|
EDIT: Added new information at bottom (many formal responses from parties involved), updated arguments, nothing was removed. Added why I chose to make "another" Naniwa thread and felt it was worth it (at end).
What happened:
For anyone that missed it, very early yesterday morning (for North America) Naniwa and Nestea had both gone 0-3 in their group for the Blizzard Cup and still had to play each other in Group B. This match was essentially a show match because neither player could advance at this point, even if they won. In these circumstances Naniwa decided to probe rush with his initial 6 probes, essentially guaranteeing Nestea winning.
The game, requires a Blizzard Cup ticket at Gom.
In response, early this morning, it has been announced that Naniwa's Code S spot will be taken away. TL post of Mr. Che announcing on Korean stream Naniwa's dismissal? And Artosis mentioned on the english stream that it will be given to Sen for his 3rd place position in Blizzcon.
There seems to be an abundance of opinions showing up on the GOM forums as well as TL. I thought I'd try to make some sense of it all in one spot and see how the arguments size up against one another.
Naniwa's POV
I think the biggest supporting argument for Naniwa is that the game had no real consequence. You MIGHT be able to argue that there was some indirect consequences relating to stats between the players and calculating points for overall rankings in the GSL. Outside of that though there was no money on the line, no effect on future seeding, effectively there was no reason to play outside of pride.
So maybe there wasn't much motivation, whats wrong with playing just one more game? Well I've learned a lot about how hard players train and the amount of heart that goes into their games and practice. Remember how both players entered that game 0-3? Well Naniwa had very close games and I'm sure those earlier losses were pretty devastating. Not only is he in a foreign country, very much out of his element, but he is working hard enough to compete against the best of the infamous Koreans, and to work so hard as to almost beat them? I just think we need to have some emphasis on Naniwa's mindset to explain why he could have been frustrated enough to pull a stunt like that. The easy counter-argument is that Nestea was in a very similar position, but I think combined with Nestea's greater experience and home game advantage (if you will) I think it's worth considering. Really it boils down to GOM's consideration of players state of mind in extenuating circumstances, and how they decide to handle those situations. GOM has its own interests to defend as well, but I'll leave that for their side of the argument.
Continuing the idea that it is as much GOM's responsibility Idra commented, I think quite fairly, with his opinon. It's partially GOM's job to keep things relevant to the fans and the players, keeping an honest atmosphere where we don't have to question the value of what we're watching. Not to say they're lieing to us or anything, but I don't think it would be unrealistic to expect the match to not be played at all. Keeping it in as filler or to better fit their scheduling seems questionable itself.
Another continuation, Wolf mentioned on !@#$ Slasher (link below), is that if Naniwa had asked to not play the match GOM likely would have allowed it. Well I pose the question that shouldn't it have been the responsibility of GOM to ask permission of Nestea and Naniwa if they were willing? I understand I may not have any ground here with no understanding of the agreement between the players and GOM, but I think it shouldn't be expected one way and not the other. Naniwa has as much interest in the tournament as GOM and I don't think it should be assumed he do as they see fit without question. On that note as well, should there be a way to honourably (for lack of a better word) forfeit a game? If a player considers it in their best interest should this be allowed?
Even if you consider GOM right in its claim that Naniwa threw the game unprofessionally and should be forced to play the match, where do you draw the line. Slasher really defends this saying that what if he managed to actually win the probe rush? At what point does a game become a bad enough strategy that it's considered intentional? Maybe TheBest.fOu actually had great banshee micro and Artosis is just trying to hide the fact he threw some matches? This becomes a logistical nightmare to police. EDIT: I'm aware that this is a weird claim and I'm sort of playing Devil's advocate; in 1000 games its unlikely his probe rush would win even 1 attemp. But I still think there is a valid point in the argument, it's about principle, not "it could have worked."
We can even compare this to a match between Coca and Byun where, after discussing the match, Coca "agrees" to forfeit and continue to a game 3. Clefairy's TL post about Coca "throwing a match". A situation arguably worse because it actually would affect code A seeding, if I understand correctly. Another of Clefairy's posts sourcing Mr Che's statement and video of Coca's forfeit shows that team Slayers was allowed to discipline Coca as they chose, with GOM's input. Is there a better solution we could have had with Naniwa, with more of a mediating party thats not so directly involved?
In another comparison, Slasher shows how other major sports handle less significant exhibition matches where teams will bench their major players essentially showing that they are not concerned with winning. It's not really a major problem and rarely punished because of the lack of consequences it has on the league, that's what makes it okay. EDIT: I think we can consider this point not good enough, the involvement of a Team game instead of an Individual player changes the circumstances.
EDIT: I think it's important to add as well in Naniwa's defense that there was no clear rule that was broken. This was something GOM did more on principle than on offical legalized rules. The major problem with this is the magnitude of the disciplinary action, removing his Code S spot. I think this is well defended though by GOM stating that his spot was never gauranteed, but more him being chosen from a list of players who all had the requirements to earn the spot. Also, whether or not there was a clear rule, it's obvious that people were wronged and I think we are mature enough to be aware of that and understand hiding behind beaurocracy will not help this situation.
tl;dr So, essentially it seems important to note that Naniwa's action doesn't TECHNICALLY harm any part of the league. Also there was a failure to communicate between the interests of GOM and of the players. Lastly, in future incidents, judging whether a match is forfeit or not may be impossible to police wiith any confidence.
Gom's POV
GOM has to tread very carefully with situations like this because of the match fixing scandal in BW involving Savior. Even if it is obvious that this isn't the case, GOM is not in a position where it can make any assumptions and it has to be very careful to protect its own integrity. Few sponsors are going to be eager to associate with a league that allowed players to get away with match fixing. The most dangerous thing being it doesn't have to actually happen, only appear like it did to make sponsors hesitate.
The most disappointing aspect is the question of professionalism for Naniwa. Koreans are respected for more than just their success, they set the standard for hard work and dedication. Part of that is the pride and respect for what they are trying to accomplish, which is what makes not caring about this match so controversial. They are eager and proud to be given the chance to compete at that high of a level, so when Naniwa basically shows that it is below him, he is directly insulting that mentality. Well who the hell does he think he is?
It isn't just the other players he is affecting though, the casters and the people behind the scenes are putting at least full time hours into making GSL an exciting experience. Naniwa is essentially insulting everyone contributing there, showing that the match may be worth their time, but not his.
If Naniwa is so frustrated and unable to act professionally for GOM, it's his responsiblity to communicate that. If it was so problematic for him to play the match I'm sure they would have been able to reach an agreement where they would not play it. He has to accept that its his responsibility to speak up and help GOM keep the show going. If he can show he cares in the interests of GOM, I'm sure they would respond reasonably.
l can only speculate on the legality of what happened, but I'm sure whatever agreement in writing there is between a player and an event, I doubt it would be in Naniwa's favor, for good reason. Naniwa has to understand when he enters a tournament there are certain obligations he is agreeing to whether or not he chooses to be aware of them.
The punishment is difficult as well. It's not as though they can simply give him a single game suspension in the future as it affects too much, the next logical step being an entire season. It may have been better to fine him a cash amount, but that presents other problems, including possible legal ones. Pro gaming isn't the highest income career out there, finding an appropriate amount would be very complex. Something small like removing his ability to veto a map for a few matchups seems too soft.
It's not just what he did, but how he did it. This was at a point where everyone was watching, this was a big night with lots of viewers in a major tournament. It was overdramatic and Naniwa was very selfish and decided to make a big deal out of it. One of the things that makes icons like Slayers.Boxer amazing is the self respect he has in how he conducts himself, the person he pushes himself to be, and you'd never see him act like that. A lot of the players in the GSL are there for their team and for their fans, not just themselves. Sometimes it's about putting on a good show for the people who care about them.
tl;dr Its a matter of disrepect, Naniwa insulted a lot of people and could have avoided it with just a little more effort, not much, just a little. GOM is in a tough spot to try and deal with it and has to make a hard decision.
So what now?
Well initially I thought they were being too harsh taking away his code S spot. But after writing this and reading through it, I'm not as sure. I was convinced that a fine would have been fair, but from GOM's point of view that may not have been an option. I sincerely hope this isn't the beginning of a chain of events that causes Naniwa to give up on training in Korea, I'd hate to see this hurt his career. But I can't help but feel that he owes so many people such a huge apology and if he's not willing to learn from this and grow up, maybe he doesn't belong there.
In the spirit of Incontrol's call to the community to better ourselves for the next year of Starcraft and E-sports I think we have a lot to learn from this. It enunciates so clearly that we need to have much, much clearer communication between organizers, players, casters, sponsors, everyone involved in creating the content. We need to strike a balance that allows us to keep creating content and its through confrontations like these that we can sit down and say, okay here is exactly what we need to do so this doesn't happen again, and to protect everyone from feeling the need to throw a game or suspend a player.
E-sports is still very young and undeveloped, we have to be ready for problems like these to come up. If we want to grow to a point where we are recognized world-wide as a valid profession and sport we have to hold ourselves to a higher standard. I think many people have proven they are very capable of that and we need to focus on how we can lay everyones interests and necessities out on the table, and make sure they are met for everyone involved.
Edit: New information GOM's Official Response -really clarifies what they actually took away, Naniwa wasn't necessarily guaranteed a Code S spot -aknowledges that he didn't clearly break the rules, but he was clearly unprofessional and something should be done Quantic's Official Response -Naniwa apologizes whole-heartedly, sounds like he actually understands why it was wrong -Quantic takes a solid stance, they will stand by Naniwa with his mistake and help him grow out of it
DOA's opinion -brings up an excellent point about the purpose of Blizzard Cup and why the match did matter Ayesee's opinion from team Gosu -explains thoroughly how Naniwa wronged his fans
Related Discussions: !@#$ Slasher w/ Wolf & Naniwa Jinro, Huk tweets discussing it
Unrelated Edit: Hey, everybody, sorry for making another Naniwa thread :3, thanks for the many nice comments though! In afterthought I guess putting this in blogs would have been a good way to not add to the masses, but I was actually trying to lessen the need for more threads by having one central place that provided all the information involved. I'm aware of the irony, trying to reduce them by adding my own, but that's why I made sure I put the time in to make this as worthy as I could. I've learned so much from watching day9, SOTG, tournaments, interviews, etc. I think there are fantastic ideas coming out of the pillars in our community and people would be better off being able to hear them, but this is the internet. Trying to follow this stuff, and more importantly, after the issue has blown over its hard to remember all the pieces to help us make decisions later. I wanted something that allowed future me to search "naniwa forfeit" on TL forums, and bam, a list of what happened, with sources, so I could make new opinions on what may have happened with new information I got in the future.
I really thought I could make something useful.
Also how could you pick a side, both are so defensible! >.< I need some special tactics.
|
Great article! thanks for your time invested!
|
Good read, well thought out arguments. Showed me a new perspective on both sides.
|
Something we should clear up right now is whether or not the community is willing to accept player forfeitures honorably in a group-play scenario. It's a great point and it needs to be addressed.
I agree, Naniwa's forfeit is probably unjustified - especially in the way he went about it. But, imagine if he had to play a teammate who would advance with a win, but both would not advance if he lost. There's no chance in hell nani (or this hypothetical player) would beat his teammate under those circumstances, however rare they may be (and it does happen!).
Is there any way for him to forfeit the match while keeping his integrity? I mean sure, he could do some ridiculous strat other than probe rushing and some people might be entertained for 10 minutes. But if the player has incentive to lose, I would rather him come out and say it, forfeit the match, have it treated as a walk-over and have all parties retain their integrity.
|
There are way too many threads about this, but out of all unwanted threads, this is by far longest and the best OP.
|
Jesus christ how many threads do we need? Start making them blogs so they don't clutter the general forum, imo
|
This is a good post. I wonder how many people would have thought that both Naniwa and Nestea would BOTH be 0-3 at that point? I know I didn't. I think GOM did the right thing, it's better to address this now and set a precedent than to wait on the next occurence and have "well you didn't do anything to Naniwa, so why now?"
If I understand the penalty, Naniwa is gone for a month. If he wants to come back he can. In my opinion, I don't think his team had any desire to punish him (pure speculation no facts at present), so GOM had to. GOM did what MLG was scared to do and for that I applaud them.
Trust me, if a Korean had done the same thing, the consequences would have been much worse from his own team, let alone GOM.
|
|
maybe enough about Naniwa ................
|
Well written, a 5/5 if this was in the blog section. Thanks for putting your time and effort for a comprehensive post.
|
Awesome write up, but all I really took away from it is how Slasher has no idea what he's talking about.
"What if he won with his 6-probe rush?"
Really? NaNiWa is going to micro so hard (and NesTea is going to AFK or something) that his probes kill off drones (which will always win in a drone vs probe fight due to slight regeneration of zerg units, iirc).
"It's just like real sports benching their top players."
Yeah, the difference is that those teams actually played the games. A better comparison would be a team playing their top players... but (using American football as a comparison) receiving the kickoff and running it back into their own endzone, then walking off the field. I really doubt the 60k fans at the game and millions watching at home would be understanding since "the game didn't mean anything".
And now I must apologize for expressing my anger toward Slasher's statements in your post. I am sorry about that!
On topic, thank you for taking the time to put this all together. Exactly what the community needed for this situation.
|
great article but i really think this topic has got enough threads already im sure that there are about 10 threads discussing the same issue lol
|
|
United States40789 Posts
Moving this to blogs. Your opinion does not merit another topic on this.
|
I stopped reading as soon as I understood it's just a repeat of the same things those happened. (Not because I don't care about your opinion, it's because by creating a new thread you made me think that there are new events happened on the matter)
If you have an opinion about this why don't you post in already open discussion threads or blog? How many threads will TL have about this? Should everyone open a thread for what they have in mind?
|
naniwa doesnt deserve a code S spot was a dog act towards ppl who payed money to watch the stream
|
Nice. Let's keep this bumped so people can see a nice rational analysis of the situation.
|
Finals this week, haven't been watching, so thanks for being the one thread in the sea on this issue that actually takes the time to explain what happened.
Naniwa's actions were disrespectful to the fans to be sure. But gom was treating him like a circus animal- "here kid, that starcraft stuff you do makes for a great party trick- entertain our fans so we can sell premium tickets, even though this match is of no fucking consequence."
Naniwa was rude at worst, but it's really on gom's shoulder's for not having clear standards. If gom wants players to play meaningless matches and the players know that going in because of clearly defined and promulgated rules, that is 100% gom's prerogative. Although honestly, I don't even know how you word that. Play hard even though we're insulting your intelligence?
I think Idra nailed it, if the match doesn't matter, the player shouldn't have to care. Furthermore, as a fan of both Naniwa and Nestea, I'll be honest, I don't really care either. The narrative matters at least as much as the quality games, if not more. If all I want is starcraft for starcraft's sake, I'll go ladder or watch replays.
I'm not even sure it's fair to say that Naniwa should have "played to win." In the big picture sense that every player is thinking in, namely winning a title, it was already out of the question, thanks to gom's ridiculous structure.
tl;dr I think there's a point at which starcraft is not about victories in individual games but about winning in a bigger sense. If a tournament can't offer an opportunity for the latter to a player, how on earth can they expect them to take it seriously? Throw some charity dollars at it if you want a good game, don't just use players to pad your own pockets and then act like you're the victim.
|
On December 15 2011 05:26 KwarK wrote: Moving this to blogs. Your opinion does not merit another topic on this.
Did you read the post? Just because part of it is his take on the matter doesn't make the whole thing an opinion piece. This is a great summary of the information and puzzle pieces available.
|
On December 15 2011 05:12 Meta wrote: Something we should clear up right now is whether or not the community is willing to accept player forfeitures honorably in a group-play scenario. It's a great point and it needs to be addressed.
I agree, Naniwa's forfeit is probably unjustified - especially in the way he went about it. But, imagine if he had to play a teammate who would advance with a win, but both would not advance if he lost. There's no chance in hell nani (or this hypothetical player) would beat his teammate under those circumstances, however rare they may be (and it does happen!).
Is there any way for him to forfeit the match while keeping his integrity? I mean sure, he could do some ridiculous strat other than probe rushing and some people might be entertained for 10 minutes. But if the player has incentive to lose, I would rather him come out and say it, forfeit the match, have it treated as a walk-over and have all parties retain their integrity.
Really, the solution is to just get rid of these matches in tournament formats. If it happened often at all, it definitely will be a very, very rare occurrence afterwards.
|
To say that GOM should've asked the players if they wanted to play or not is ridiculous. Why should GOM need to ask? Its a mutual agreement in the sense that if you go in the booth, you have agreed to play? If you don't want to play then dont go in and tell the official that you dont want to play.
"In another comparison, Slasher shows how other major sports handle less significant exhibition matches where teams will bench their major players essentially showing that they are not concerned with winning." Does those bench players that goes out and play still try the best of their ability? The answer is yes, although they are not as great, they are still trying their best. The problem here is that it was not a team league, its an individual league. What he did was very disrespectful to fans and the event holder. Your argument of "what if he actually won" is quite bad. Nobody from the GSL will win with that rush, lets be real. And if you do a strategy with 0% chance of winning, is that not throwing a game away? (unless you wholeheartedly believe that Naniwa had a chance of winning...)
|
On December 15 2011 05:40 robopork wrote: Finals this week, haven't been watching, so thanks for being the one thread in the sea on this issue that actually takes the time to explain what happened.
Naniwa's actions were disrespectful to the fans to be sure. But gom was treating him like a circus animal- "here kid, that starcraft stuff you do makes for a great party trick- entertain our fans so we can sell premium tickets, even though this match is of no fucking consequence."
Naniwa was rude at worst, but it's really on gom's shoulder's for not having clear standards. If gom wants players to play meaningless matches and the players know that going in because of clearly defined and promulgated rules, that is 100% gom's prerogative. Although honestly, I don't even know how you word that. Play hard even though we're insulting your intelligence?
I think Idra nailed it, if the match doesn't matter, the player shouldn't have to care. Furthermore, as a fan of both Naniwa and Nestea, I'll be honest, I don't really care either. The narrative matters at least as much as the quality games, if not more. If all I want is starcraft for starcraft's sake, I'll go ladder or watch replays.
I'm not even sure it's fair to say that Naniwa should have "played to win." In the big picture sense that every player is thinking in, namely winning a title, it was already out of the question, thanks to gom's ridiculous structure.
tl;dr I think there's a point at which starcraft is not about victories in individual games but about winning in a bigger sense. If a tournament can't offer an opportunity for the latter to a player, how on earth can they expect them to take it seriously? Throw some charity dollars at it if you want a good game, don't just use players to pad your own pockets and then act like you're the victim.
I completely agree and to further expand I would like to know how GOM can bend a very vague rule about proffesionalism to enforce it on a probe rush in a game that doesnt matter at all. It's funny to me the people that don't think GOM is at fault here, with their horrible tournament format and bending of the rules to punish something they didn't like. I really hope the MLG seed contract negates this and nani gets into code s.
|
my objection to the OP, which is overall excellent, is that it doesn't seem to include anything about the rules used to disqualify naniwa. many of us who have been commenting on other threads feel that, apart from the issue of naniwa doing something right or wrong, gom does not seem to have a rule that disqualifies this in a clear way. the rules it does have are incredibly vague, about as vague as statements like "we wanted a progamer, not just some guy who's good at sc2." there's a reason you don't want vague rules - they're very open to arbitrary application by whoever has power. think about when you were a kid. did your parents have a rule that you weren't allowed to be "disrespectful". this rule was probably initially vague. it started to seem more clear after they punished you over and over for it, and you started to sense what you could do and what you couldn't, but that doesn't make those initial punishments fair. just as you didn't have any reason to know that their interpretation of the vague word "disrespectful" contained certain things, there's no reason naniwa should have known that this action was "unfit for a gamer," "offensive," "abusive," or any of the other things that are actually in the rules.
i feel that it merits noting that many of us also feel that this points up a persistent problem with the esports scene, which emerged quite clearly in mr. chae's comments. it's simply not good to have an organization that intentionally devalues people who are motivated by money. that leads to a lot of abuse of the players and the employees. there's already enough twelve-hour days for little pay in korean esports. here a good analogy is to college athletics - it's a scandal when a star quarterback gets some sort of kickback from his school or a donor, but it's no scandal when a linebacker gets five concussions and can then neither play football nor graduate college due to the injuries. while using language that suggests that he's looking for adults, mr. chae's words actually express a desire for gamers who don't protect themselves in an adult way by looking out for their own interests. a good esports scene requires that progamers *must* be aware of what they're giving up to play and *must* be intent on protecting their own interests, monetary or otherwise.
|
I think Doa actually made a really good point about why that game may have been played. The Blizzard cup is a tournament, sure, but it's mostly wrapped around a celebration of the past year of Starcraft. What with the awards going out at the finals, with a lot of major tournament winners being invited. It's all for the fans, and a Naniwa vs Nestea rematch is something a lot of people want to see. For Naniwa no matter how badly he doesn't want to play that game at worst he gets a game of practice against the best zerg in the world, but he decided to take his ball and go home
|
Read what Doa has to say about it. I thought gives a pretty good idea on the details for both sides.
Doa's blog
It reminds me of a thread we had a while back that was discussing if we thought Blizzcup was a regular season or a special event. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=293352 Majority agreed that this was indeed a special event, and I thought so too. Keep that in mind when you think about if a game in a special event match is meaningless.
|
How is GOM at fault? GOM made a tournament, put out the format. If you think the format is stupid then by all means, dont join the tournament. When you agree to join a tournament, you need to abide by their rules even if it means playing "meaningless" game.
|
On December 15 2011 05:40 robopork wrote: Finals this week, haven't been watching, so thanks for being the one thread in the sea on this issue that actually takes the time to explain what happened.
Naniwa's actions were disrespectful to the fans to be sure. But gom was treating him like a circus animal- "here kid, that starcraft stuff you do makes for a great party trick- entertain our fans so we can sell premium tickets, even though this match is of no fucking consequence."
Naniwa was rude at worst, but it's really on gom's shoulder's for not having clear standards. If gom wants players to play meaningless matches and the players know that going in because of clearly defined and promulgated rules, that is 100% gom's prerogative. Although honestly, I don't even know how you word that. Play hard even though we're insulting your intelligence?
I think Idra nailed it, if the match doesn't matter, the player shouldn't have to care. Furthermore, as a fan of both Naniwa and Nestea, I'll be honest, I don't really care either. The narrative matters at least as much as the quality games, if not more. If all I want is starcraft for starcraft's sake, I'll go ladder or watch replays.
I'm not even sure it's fair to say that Naniwa should have "played to win." In the big picture sense that every player is thinking in, namely winning a title, it was already out of the question, thanks to gom's ridiculous structure.
tl;dr I think there's a point at which starcraft is not about victories in individual games but about winning in a bigger sense. If a tournament can't offer an opportunity for the latter to a player, how on earth can they expect them to take it seriously? Throw some charity dollars at it if you want a good game, don't just use players to pad your own pockets and then act like you're the victim.
sir there are clear rules in korea
its called the korean civil code
it says that you have to fulfill your contractual obligation in good faith.
naniwa and gom were in a contractual obligation when they agreed that gom agreed that naniwa was allowed to play in the gsl and get prizemoney if he gets far and naniwa agreed that he will do his best in his matches knowing that broadcasting the games and pleasing fans and sponsors alike is the financial ground of the business of gom.
what naniwa did was a breach of this contract and normally in such case gom is entitled to terminate the contractual relationship and claim damages.
they did not terminate the contractual relationshps entirely but only partly and did not claim any damages.
why is there a need to have clear rules when the applicable law already has a solution to this ?
Also I dont agree that idras argument makes sense.
the tournament format was known before naniwa participated. he surely had the option to let other players (like marineking or jjakji for example) participate instead of him if he did not agree to the format
|
On December 15 2011 05:40 robopork wrote: Finals this week, haven't been watching, so thanks for being the one thread in the sea on this issue that actually takes the time to explain what happened.
Naniwa's actions were disrespectful to the fans to be sure. But gom was treating him like a circus animal- "here kid, that starcraft stuff you do makes for a great party trick- entertain our fans so we can sell premium tickets, even though this match is of no fucking consequence."
Naniwa was rude at worst, but it's really on gom's shoulder's for not having clear standards. If gom wants players to play meaningless matches and the players know that going in because of clearly defined and promulgated rules, that is 100% gom's prerogative. Although honestly, I don't even know how you word that. Play hard even though we're insulting your intelligence?
I think Idra nailed it, if the match doesn't matter, the player shouldn't have to care. Furthermore, as a fan of both Naniwa and Nestea, I'll be honest, I don't really care either. The narrative matters at least as much as the quality games, if not more. If all I want is starcraft for starcraft's sake, I'll go ladder or watch replays.
I'm not even sure it's fair to say that Naniwa should have "played to win." In the big picture sense that every player is thinking in, namely winning a title, it was already out of the question, thanks to gom's ridiculous structure.
tl;dr I think there's a point at which starcraft is not about victories in individual games but about winning in a bigger sense. If a tournament can't offer an opportunity for the latter to a player, how on earth can they expect them to take it seriously? Throw some charity dollars at it if you want a good game, don't just use players to pad your own pockets and then act like you're the victim. I don't agree with the circus animal point.
Let's say that I offer A and B $500 each to play a 1 game show-match with each other. Suppose that both players agree. Now suppose that A simply attack-moves in his 7 probes in this show-match game. Has A disrespected me?
I would argue that yes, Player A has disrespected me in this instance by not playing out the game.
This show-match example is, in many ways, very similar to a tournament where all players receive a prize, and where there is a round-robin tournament where all games are played. In such a tournament, it is always possible that some games may not affect the outcome of the tournament. However, these players are still being paid (the minimum prize) in order to compete in this round-robin tournament.
The game may not "matter" in terms of cash compensation or future tournament matches, but that does not mean players should simply be allowed to throw the game without consequence, just as I would not want player A in my hypothetical above to simply probe rush in the show-match I took time, effort, and money to organize.
I think there may just be cultural differences here, as some people believe the purpose of this tournament is solely to crown a winner, and anything outside that purpose is meaningless, whereas others believe that playing the scheduled games themselves are the value to the tournament, not just determining the winner.
|
On December 15 2011 05:55 thatsundowner wrote: I think Doa actually made a really good point about why that game may have been played. The Blizzard cup is a tournament, sure, but it's mostly wrapped around a celebration of the past year of Starcraft. What with the awards going out at the finals, with a lot of major tournament winners being invited. It's all for the fans, and a Naniwa vs Nestea rematch is something a lot of people want to see. For Naniwa no matter how badly he doesn't want to play that game at worst he gets a game of practice against the best zerg in the world, but he decided to take his ball and go home
If the naniwa vs nestea game was that big and such a crowd draw, then they shouldn't have held it at such an awkward time in the tournament. The blizzard cup may be a "celebration of esports" but it is still a tournament with a prize pool and a set of rules. Nobody is saying what naniwa did is good which is what alot of posters are misunderstanding. We all think nani is an idiot for doing it, but we also think GOM is completely wrong for bending their very vague ruleset to punish a player who had no clue it was even against the rules.
Not even considering that the mlg/gom partnership is a legal contract and gom likely doesnt even have the right to take away the seed.
|
On December 15 2011 05:55 thatsundowner wrote: I think Doa actually made a really good point about why that game may have been played. The Blizzard cup is a tournament, sure, but it's mostly wrapped around a celebration of the past year of Starcraft. What with the awards going out at the finals, with a lot of major tournament winners being invited. It's all for the fans, and a Naniwa vs Nestea rematch is something a lot of people want to see. For Naniwa no matter how badly he doesn't want to play that game at worst he gets a game of practice against the best zerg in the world, but he decided to take his ball and go home
Exactly this. I stayed up all night to catch Naniwa vs Nestea rematch given their history together. What I got was a professional being on tilt (due to previous games) then ultimately being unprofessional doing a probe rush that has 0% of winning.
|
Although Naniwa didn't break any rules, he should really work on his professionalism. He is a progamer, not some amateur. He plays on the big stage live in front of thousands of fans and the least he can do is provide some showmanship. I know the game is meaningless, but at least do some wacky build cheese or something. Cannon rush? Proxy gates? Swtich race to Random? (is that even allowed?)
|
On December 15 2011 06:07 ilikeredheads wrote: Although Naniwa didn't break any rules, he should really work on his professionalism. He is a progamer, not some amateur. He plays on the big stage live in front of thousands of fans and the least he can do is provide some showmanship. I know the game is meaningless, but at least do some wacky build cheese or something. Cannon rush? Proxy gates? Swtich race to Random? (is that even allowed?)
We don't know that he didn't break any rules. The Blizzard Cup isn't a regular GSL, I don't think the regular rules apply word for word. There's probably a lot more that we don't necessarily know about when it comes to ruleset. It could be likely due to the nature of the event that "all games will be played" was in there
|
On December 15 2011 06:25 thatsundowner wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 06:07 ilikeredheads wrote: Although Naniwa didn't break any rules, he should really work on his professionalism. He is a progamer, not some amateur. He plays on the big stage live in front of thousands of fans and the least he can do is provide some showmanship. I know the game is meaningless, but at least do some wacky build cheese or something. Cannon rush? Proxy gates? Swtich race to Random? (is that even allowed?)
We don't know that he didn't break any rules. The Blizzard Cup isn't a regular GSL, I don't think the regular rules apply word for word. There's probably a lot more that we don't necessarily know about when it comes to ruleset. It could be likely due to the nature of the event that "all games will be played" was in there
I think this was more of an "exhibition tournament" than anything else.
|
Nani should have just done some 4-gate allin, or rather a strat that isn't so obviously throwing the game, so silly of him.
|
I think we should all create a blog just to give our opinions separately. There's only something like 4 threads on this.
|
i feel like i agree with naniwas standpoint but it seems the real problem lies in the system of communication and organisation in these tournaments and relates to what artosis was talking in a recent state of the game
|
|
|
|