AI coaching enters the Smash Bros arena

When a teenage gamer reached for ChatGPT mid-match at a local Super Smash Bros tournament, few expected it to spark a debate that could ripple across the competitive fighting game scene.

A Super Smash Bros player used ChatGPT mid-match to receive stage-banning advice and mounted a comeback win.,Tournament organisers are now debating whether AI counts as illegal “midset coaching.”,Industry leaders suggest AI is here to stay but stress that real skill, not text prompts, ultimately decides outcomes.

A digital coach in the pocket

At a June 24 tournament, Corrin player Zorrin, just sixteen years old, found themselves down in a set against Lucida, a Robin main. Instead of leaning solely on reflex and instinct, Zorrin turned to ChatGPT for guidance on which stages to ban. The AI recommended Smashville, Town & City, and Kalos Pokémon League. Whether coincidence or cunning, Zorrin followed through and went on to secure a comeback victory.

Lucida later posted on X, wryly noting, “Lost to a sixteen-year-old at my local tonight who asked ChatGPT for match up advice after Game 2, I can’t keep up with these zoomers.”

The light-hearted remark belied a genuine issue: should AI advice during a match be treated as illegal coaching?

The grey zone of mid-match advice

In competitive Smash, players are forbidden from receiving outside coaching between games in a set. Advice scribbled on a notepad is fine; a whispered hint from a teammate is not. But ChatGPT complicates that binary. It is not a human, yet it functions as an external brain, offering distilled strategy at speed. For those looking to get the most out of their AI interactions, learning How To Teach ChatGPT Your Writing Style or exploring 20 menial tasks ChatGPT handles in seconds can be beneficial.

Lucida herself conceded that the use of AI was funny in a low-stakes local setting, but flagged that in higher-level play, its legality should be clarified. Others in the community agreed. As one player mused online, “Would this not just fall under midset coaching?” Another countered that while it probably does, enforcement would be almost impossible.

Tournament organisers respond

Alex Jebailey, founder of the long-running CEO fighting game tournament series, acknowledges the murky waters. Speaking on the issue, he said:

“This is gonna be a touchy subject. It’ll be hard to manage cause players take notes on others, but sticking to a one minute rule between [games in a set] to avoid stalling is probably the safe way to avoid someone taking their time to look up answers.”

“This is gonna be a touchy subject. It’ll be hard to manage cause players take notes on others, but sticking to a one minute rule between [games in a set] to avoid stalling is probably the safe way to avoid someone taking their time to look up answers.”

Jebailey added that he has personally experimented with AI for strategy insights, though he admitted the responses were often generic. Still, he noted the inevitability of AI becoming part of the toolkit. His conclusion was pragmatic: “Real skill in the moment will win out.”

A wider question for esports

The Smash community is not alone in facing this dilemma. From chess to poker, the boundary between permissible preparation and illicit assistance is increasingly blurred by digital tools. AI’s role in esports now sits at the intersection of tradition, innovation, and regulation. The broader impact of AI on various industries, including its potential to reshape human roles, is a topic of ongoing discussion, as highlighted in articles like What Every Worker Needs to Answer: What Is Your Non-Machine Premium?.

For casual weekly tournaments, an AI pep talk may remain little more than a comic anecdote. But for professional competitions with prize money and sponsorships at stake, tournament organisers will need to decide whether AI counts as just another notebook, or an unfair second coach. The Esports Integrity Commission, for instance, provides guidelines and regulations for maintaining fair play in competitive gaming.

Where does the line get drawn?

In truth, Zorrin likely knew the correct bans before consulting ChatGPT. The AI’s advice merely reinforced existing knowledge. But perception matters, and to Lucida and others, the involvement of AI still altered the competitive balance.

For the moment, most agree that rules should lean towards clarity: define permissible breaks, prevent excessive delays, and accept that AI tools exist in players’ pockets whether banned or not.

If AI can coach fighters mid-match today, how long before it shapes practice regimens, scouting reports, or even live-stream commentary in tomorrow’s tournaments? The question is no longer whether esports will embrace AI, but how far communities are willing to let it in. This ongoing integration of AI into daily life is also seen in how How People Really Use AI in 2025.