thought: the fact you see more Bobby G lists than, say, Conscript Spam lists may not *necessarily* tell us a great deal about the relative power/brokenness/whatever you want to call it – I'd wager there are a lot more Bobby G lists out there, given how much lower the hobby barrier to entry is in terms of time/cost, and this is obviously going to skew the stats.

I took it to mean something else. Let's assume Guard is overpowered and Conscript Spam beats everything. Except Bobby G. Bobby G lists smash conscript spam. So in a meta of conscript spam, guess who takes 1st place? The guy bringing 72 s6 shots that reroll failed hits and wounds.

**AaronWilson**

In regards to Lawrence's play I can't / won't comment. No idea on those statements as I wasn't there and it's not right to call people out when they're not on the forum to respond.

All I will say in regards to that is - If people playing against him knew Lawrence said the aura was bigger then it is, or was moving too far I feel like they would of called him out. As I said I wasn't there and have no idea.

Luck is a huge factor in winning any large event with 5+ rounds. You need some to win a even that size.