Please note the following before reading this commentary: 1) While it may not be possible to truly remove all bias when commenting on an opposing team or its player(s), I don't feel that my stance here has been motivated by any pro-EG sentiment. This is an objective commentary from someone with as much eSports-related business experience as anyone in the industry, and someone who's both personally and professionally invested in the long-term success of eSports.
2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa.
3) This commentary will focus more on NaNiWa's actions themselves than GOM's subsequent decision to punish him by removing him from Code S. The relatively small amount of attention paid to GOM's decision is intentional; I want to discuss the NaNiwa/NesTea incident itself, without being distracted by separate (albeit related) events.
--
Okay, here goes By now, we're all aware of what happened between NaNiWa and NesTea in the GOM.TV Blizzard Cup. At the time of their match, both players were 0-3 in their group, both were eliminated from further contention, and as such, the result of the match itself had no tangible effect on the rest of the tournament. NaNi then probe rushed NesTea, and the eSports world exploded.
After reviewing many, many discussion threads on TL and Reddit, as well as other community commentaries, the public sentiment seems to be somewhere between 65/35 and 70/30 in disapproval of NaNiwa's actions. Those against his decision to probe rush usually cite reasons related to sportsmanship, honor, and respect for the game. Those sympathizing with NaNi (including, understandably, many pro players) tend to place the blame on GOM for utilizing a tournament format which allows for meaningless matches. I'm sure this summary is a bit of an oversimplification, but it seems to be the general spectrum of public opinion.
I myself find NaNi's actions completely unacceptable, but for a very different reason than I believe has been popularly expressed. I also find GOM's decision to punish NaNi to be completely reasonable (although I acknowledge that there were other, less extreme, options for how to do so). In any case, as mentioned above, I don't really have a firm opinion on the punishment itself - other than the fact that I believe the situation did warrant some kind of punishment - nor do I wish to spend any more time addressing that subject here. What I'd like to do in this blog is plead my case for why NaNi's actions were completely unacceptable, not only to the 30-35% of the community blaming GOM for the incident, but also to the other 60-65% of the community who agree that NaNi's actions were unacceptable, but for reasons different from mine.
Let me preface my further comments by saying that this is not a personal attack (or, really, an attack of any kind) on NaNiWa, Quantic, or its CEO, Mark Ferraz. I've met both NaNi and Mark in person many times, and I've only experienced the utmost professionalism from them in all of our face-to-face interactions. Actually, this commentary isn't really about NaNiwa, or Quantic, or Mark, at all. It's about a player making a particular decision, and why that decision is not acceptable.
--
As most of you know, IdrA is one of my team's most high-profile players. He's also been involved in some of the more controversial moments in SC2 history (most notably, his early GG's against MMA and HuK). Now, as of late, these kinds of occurrences are much less frequent for Greg - to his credit, he has improved that aspect of his play tremendously. But, back when leaving the game too early was a both common and serious problem for IdrA, people (both fans and community pillars alike) would often ask, "What, exactly, is EG's stance on this? Are they trying to prevent it from happening? Are they talking to IdrA about it? If not, when are they going to step in and do something about it?" The reality is that we really didn't want to intervene, for the most part. Even after the storied games against HuK and MMA, we really didn't say much, other than to be supportive of Greg and let him know that we were there for him. We approached the situation this way for a very long time because we felt that it was Greg's problem to solve (and, to his credit, he eventually did for the most part solve it). However, after taking a passive approach for almost a year, something happened that we felt required our direct intervention.
Last September, in TL Open #22, IdrA faced Nerchio in the bo3 Semifinals. After dropping the first map to some surprise baneling pressure from Nerchio, Greg's frustration boiled over, and he forfeited the second game of the bo3, giving Nerchio the free win and a spot in the finals. This was, frankly, completely unacceptable. And I expressed this point to Greg without any sugar-coating. Out of the many early GG- and bad manner-related IdrA moments that have taken place during his tenure on EG, this was the first time I felt that I needed to step in and say something. And as of now, it's still the only time I've tapped Greg on the shoulder.
--
There are (for the most part) three kinds of situations in which players usually throw matches, or don't put forth maximum effort. There's Scenario A, in which throwing the match would be in the player's own best interests (example: Stephano vs. BratOK at Assembly Summer 2011, in which both players did their best to the lose the match because they each wanted to avoid facing Sen in bracket play). There's Scenario B, in which the match is meaningless for the player himself, but has meaning for his opponent and/or a third-party (example: IdrA vs. White-Ra at the IPL3 Finals, in which IdrA forfeited because he had already qualified for bracket play - which was seeded randomly - and wanted to get some rest). And then, there's Scenario C, in which the match is truly meaningless, and throwing it would be due purely to the fact that the player (for whatever reason) doesn't put forth the time and effort required to play for real (example: NaNi's probe rush vs. NesTea, which sparked all of the recent community discussion and commentary, including this blog).
Scenarios A, B, and C all happen, regularly, in professional sports. At the end of almost every regular season in leagues like the NFL, NBA, NHL and Major League Baseball, there are teams that have the opportunity to determine their first-round playoff opponent, or to prevent a certain team from qualifying for the playoffs, by tanking a couple of games (Scenario A). And, during absolutely every regular season in such leagues, there are teams who are eliminated from playoff contention well before the season is over, but still have to play out their schedules in full - including games against other teams who are still in the playoff hunt (Scenario B). And, lastly, also every regular season in such leagues, there are games late in the schedule between teams who have both already been eliminated from playoff contention (Scenario C).
Now, to be fair, there's a difference between throwing a match, and not putting forth maximum effort, and just not playing well - and that difference is subject to a massive gray area. Professional sports teams often bench their best players in the final game of the regular season, if they've already made the playoffs and their playoff opponent has already been determined. Does that mean that they're throwing the game? Most would say, no. But, what about a sports team that does have something to gain by losing its last game of the season, and starts its best players, but they all happen to have off days? Did the team throw the match? Did the players not try as hard as they could've? Or did the the team try hard, but just not play well? That's a much more complex question, with no uniform answer.
Additionally, while most would agree that flat out throwing a match isn't a good thing, things get much murkier when the subject shifts to effort and passion. Is it necessarily unacceptable, dishonorable or disrespectful to the sport for a team or player to not put forth maximum effort, every game or match? Again, that's a complicated question, and it has no blanket answer. For a highly-paid player or team that's phoning it in on a regular basis, many would say the answer is yes. But, if two last-place MLB teams are facing off on the last day of the regular season, should both sides really be expected to play their hearts out? Many would say, no.
--
The bottom line is that players and teams - in all professional sports - regularly find themselves in Scenarios A, B, and C. And they correspondingly - in all professional sports - throw matches; don't try their hardest on every occasion; and play poorly at convenient times. Furthermore, in most of these situations, it's not even possible to discern which of those three (or what combination thereof) is truly the case - let alone to try and determine, with any level of certainty, whether or not what's happened is unacceptable, or dishonorable, or disrespectful to the sport and its community. Essentially, for the vast majority of situations like these, there are two massive layers of subjectivity standing in the way of any objective conclusion or analysis. That's why you very rarely see league officials involve themselves in such matters.
But if that's the case, then what's the point of this very, very long - sorry... it's just my style - write-up? I stated at the beginning of this blog that NaNiwa's decision to probe rush NesTea was absolutely unacceptable; that I believe everyone in our community should view it as unacceptable; and that I support GOM's decision to levy punishment on NaNi (the severity of the punishment is a different subject altogether). Yet, I've basically used the past five paragraphs to make the argument that... well... that it's not really possible to put together a definitive argument about situations like this one; that they're all just part of professional sports.
So, what's my point?
My point is that in all of the scenarios, examples, and hypotheticals I've outlined above, the player or team - at the very least - still did its job, put on a show for the spectators, and delivered a quality product to its respective league. All of them, of course, except for the one we're all so feverishly discussing.
--
Direct, community-to-industry revenue is the single, most important aspect of both the short- and long-term stability and growth of eSports. The StarCraft 2 community's willingness and enthusiasm to support its teams, players, and tournaments - by watching ads on their streams, buying their merchandise, and purchasing their subscriptions and season passes - has contributed, more than any other factor, to the amazing growth we've seen over the past year and a half. The term "ecosystem" is a buzzword as of late for those of us on the business side of the industry, because we all recognize the fact that in order for eSports to keep growing and find stability, the industry needs to become more self-sustaining, and less reliant on outside income, like corporate sponsorships.
In line with this, selling subscriptions and season passes is, obviously, crucially important to GOM.TV's business model. And ultimately, the quality of their product is defined by the entertainment value of their matches. So, when one of the world's most famous players, in an exciting grudge match (regardless of the players' records in their group), decides to probe rush in front of thousands upon thousands of spectators, many of whom are paying subscribers, he's single-handedly denying GOM a quality product to deliver to its consumer base. That is, simply, unacceptable. It is, objectively, bad for everyone who cares about eSports.
--
Now, I actually find nothing wrong with the fact that NaNi didn't want (or didn't have the mental energy, depending on what you believe) to put forth his best effort against NesTea in the Blizzard Cup. Given some of the names on EG's roster, I'd be a pretty massive hypocrite if I criticized NaNiwa's actions on that basis. With EG's players, I'm actually very understanding of the fact that they have a limited amount of mental energy, and that they're constantly working to improve their own mental toughness. However, no matter how tired or frustrated you are, there's absolutely no excuse for not giving the spectators and fans what they showed up for. This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
We don't know whether NaNi was exhausted, or frustrated, or unmotivated, or just didn't care about winning the game (for whatever reason). But, frankly, we don't need to; his actions were absolutely unacceptable, regardless of their reasoning. If he wasn't feeling up to putting forth maximum effort (again, for whatever reason), he could've just done a two-base all-in, or four-gated, or executed one of many other strategies that would've almost certainly ended the game in ten minutes or less.
I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers. What NaNiwa did was basically akin to a last-place MLB team, during its final game of the season, intentionally striking out in every at bat. Just imagine what would happen in that situation: fans would ask for their money back; advertising contracts would be violated; and the league would certainly take action against the team and its players - just like GOM did with NaNi - in order to protect its product.
For those of you who, after reading this, agree that NaNi's actions were unacceptable, but still blame GOM for utilizing a format which allows for inconsequential matches, I would ask you to consider holding players to higher standards of professionalism; and to also consider the fact that it's not GOM's responsibility to cater their format solely to suit players. GOM's job (as is the case with any professional sports league) is to provide a quality product to its viewers, while providing its competitors with fair, reasonable playing conditions, and the Blizzard Cup's format balanced these factors acceptably. Additionally, I would also point out the fact that, as illustrated above, every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist.
Ultimately, in order for eSports to be successful, whether short-term or long-term, players, teams, and tournaments must each pull their weight appropriately. Without all parties contributing, the industry cannot produce a quality product for our fans and community. And without a quality product being produced, there's no community-to-industry revenue, and there's no self-sustaining ecosystem.
Some of you may see my comments as an overreaction, or as blowing things out of proportion - does one probe rush really warrant all of this text? I think so, and I believe that my comments hold an appropriate amount of concern. NaNiwa is one of the most famous players in all of StarCraft 2. He receives a significant salary from his professional team. The tournament in which he was competing was run by the world's most prestigious StarCraft 2 league, whose audience contains a greater percentage of paying subscribers than any other league. But, even with everyone around him meeting their respective obligations - with his team supporting him; with the league providing his playing field and broadcasting his match; and with the community watching advertisements and purchasing subscriptions - the system won't work unless NaNi also meets his obligations.
Against NesTea, NaNiwa didn't do his part. That's why I find his actions to be unacceptable. And that's why you should, too.
NaNi, you're an incredible player, with thousands upon thousands of fans who just want to see you play. Next time, play.
Alex Garfield CEO, Evil Geniuses @ottersareneat on Twitter
*For those of you eager to pull out the pitchforks, the IPL3/White-Ra situation is quite different; at the time of IdrA's match against White-Ra, IPL3 was already behind schedule, and didn't even have time to broadcast all of its remaining group play matches.
Insightful post, I am glad that you approach the situation and state how it is wrong on multiple levels. Even more so I am glad that you pointed out a similar situation and how you directly stepped in. Its always interesting to see what the business minds of e sports think rather than the continual pitchfork mob we see on tl and reddit. Also, the I am glad esports, SC2 in particular is approaching the point where we can look to other sports leagues and say that they would act the same way and the same situation. 2012 is looking good. Thanks for your time and your view.
I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
very true statements there. Can't really argue with the logic either. I've agreed that NaNiwa should not have done that from the beginning. Pure and simple, if people didn't enjoy watching the matches, there would be no market for these tournaments and leagues. Denying fans enjoyable games is directly hindering eSports. boom. ...and seriously tho, a NaNiwa vs Nestea match?! I would watch 100 of those!
I see can see your point. For me tho i didnt mind this match cus it was meaningless. Acctuly i got my self a good laught cus it was so unexpected. Gj nani, it gave some personality and i enjoyed that.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Well NaNiwa vs Nestea MATTERS for pro-gamers and many fans. NaNiwa also mentioned later that the match against wasn't meaningless as he previously thought. GomTV is doing their job by broadcasting the game that matters.
I don't mean this in a facetious way or saying that you or your team are being hypocritical, because I do agree with your overarching point of your perspective, but if Naniwa should have just played the meaningless match, then what does it mean when your guys new Dota team recently, at what is considered one of the most prestigious tournaments in the world in SMM (no matter how poorly run the event ended up being this year), chose to forfeit out of matches that DID have a meaning, by boycotting their losers bracket matches and any potential future that they have with the event? There was never really any official statement or release from management of EG following the SMM event, and more than anything I'm just interested in what your comments are on THAT situation, of giving up instead of fighting the fight. DID you guys talk to them and give them the talk that what they did was unacceptable, a la what you did for Idra following his forfeiting of Game 2 vs Nerchio?
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Up/down matches being skipped isn't a precedent for this, the Blizzard cup from the start was billed as a more show-y tournament than a regular GSL. It's a celebration of the past year of e-sports, inviting major tournament winners from throughout the year to play a short tournament as a cap to it all off.
Well said, I must admit that I really agree with you. Furthermore your post is actually insightful and reasonable, and let me tell you that nowadays, this kind of posts is getting scarce.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Up/down matches being skipped isn't a precedent for this, the Blizzard cup from the start was billed as a more show-y tournament than a regular GSL. It's a celebration of the past year of e-sports, inviting major tournament winners from throughout the year to play a short tournament as a cap to it all off.
This is why every game matters. Blizzard Cup isn't about winning and earn prize, it's all about showing their skills.
NaNiwa enters game, forfeits. IdrA doesn't enter game, forfeits. How about his forfeits at MLG Providence against Haypro? I fail to see the difference.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Well NaNiwa vs Nestea MATTERS for pro-gamers and many fans. NaNiwa also mentioned later that the match against wasn't meaningless as he previously thought. GomTV is doing their job by broadcasting the game that matters.
I don't want to drag this topic off on a tangent so I'll try to keep this short. This is the type of things where some people will think one way, and others will think another. To me the match doesn't effect the progression of the tournament, so no longer matters, for other people, any chance to watch Nestea vs Naniwa is important even if nothing but "honour" is on the line, so it does matter. Its just a situation the ideal tournament format will avoid, you want the players to be trying their best, not half assing it, like I said in my post, if this format is used again, the exact same situation will re-occur sooner or later, it is inevitable, the player won't do something as blatant as what Naniwa did, but it will be the same.
On December 15 2011 18:25 chadissilent wrote: NaNiwa enters game, forfeits. IdrA doesn't enter game, forfeits. How about his forfeits at MLG Providence against Haypro? I fail to see the difference.
Then maybe you should actually read the article instead of skimming through it.
Thank you for the post captured my thoughts exactly. It felt as if the necessary issues and social conundrums with regards to this incident were covered wonderfully. Though it may look tl;dr'ish, it certainly did not seem verbose, as every word contributed the general stance we should be taking towards nani and gomtv.
Absolutely yes. It is your JOB as a pro gamer to entertain the fans. It is your GOAL to win championships for yourself. If you do not complete your goals in winning, but do your job in entertaining the fans, then you will always be respected as a pro gamer regardless of personal success.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Did you read the OP? Every sports league has games played and televised that don't matter. People even pay and show up in person to watch games that don't matter. That is really fucked up to deprive a player the opportunity to show their ability just because they no longer can advance in the tournament. Not everyone is Naniwa, many players would jump at the chance to be able to show their skills against Nestea to thousands of fans even if they were playing for beans.
After reviewing many, many discussion threads on TL and Reddit, as well as other community commentaries, the public sentiment seems to be somewhere between 65/35 and 70/30 in disapproval of NaNiwa's actions
I think you have to see things from two ways. Yes, there is likely a majority that thinks that what Naniwa did was wrong - but what I've read on forums (Reddit/TL/Local/GOMTV) there is also pretty much a majority that thinks that GOMTVs punishment was too harsh.
I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers. What NaNiwa did was basically akin to a last-place MLB team, during its final game of the season, intentionally striking out in every at bat. Just imagine what would happen in that situation: fans would ask for their money back; advertising contracts would be violated; and the league would certainly take action against the team and its players - just like GOM did with NaNi - in order to protect its product.
On different Swedish forums there are also a lot of people demanding the money back. I'm guessing that the GOMTV support mailbox is pretty full right now.
On December 15 2011 18:30 mojo_ca wrote: Absolutely yes. It is your JOB as a pro gamer to entertain the fans. It is your GOAL to win championships for yourself. If you do not complete your goals in winning, but do your job in entertaining the fans, then you will always be respected as a pro gamer regardless of personal success.
Eh not it's not their job to entertain the fans. That's like saying a hockey team have to play entertaining hockey instead of a boring clutch and grap style. It's up to league (Blizzard and gom/whatever organization) to create a game and rules that gives us an entertaining product. Of course you can argue it's in the players self interest to play enertaining (more fans = more money, more invites, etc) but it should by no means be obligatory as "their job."
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Did you read the OP? Every sports league has games played and televised that don't matter. People even pay and show up in person to watch games that don't matter. That is really fucked up to deprive a player the opportunity to show their ability just because they no longer can advance in the tournament. Not everyone is Naniwa, many players would jump at the chance to be able to show their skills against Nestea to thousands of fans even if they were playing for beans.
Sigh, yes I did read the OP, did you read my post? I mentioned I don't think certain details/analogies work, in this case I don't think the sports league televising irrelevant matches translates, group play in BO1 between five players is different than a single baseball match between two teams.
A pretty lucid and insightful post, and I do wish NaNiwa would have handled it differently, but there's one thing I can't get over... NaNiwa seemed to suggest in his interview that playing a game half-heartedly would've actually been MORE insulting to the fans than his probe rush. His probe rush was at least honest.
When you lie to someone it suggests that you don't respect them enough to think they can handle the truth. But being brutally honest shows you respect them enough to think that they CAN handle it. I can definitely imagine, at least in NaNiwa's mind, him thinking that just doing a probe rush was far more honest than going through a game his heart wasn't in. Would we rather watch a farce or feel comfortable next time we watch NaNiwa play KNOWING that he's playing his heart out?
GOM, and Korea in general, hell, most of the world in general, doesn't seem to see it that way though. But the truth can be uncomfortable.
I guess it goes back to the point that Tyler made on SotG, which is that NaNiwa just has a completely different mindset from most people. And like Day[9] suggested, it really comes down to a matter of eSports ethics. Are we comfortable setting down a guideline of ethics? I would suppose that as long as our ethics are aimed at helping the sport, then yeah. But I guess I just still feel like it's a bit of a murky situation. Ethics always is.
On December 15 2011 18:25 chadissilent wrote: NaNiwa enters game, forfeits. IdrA doesn't enter game, forfeits. How about his forfeits at MLG Providence against Haypro? I fail to see the difference.
You fail to see the difference because you cleary don't know, or haven't bothered to find out, that Idra didn't forfeit the match against Haypro, he was watching HuK play and didn't hear the call for their match. Please at least look into these things before using them to make a point.
So going with the A, B and C definitions, you think it is OK to throw matches when someone has something to gain from doing so, but not when nothing is on the line?
Furthermore, according to your suggestion for Naniwa to 4gate to end the game quickly, it is also OK to throw the game, as long as you are faking effort?
I agree that Naniwa's choice was pretty bad, considering Korean esports culture and the recent drama surrounding him as a player. I do not agree, however, that it warrants a punishment. A warning from his coach, like the one you gave Idra, sure! But consider that Idra incident. Should that have warranted his invite to TSL3 to be revoked? Because that is of a (nearly) similar magnitude
On December 15 2011 18:30 mojo_ca wrote: Absolutely yes. It is your JOB as a pro gamer to entertain the fans. It is your GOAL to win championships for yourself. If you do not complete your goals in winning, but do your job in entertaining the fans, then you will always be respected as a pro gamer regardless of personal success.
Eh not it's not their job to entertain the fans. That's like saying a hockey team have to play entertaining hockey instead of a boring clutch and grap style. It's up to league (Blizzard and gom/whatever organization) to create a game and rules that gives us an entertaining product. Of course you can argue it's in the players self interest to play enertaining (more fans = more money, more invites, etc) but it should by no means be obligatory as "their job."
Winning is a form of entertainment. If you win in an entertaining way, thats much better than winning in a boring way. Winning in a boring way is better than losing in an entertaining way, but losing in an entertaining way is MUCH MUCH MUCH better than losing in a boring way.
I would have thought that any reasonable competition and management team would have stepped in when Idra wrote Fuck Off to Huk in game chat live during a broadcasted MLG match earlier this year, something that you didnt mention here... - completely over and above anything that Naniwa did, but no mention of that in this article, so ill have to take this with a pinch of salt, but well written and I agree with it, thanks for taking the time to write this
feels kinda awkward for a owner of a competing team to tell naniwa that he has misbehaved. It's also a bit troubling since from your corporate point of view telling people to play sincerely because of the spectators, fans and so on but giving less attention to the fact that it was a pointless game. Many folks expected naniwa to put on a show, for good manner sake, but naniwa a competitor saw a non-competitive game. I think it comes down to peoples perception of what starctaft 2 has become because if you think it's a show you might think negative about naniwa but if you see it as a sport you might think the opposite.
I believe that your reason for viewing Nani's action as unacceptable doesn't necessarily differ from the people who share the view that players should act professionally and sportsmanlike, despite the context. However, you provide a detailed commentary as to WHY players should act in said ways, which nonetheless I completely agree with.
This is gaining so much momentum and creating so much discussion. It was just a game and everyone wants to comment. Nani should probe rush more often just to rock the boat. You're the pimp, NaNi!
On December 15 2011 18:43 Ponchey wrote: So going with the A, B and C definitions, you think it is OK to throw matches when someone has something to gain from doing so, but not when nothing is on the line?
Furthermore, according to your suggestion for Naniwa to 4gate to end the game quickly, it is also OK to throw the game, as long as you are faking effort?
I agree that Naniwa's choice was pretty bad, considering Korean esports culture and the recent drama surrounding him as a player. I do not agree, however, that it warrants a punishment. A warning from his coach, like the one you gave Idra, sure! But consider that Idra incident. Should that have warranted his invite to TSL3 to be revoked? Because that is of a (nearly) similar magnitude
He said nothing of the sort. He said that while throwing a match is something that could be seen as a strategy, trying to secure something (an advantageous place in a bracket or whatever), throwing a match when nothing is at stake is wrong because you'll gain nothing out of this move.
Personally I feel gratified that Naniwa didn't pretend to play at his best. I find this kind of treating fans like idiots and pretending to try as much more insulting.
In regards to sponsorship. Regardless of how GoM reacted it would have been a talking point and would only be good for GoM as any publicity is good publicity blah blah blah.
What I'm essentially saying is that I don't feel personally let down as a fan, in fact i respect Nani that much more. I found the fake game between Nestea and MvP at Blizzcon to be very disrespectful to the fans and I feel that was much worse. Almost like they were laughing at us.
I agree, but I also see the value in the drama. I haven't even matched the 3 games he actually played, rather just enjoyed the discussion around this forfeit game.
I actually have a blog written out myself that I still wanted to edit before posting, but it touches on so many of the same issues Alex addressed. This has my complete support.
The problem is that if Naniwa had played out the match and entirely fail because he was unable to perform his best, that then directly reflects on him as a player. The format of the tournament put Naniwa in a bad position, and then punished him when he responded.
On December 15 2011 18:43 Ponchey wrote: So going with the A, B and C definitions, you think it is OK to throw matches when someone has something to gain from doing so, but not when nothing is on the line?
Furthermore, according to your suggestion for Naniwa to 4gate to end the game quickly, it is also OK to throw the game, as long as you are faking effort?
I agree that Naniwa's choice was pretty bad, considering Korean esports culture and the recent drama surrounding him as a player. I do not agree, however, that it warrants a punishment. A warning from his coach, like the one you gave Idra, sure! But consider that Idra incident. Should that have warranted his invite to TSL3 to be revoked? Because that is of a (nearly) similar magnitude
He said nothing of the sort. He said that while throwing a match is something that could be seen as a strategy, trying to secure something (an advantageous place in a bracket or whatever), throwing a match when nothing is at stake is wrong because you'll gain nothing out of this move.
Thank you for the well written article. It's rare that I'd read that much text on any forum, even TL, but it was very insightful and well written.
I would like to especially thank you for talking about the Idra v Nerchio forfeit, it had nagged me for a while, and I'm glad to see you have a clear position on it. Reassuring that I can wholeheartedly support EG.
To all those saying that it's the tournament that forced it, I'd like to point out the statistics Day9 cited about Idra: he loses most sets where he loses the first game - it's hard to win after a loss, but it's part of the game. Anyone who listened to Lo3 yesterday knows Naniwa is now the first to tell you that it would be right to still try to play one's heart out in that situation.
OK. For a start- why would EG feel the need to put their oar into the water regarding this situation? We dont need further gossip or talk on an incredibly obvious subject.
EG's view is very fair and standard, and i agree 99%.
Though say we were to talk about professionalism... when EG's (and many, many other teams) top players regularly go on stream and repeatedly abuse their opposition, when they sit there and call almost every opponent a 'retard'... sure that must be seen as totally unprofessional and down right rude?
Throwing stones. Glass house. E-sports is young and it will change massively in the next few years. I believe people are overreacting to what nani did. It was wrong and disrespectful, but it was also the first time he has done something like this.
Very good post, but I'm still disgusted by gom's unprofessional handling of the situation, making things up and lying about things is not the way to go when you punish someone for being unprofessional
On December 15 2011 18:46 McgKrypton wrote: What i don't understand is that if Naniwa did a 4-gate (to end the match at 6-7min ingame lose or win) no-one would have complained.
True. Naniwa was caught in a lose/lose situation and I don't see why a half-assed attempt would be so much better than what he did. Sure he could have pulled off his Nestea-tailored-supergosu-strategy in a serious attempt to win, but doing that in a game that didn't matter at all is just stupid. Like..really stupid. I don't want any player to pay that prize just for our "entertainment". And c'mon, you have to admit that a probe rush at this level is pretty entertaining (in a hilarious way), at least more so than the more "suited" fake game as mentioned.
On December 15 2011 19:07 Huckleuro wrote: OK. For a start- why would EG feel the need to put their oar into the water regarding this situation? We dont need further gossip or talk on an incredibly obvious subject.
EG's view is very fair and standard, and i agree 100%.
Though say we were to talk about professionalism... when EG's (and many, many other teams) top players regularly go on stream and repeatedly abuse their opposition, when they sit there and call almost every opponent a 'retard'... sure that must be seen as totally unprofessional and down right rude?
Throwing stones. Glass house. E-sports is young and it will change massively in the next few years. I believe people are overreacting to what nani did. It was wrong and disrespectful, but it was also the first time hes done it.
Nononono. Please don't do this. I've had people say this to me as well. However if you want teams to be silent (due to their relationship with Quantic), tournaments to be silent (due to their relationship with GOM), and players to be silent (due to their relationship with Naniwa) you are essentially saying all the big spokespeople in this scene cannot speak out against actions. This is incredibly detrimental to the scene. Important people in this industry do need to speak out when something serious happens. The fact that so many don't just to avoid the heat is actually a major issue in Esports.
On December 15 2011 18:59 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: I actually have a blog written out myself that I still wanted to edit before posting, but it touches on so many of the same issues Alex addressed. This has my complete support.
Cool to hear, I'm sure it'll be great when it comes out but I want to say that Alex's blog post really articulates my thoughts (and what I was trying to express in the "LR") perfectly.
Also, thanks for writing these opinions, its always great to be able to read these kind of opinion pieces from some of the great E-sport minds who aren't players. (The FXOboss one is really good too.)
I agree with mostly everything you wrote, as did Naniwa if you actually watched him with djwheat and sirscoots last night. He admitted he was in the wrong and he apologized. So I don't really see the need for this blog post, but whatever..
Anyways, I still think the situation was poorly handled by GOMTV. There was no official statement until much later and no official translation of what was said yesterday by mr chae. The translation that was out, I'm still not sure whether or not it was accurate or not, but that certainly enraged people aswell. Most of the outrage from people like me who sided with naniwa on the matter, felt that a lot of players (including naniwa himself) has gotten away with much worse things in other tournaments, and were completely surprised and confused by the anger towards him after the probe rush and the harsh punishment he received.
We need consistency from all major tournaments in these matters, and clear and precise rules of what is acceptable behaviour and what is not.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Well NaNiwa vs Nestea MATTERS for pro-gamers and many fans. NaNiwa also mentioned later that the match against wasn't meaningless as he previously thought. GomTV is doing their job by broadcasting the game that matters.
I don't want to drag this topic off on a tangent so I'll try to keep this short. This is the type of things where some people will think one way, and others will think another. To me the match doesn't effect the progression of the tournament, so no longer matters, for other people, any chance to watch Nestea vs Naniwa is important even if nothing but "honour" is on the line, so it does matter. Its just a situation the ideal tournament format will avoid, you want the players to be trying their best, not half assing it, like I said in my post, if this format is used again, the exact same situation will re-occur sooner or later, it is inevitable, the player won't do something as blatant as what Naniwa did, but it will be the same.
pretty much this. actually officialy the game did NOT matter.
for me it doesn't matter. and i hate to see progamers play if i have the feeling they don't play real - so i don't want to see this games at all. Nobody can expect that a progamers does his best, if there is nothing on the line. It's psychological very unplausibly that someone actually is able to do his best in such a situation. Some eventually are able some will never be able - you can't blame them. It is just normal.
so if i can't be sure they are giving his best, i would rather not see this game.
and aside from that it even made this silly game more interesting cause it wasn't expected and i was thankful for a short game (because it didn't matter anyway ).
in terms of entertainment value it was the best thing that could have happened.
Some of you seem to live in some delusional world of so called 'honesty' - doing whatever you think is right, without considering other people. I support Alex's statement and hope that Naniwa will act differently next time. And I hope GOM's decision will scare off other players from doing things like Naniwa. At home on ladder you can probe/scv/drone rush all day long, but during a televised match just show some sportsmanship and respect for sponsors and viewers. Whether the match matters or not.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Well NaNiwa vs Nestea MATTERS for pro-gamers and many fans. NaNiwa also mentioned later that the match against wasn't meaningless as he previously thought. GomTV is doing their job by broadcasting the game that matters.
I don't want to drag this topic off on a tangent so I'll try to keep this short. This is the type of things where some people will think one way, and others will think another. To me the match doesn't effect the progression of the tournament, so no longer matters, for other people, any chance to watch Nestea vs Naniwa is important even if nothing but "honour" is on the line, so it does matter. Its just a situation the ideal tournament format will avoid, you want the players to be trying their best, not half assing it, like I said in my post, if this format is used again, the exact same situation will re-occur sooner or later, it is inevitable, the player won't do something as blatant as what Naniwa did, but it will be the same.
pretty much this. actually officialy the game did NOT matter.
for me it doesn't matter. and i hate to see progamers play if i have the feeling they don't play real - so i don't want to see this games at all. Nobody can expect that a progamers does his best, if there is nothing on the line. It's psychological very unplausibly that someone actually is able to do his best in such a situation. Some eventually are able some will never be able - you can't blame them. It is just normal.
so if i can't be sure they are giving his best, i would rather not see this game.
and aside from that it even made this silly game more interesting cause it wasn't expected and i was thankful for a short game (because it didn't matter anyway ).
in terms of entertainment value it was the best thing that could have happened.
I disagree, the game does matter.
Naniwa agreed to the format and he agreed to compete with.. oh... just the top players of 2011 in SC2's most prestigious tournament organizer. Therefore, Naniwa has an obligation to the fans, to his team, and to the tournament organizers to play it out (after all they're all putting time and/or money to see him succeed.)
At the end of the day, the game does matter or it wouldn't have caused this community backlash. It wouldn't have led to his candidacy for Code S being revoked. The posters and fans that continue to defend Naniwa, know this, you're not doing him any favors. In fact Naniwa himself (along with other notable figures in the sc2 world) have agreed that this situation will only make him better if he learns from it.
yeh but the differnece is you dont go to watch a MLB game and watch only one player... hell if of all the football games ive watched my bets player has sucked many timesand I sure as hellwont getmymoney back for that one guy performing bad..
Atend of day the is plenty of times where teams plays hti once relgegated hell ive taken throwing in in football and been thelast guy on the line when the other team goes and scores... and had teammates walking back when they broke... happens all the time people give up... how amny times even man u and Arsenal have we seen head drops and big scores posted as generally they just dont care... it happens in every sport and in a situation like this you can expect nani or Nestea to actually try(no one knows how Nestea would of played that game)
The minor parts I disagree with, is that I still feel that this is Naniwa, and is how Naniwa functions. His apology however, gives it another dimensions as well.. And that this could have been spun to benefit Naniwa vs Nestea, and even Korean play.
Very well written, and not long at all considering the content
Has anyone considered that actions like this very one of naniwa ARE actually better entertainment than a bad game he would have lost to nestea? If, as you suggest alex, his job is to entertain, rather than win - he did a pretty good job. Its like people getting into a fight in ice hockey, or rushing off from the stadium when you are not selected to play for your team (as happened in soccer a couple of times).
People need to calm down about the "professionalism" they want so bad in esports. Dont get me wrong. A while ago I was very active in the WC3 progaming community, i also played my part in building this phenomenon. But I do not agree with the tendency these days to blame any sort of emotional over-reaction as damaging esports. Do you remember BroodWar, when people were craving for any Korean progamer to show some happiness when he won a game, or be openly upset about a loss?
What I'm saying is, in order for our "show" to be entertaining emotions are VERY important. If this was all just about best manners and clean game shows, we might watch the same 3 people battle it out every night. But what we really want, and what -to my mind- has brought sc2 to where it is today, is watching HUMANS trying hard, feeling with them, be angry when they disappoint us, be happy when our favorites win, witness upsets and domination. And therefore, Nani didnt damage esports - he actually might have helped it, because it was an honest, human, emotional, overreaction. And I liked it.
I'm glad you brought up this point Alex, personally I don't think Naniwa's actions were that bad, but if someone was to complain about his actions the reason you have put forward is the only one that I consider truly acceptable.
What I think it comes down to is whether the spectators would enjoy seeing two players with not much to play for play a game. I wouldn't have wanted to see that, although I can see that some people might have. To these people I ask, would you have been satisfied as a spectator if Naniwa had executed a standard 4 gate and Nestea had held it and then Naniwa had GG'd or slowly died, or maybe if he had proxied 2 gateways? That is probably the sort of game we'd have seen had Naniwa not pulled his probes and is normally the sort of game we usually see from a Protoss in that situation.
You brought up Idra's forfeit against WhiteRa, which was a game I had forgotten about. The general consensus by most people, including me, seemed to be that it was ok, because Idra would have probably not played very well in those games, although in that case Idra forfeited in order to be better rested in the same way a sports team might rest their best players in a league game in order to have a stronger team for a separate tournament they have a chance of winning.
Cool post Alex, nothing more to say about that, all though I think you are overreacting quite a bit and are trying to make a bigger scene out of it, then it already is.
Quite frankly, I think it's unprofessional of you to end the post the what happened at IPL3. These are two quite different situations.
I do agree with some of what you red but not all. I think it is GOM's responsibility to make and/ or have a format that is efficient and do not allow for inconvenient matches such as this one (NaNiwa vs NesTea). The format of the GSL Blizzard Cup is absolutely absurd and not fair for the players, which should be their biggest focus. If the players didn't wanna play in GSL tournament, the wouldn't have a show or any money to put up a show that thousands of people could see and follow.
I want you to consider that and i don't know if you saw the last SotG of year or not, but check Tyler's opinion out, I think he has a good point and perspective on the matter, since he also have some problems, he has insight into what could have gone trough NaNi's head at time.
But I would also say that I think it's cool that you voice your opinion of this case, but making accusations towards (That's what I think you did in your post) and flaming NaNiwa that hard, is a waste of good time, you could have used otherwise, taking in consideration of your posting you have in EG. - a smaller post could have done it, I don't care if it's your style or not, I all most didn't wanna read it, it is a bit bias in my opinion. But none the less, I think it's cool you voice your opinion.
That it's all I have to say and now, all of you guys can say what you want about my post or me as a person, but i don't really care about it. Honesty is always the best and that is what i prefer to stick by no matter what situation in might be.
I remember Idra 6 pooling vs MC on xelnaga caverns in game 2 of their bo3, after being invited and paid every expenses by Dreamhack. He built a building so I guess he put a good show for the fans :D
Thank you for this quite enlightening post from the perspective of a team owner. I too was - on from the beginning - of the opinion that Naniwa deserved to be punished (just disagreeing with the particular punishment GOM went for). Regarding the need to play meaningless games in a tournament situation, however, I have to disagree:
The comparision with professional -offline- sports is too general. You need to further differentiate between League and Tournament systems. In the case of a league system matches and broadcasting time are planned beforehand (i.e. before knowing if a specific game will be meaningless at the end of a season). In those cases all games will be played no matter if they are important or not.
On the other hand, with a tournament system at hand, meaningless games are hardly ever played out. Usually (think olympics or soccer world cups) there will only be a petite finale besides the overall finale. The reasoning behind that is that without at least 3rd place left to fight for and after an exhausting tournament, there wouldn t be interesting games, simply because u cannot force a competition without something to compete for - even in professional sports.
So I think we shouldn't ask too much of a pro gamer (esp considering their average age), at the very least not ask more of them then we would of professional offline athletes.
Which then brings me to one final point I really, really want to bring forward especially after this statement:
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote:
As most of you know, IdrA is one of my team's most high-profile players. He's also been involved in some of the more controversial moments in SC2 history (most notably, his early GG's against MMA and HuK). Now, as of late, these kinds of occurrences are much less frequent for Greg - to his credit, he has improved that aspect of his play tremendously. But, back when leaving the game too early was a both common and serious problem for IdrA, people (both fans and community pillars alike) would often ask, "What, exactly, is EG's stance on this? Are they trying to prevent it from happening? Are they talking to IdrA about it? If not, when are they going to step in and do something about it?" The reality is that we really didn't want to intervene, for the most part. Even after the storied games against HuK and MMA, we really didn't say much, other than to be supportive of Greg and let him know that we were there for him. We approached the situation this way for a very long time because we felt that it was Greg's problem to solve (and, to his credit, he eventually did for the most part solve it). However, after taking a passive approach for almost a year, something happened that we felt required our direct intervention.
Last September, in TL Open #22, IdrA faced Nerchio in the bo3 Semifinals. After dropping the first map to some surprise baneling pressure from Nerchio, Greg's frustration boiled over, and he forfeited the second game of the bo3, giving Nerchio the free win and a spot in the finals. This was, frankly, completely unacceptable. And I expressed this point to Greg without any sugar-coating. Out of the many early GG- and bad manner-related IdrA moments that have taken place during his tenure on EG, this was the first time I felt that I needed to step in and say something. And as of now, it's still the only time I've tapped Greg on the shoulder.
Entertaining fans and viewers sure is very important in sports, yet I think there are limits to what you can tolerate if you want to further professionalism in that sport - all the more if the sport at hand is a young one struggling for acceptance:
When Idra played Mana in the IPL he called the game a "fucking joke" but more importantly Mana a " fucking idiot"
Up to today I cannot believe that this did not have a larger impact on the scene. Why wasn't Idra tapped on the shoulder for that one? Why wasn't there a public apology? This is not meant to be some kind of idra-bashing but rather an expression of my utter bafflement how this could be acceptable on a pro level. Entertaining the fans (i am thinking the bad boy factor here) at all costs is not professional but a mere reduction of professionalsim to the extend it creates revenue. That is acceptable (and only logical) if we see sc2 as mere entertainment programme like for example Big Brother. If one wants to speak of eSports though, professionalsim requires more than that.
I'm sorry but due to your position in the community I can't take you seriously whatsoever. Of course you're going to be chastising Naniwa and agreeing with GOM. If we don't allow people to display their emotions and personality like this in matches that don't matter we lose a lot of our storylines. GOM should just have taken all the publicity (which did not reflect negatively on them until their ridiculous decisions) and look forward to everyone being incredibly excited to watch Naniwa in Code S next season because of the Blizzard Cup results.
All that should matter is that Naniwa is still by far the best foreigner and GOM should have felt lucky to have him in Code S next season given all the drama and hype that surrounded him especially after the probe rush.
While you make good points, i still believe a quality product will not have meaningless matches. When you watch an all star game, your expecting silly/shenanigans/not trying to occur. That's not the case when you tune into a professional level tournament with money on the line and what not.
What's funny is if naniwa just 4 gated, no one would say anything. Throwing games will happen. It's all about how blatant you throwing the game really is, but no matter what form it comes in, it accomplishes the same goal. I actually found it funny when he pulled his probes, got a good laugh out of it.
to be honest with comparing to atheletic sports, they actually have a rule agianst those kind of things. there is a rule that says you cant W.O without punishment or just stand on the pitch giving away a win. and in most of the atheltic sports have also prize money. tv money and such..
like lets say its a table of 1-12 teams.. then each and every spot in there gives different money
each of every team gotta compete to get his team in a better position to get more money. which nani vs nes didnt make a difference
I really enjoy when you speak because it is always very rich. Still don't you think your timing is a bit off? Do we really need EG in here to cover Idra's ass? Fairly or unfairly letting die off seems the better or atleast more honorable route.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Well NaNiwa vs Nestea MATTERS for pro-gamers and many fans. NaNiwa also mentioned later that the match against wasn't meaningless as he previously thought. GomTV is doing their job by broadcasting the game that matters.
I don't want to drag this topic off on a tangent so I'll try to keep this short. This is the type of things where some people will think one way, and others will think another. To me the match doesn't effect the progression of the tournament, so no longer matters, for other people, any chance to watch Nestea vs Naniwa is important even if nothing but "honour" is on the line, so it does matter. Its just a situation the ideal tournament format will avoid, you want the players to be trying their best, not half assing it, like I said in my post, if this format is used again, the exact same situation will re-occur sooner or later, it is inevitable, the player won't do something as blatant as what Naniwa did, but it will be the same.
pretty much this. actually officialy the game did NOT matter.
for me it doesn't matter. and i hate to see progamers play if i have the feeling they don't play real - so i don't want to see this games at all. Nobody can expect that a progamers does his best, if there is nothing on the line. It's psychological very unplausibly that someone actually is able to do his best in such a situation. Some eventually are able some will never be able - you can't blame them. It is just normal.
so if i can't be sure they are giving his best, i would rather not see this game.
and aside from that it even made this silly game more interesting cause it wasn't expected and i was thankful for a short game (because it didn't matter anyway ).
in terms of entertainment value it was the best thing that could have happened.
I disagree, the game does matter.
Naniwa agreed to the format and he agreed to compete with.. oh... just the top players of 2011 in SC2's most prestigious tournament organizer. Therefore, Naniwa has an obligation to the fans, to his team, and to the tournament organizers to play it out (after all they're all putting time and/or money to see him succeed.)
At the end of the day, the game does matter or it wouldn't have caused this community backlash. It wouldn't have led to his candidacy for Code S being revoked. The posters and fans that continue to defend Naniwa, know this, you're not doing him any favors. In fact Naniwa himself (along with other notable figures in the sc2 world) have agreed that this situation will only make him better if he learns from it.
the game officially doesn't effect anything in the tourney. that's it.
so it doesn't matter. if you want to put something in there that doesn't exist officially. ok do that - that's your thing.
also regarding "obligation to the fans, to his team, and to the wournament organizers" - Naniwa has a personality in the first place. if you don't like it - ok, that's your thing again.
i like personalities and every person has to judge by her self which things matter and which not. he doesn't offend anyone.
or do you think (bad)manner mules or hatches, nexi, offend someone? lol
idra saying "fuck you" or "random fat guy" is offending. not this shit. GOM acted like being emotional unstable and personally offended - i think they have to calm down and apologize to Naniwa and community. making bad format in first place and then acting like a kid whose fiends doesn't want to play the way they wanted.
The difference in culture is the problem I have, and why I think esports in the west will never get there. Naniwa disrespected alot of people and MLG itself when he called them a joke tournament live on stage for all too see and what did anyone do about it? absolutely nothing.
He disrespected and offended alot of people with his unprofessional attitude in his match against nestea and got punished for it, yet what I see from the community is blame not on the player but on GOM and the culture in general like its some weird unknown thing that only these koreans care about respect, honour and professionalism.
Its actually extremely sad that people in this community are so easily ready to throw away the most basic of requirements.
Let's see, so the argument is that Naniwa's behavior is unacceptable because it prevented GOM from providing the viewers with the best possible product/product they paid for.
But that argument lies on the highly subjective assumption that half-ass 4-gate is better product than probe rush. Not only is it subjective, but it is also divisive as there does not seem to be overwhelming majority that prefers one over the other as many people prefer clearly thrown game over pretend game. So the argument holds the ground only so-so and it seems quite clear that if one wants to declare Naniwa's behavior unacceptable this is not the way.
Your post is insightful and I agree on many points, but there is something I would like to have clarified.
When you say that you agree that what NaNiwa did was wrong but for different reasons than what most say and you cite their reasons as "...related to sportsmanship, honor, and respect for the game." Yet when I read your statement it seems that you are in full agreement with those reasons. I can't help but to be confused and wonder if you really meant to say something else.
I suppose one could take your statement as saying that none of that matters and that the reason you are against such behaviour it is purely $$$? At which point I respectfully would like to disagree and say that such viewpoints and ideas, however much $$$ is needed in e-sports, are not needed in our e-sports community.
I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers.
Speaking personally as a GOM customer, at least in my case this is because Naniwa's probe rush did not significantly degrade the quality of the product. It certainly shortened the length of the game, but it offered a novel punchline, and because of how the casters presented the match, it ended up being the highlight of the night.
I suspect that on the other side, to people who want to find something to criticize, it also was the highlight of their night, by providing them with the "thing to hate."
So to the extent that you've been surprised about lack of complaints about the reduction of quality of product, that mitigates the claim that the quality of the product was actually degraded. It was transformed into something else than a high-level starcraft match, but not in the same way as completely forfeiting the match would have.
The match happened, and it was the most dramatic and comical minute and a half of the broadcast.
On December 15 2011 19:50 Sabu113 wrote: I really enjoy when you speak because it is always very rich. Still don't you think your timing is a bit off? Do we really need EG in here to cover Idra's ass? Fairly or unfairly letting die off seems the better or atleast more honorable route.
How is Alex covering Idra's ass? Did i miss something? People have said the exact examples that Alex mentioned, in the discussions about this whole Naniwa case. Majority knows about them.
On December 15 2011 19:47 souLess419 wrote: While you make good points, i still believe a quality product will not have meaningless matches. When you watch an all star game, your expecting silly/shenanigans/not trying to occur. That's not the case when you tune into a professional level tournament with money on the line and what not.
What's funny is if naniwa just 4 gated, no one would say anything. Throwing games will happen. It's all about how blatant you throwing the game really is, but no matter what form it comes in, it accomplishes the same goal. I actually found it funny when he pulled his probes, got a good laugh out of it.
Couldnt agree more.
No drama would have occured if he had 4gated or proxy 2gate. Guess next time a pro player wants to skip a game he will have to do this.
On December 15 2011 19:07 Huckleuro wrote: Though say we were to talk about professionalism... when EG's (and many, many other teams) top players regularly go on stream and repeatedly abuse their opposition, when they sit there and call almost every opponent a 'retard'... sure that must be seen as totally unprofessional and down right rude?
This exactly sums up my opinion on the whole matter. The point made by this thread is that Nani was being unprofessional but it's clear that the community is fine with unprofessionalism.
It's completely understandable that business is business and people need to make money, but that's the real reason for this thread, claiming it's all about professionalism in such an unprofessional scene doesn't make much sense to me.
On December 15 2011 18:17 Zlasher wrote: I don't mean this in a facetious way or saying that you or your team are being hypocritical, because I do agree with your overarching point of your perspective, but if Naniwa should have just played the meaningless match, then what does it mean when your guys new Dota team recently, at what is considered one of the most prestigious tournaments in the world in SMM (no matter how poorly run the event ended up being this year), chose to forfeit out of matches that DID have a meaning, by boycotting their losers bracket matches and any potential future that they have with the event? There was never really any official statement or release from management of EG following the SMM event, and more than anything I'm just interested in what your comments are on THAT situation, of giving up instead of fighting the fight. DID you guys talk to them and give them the talk that what they did was unacceptable, a la what you did for Idra following his forfeiting of Game 2 vs Nerchio?
ahhhh nice would like to hear his oppinion about that, too :D
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Well NaNiwa vs Nestea MATTERS for pro-gamers and many fans. NaNiwa also mentioned later that the match against wasn't meaningless as he previously thought. GomTV is doing their job by broadcasting the game that matters.
I don't want to drag this topic off on a tangent so I'll try to keep this short. This is the type of things where some people will think one way, and others will think another. To me the match doesn't effect the progression of the tournament, so no longer matters, for other people, any chance to watch Nestea vs Naniwa is important even if nothing but "honour" is on the line, so it does matter. Its just a situation the ideal tournament format will avoid, you want the players to be trying their best, not half assing it, like I said in my post, if this format is used again, the exact same situation will re-occur sooner or later, it is inevitable, the player won't do something as blatant as what Naniwa did, but it will be the same.
pretty much this. actually officialy the game did NOT matter.
for me it doesn't matter. and i hate to see progamers play if i have the feeling they don't play real - so i don't want to see this games at all. Nobody can expect that a progamers does his best, if there is nothing on the line. It's psychological very unplausibly that someone actually is able to do his best in such a situation. Some eventually are able some will never be able - you can't blame them. It is just normal.
so if i can't be sure they are giving his best, i would rather not see this game.
and aside from that it even made this silly game more interesting cause it wasn't expected and i was thankful for a short game (because it didn't matter anyway ).
in terms of entertainment value it was the best thing that could have happened.
please explain to me how this game does not matter. playing against the #2 GSL ranked player in a televised map casted by half a dozen casters in two different languages for a live studio audience and 100k+ viewers on live streams and future vods all enhanced by a rivalry factor that the you created by your words and actions in the previous meeting of a major tournament.
this game has no meaning? oh wait, i forgot, there was no money or seeding implications involved. that must be it right?
Also as some people before I would like to point out how incredibly blown out of proportion this was/is. As a disclaimer I do not really mind when Idra "BMs" somewhat or does not gg or early ggs. But his name-calling of Mana and the game itself in his IPL2 games if I remember correctly is what I would call disrespect. That was actually extremely rude to his opponent as there was no context of playfullness or even sarcasm in that case and was not warranted by his opponent in the slightest. He simply was an enormous ass there. There is no comparison to some perceived dishonor that is somehow inherent in probe rushing according to some people. Idra was n-times worse in that case than whatever Naniwa did, just purely by intent. Apart from few voices noone even dealt with that incident. It is telling that it is not even mentioned in Alex's blog.
Note that I am saying that from the point of view of purely personal conduct, respect and honor, which are words a lot of people use to pass judgment on Naniwa, Idra's behavior was much worse and noone took any action at all. As far as his professional obligations , which do not have much to do with honor and respect, go Naniwa's action was of course worse.
This. Almost exactly what I thought (except the part about excessive severity of the punishment). I like that the incident is getting such constructive reaction from ppl actually involved in eSports, not only "reddit hamsters". Looking forward to LiquidNazgul's outlook on the situation =)
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Well NaNiwa vs Nestea MATTERS for pro-gamers and many fans. NaNiwa also mentioned later that the match against wasn't meaningless as he previously thought. GomTV is doing their job by broadcasting the game that matters.
I don't want to drag this topic off on a tangent so I'll try to keep this short. This is the type of things where some people will think one way, and others will think another. To me the match doesn't effect the progression of the tournament, so no longer matters, for other people, any chance to watch Nestea vs Naniwa is important even if nothing but "honour" is on the line, so it does matter. Its just a situation the ideal tournament format will avoid, you want the players to be trying their best, not half assing it, like I said in my post, if this format is used again, the exact same situation will re-occur sooner or later, it is inevitable, the player won't do something as blatant as what Naniwa did, but it will be the same.
pretty much this. actually officialy the game did NOT matter.
for me it doesn't matter. and i hate to see progamers play if i have the feeling they don't play real - so i don't want to see this games at all. Nobody can expect that a progamers does his best, if there is nothing on the line. It's psychological very unplausibly that someone actually is able to do his best in such a situation. Some eventually are able some will never be able - you can't blame them. It is just normal.
so if i can't be sure they are giving his best, i would rather not see this game.
and aside from that it even made this silly game more interesting cause it wasn't expected and i was thankful for a short game (because it didn't matter anyway ).
in terms of entertainment value it was the best thing that could have happened.
I disagree, the game does matter.
Naniwa agreed to the format and he agreed to compete with.. oh... just the top players of 2011 in SC2's most prestigious tournament organizer. Therefore, Naniwa has an obligation to the fans, to his team, and to the tournament organizers to play it out (after all they're all putting time and/or money to see him succeed.)
At the end of the day, the game does matter or it wouldn't have caused this community backlash. It wouldn't have led to his candidacy for Code S being revoked. The posters and fans that continue to defend Naniwa, know this, you're not doing him any favors. In fact Naniwa himself (along with other notable figures in the sc2 world) have agreed that this situation will only make him better if he learns from it.
the game officially doesn't effect anything in the tourney. that's it.
so it doesn't matter. if you want to put something in there that doesn't exist officially. ok do that - that's your thing.
also regarding "obligation to the fans, to his team, and to the wournament organizers" - Naniwa has a personality in the first place. if you don't like it - ok, that's your thing again.
i like personalities and every person has to judge by her self which things matter and which not. he doesn't offend anyone.
or do you think (bad)manner mules or hatches, nexi, offend someone? lol
idra saying "fuck you" or "random fat guy" is offending. not this shit. GOM acted like being emotional unstable and personally offended - i think they have to calm down and apologize to Naniwa and community. making bad format in first place and then acting like a kid whose fiends doesn't want to play the way they wanted.
I don't think you addressed any of my points seriously. You said that naniwa has a personality so that means he isn't obligated to do his job? I don't like what he did, I'm not afraid to admit that because i want whats best for him. I think what he did caused a lot of backlash and headache that he could have easily avoided if he was professional.
Again, your not doing Naniwa any favors by continuously excusing his actions. Hes been punished (and while I thought it was too harsh,) neither of us can change it. So stop trying to excuse or justify his behavior. Be a real fan and support him through this rough time and hope he learns from this and becomes a better person and gamer.
On December 15 2011 18:30 mojo_ca wrote: Absolutely yes. It is your JOB as a pro gamer to entertain the fans. It is your GOAL to win championships for yourself. If you do not complete your goals in winning, but do your job in entertaining the fans, then you will always be respected as a pro gamer regardless of personal success.
Eh not it's not their job to entertain the fans. That's like saying a hockey team have to play entertaining hockey instead of a boring clutch and grap style. It's up to league (Blizzard and gom/whatever organization) to create a game and rules that gives us an entertaining product. Of course you can argue it's in the players self interest to play enertaining (more fans = more money, more invites, etc) but it should by no means be obligatory as "their job."
Exactly my thoughts. Players job should't be to entertain but to play their game at their highest level. Entertainment should come first from the rules of the game. Second it should come from the structure of the tournament that provides the fans with excitement for the outgoing of the tournament. For example did anyone really care about the GSL All-Star matches. Does anyone care about a friendly in soccer.
Great post and while for the most part I agree, I still feel that pretending to try and just doing a 4 gate or whatever, which GOM and others appear to consider having integrity and putting on a show for the fans, would be more insulting. I want to see players playing their hearts out, not moving units around for our benefit.
In a show match situation it's different, but it's advertised as being that from the start.
This was a tail end match that GOM usually does not show. I agree that Naniwa did the wrong thing, but the match still should never have happened. This doesn't excuse him (though from hearing his interview I hold nothing against Naniwa; he made a mistake, and realises it. That's enough for me.)
I think the worst part was due to miscommunication - the spot not actually being given by Providence, etc. In the official statement, GOM chose not to give the spot to Naniwa. This is very, very different from taking it away, and fits what Naniwa did. If Naniwa had been banned, I'd have been outraged. Choosing not to pick him is another story altogether.
On December 15 2011 19:37 UnholyRai wrote: How is Idra forfeiting Vs. Whitera "putting on a show for spectators"?
Can someone explain this to me, everything else in the article makes a lot of sense?
Idra vs White.Ra was something like six hours delayed and Idra was jet lagged as he just got back from China, he literally passed out back stage.
Context.
On December 15 2011 19:47 souLess419 wrote: While you make good points, i still believe a quality product will not have meaningless matches.
I watch the NHL, there are meaningless matches broadcasted let alone played, so I'm not sure where you're getting this from and how are these matches meaningless? They have meaning to the viewers, the league running it, the people sponsoring the league and the people sponsoring the players; the only person it was meaningless to was Naniwa and the fact that he felt it was meaningless really says something about his values.
On December 15 2011 19:47 souLess419 wrote: While you make good points, i still believe a quality product will not have meaningless matches.
I watch the NHL, there are meaningless matches broadcasted let alone played, so I'm not sure where you're getting this from and how are these matches meaningless? They have meaning to the viewers, the league running it, the people sponsoring the league and the people sponsoring the players; the only person it was meaningless to was Naniwa and the fact that he felt it was meaningless really says something about his values.
As all those long threads indicate more than few people apart from Naniwa think that match was meaningless, so please do not generalize.
(1)You are the money handler of EG, how could you think that your opinion on the matter is relevant for public display? The opinion expressed here is concerned with money and good relation with those holding money, in this case GomTV and their sponsors. You want puppets, I, as a fan, want games that matters with emotions attached. Not an awkward fight between the players with nothing to gain, the tournament is the defining factor of motivation.
(2)Idra got lucky, skipping up and downs is quite favorable, and has indeed both money and fame attached to it. Best of luck to him and Sen.
(3)A wall of text from the CEO of the buyout team might not be the best idea how to spend the hours you are paid, since the bias of money is showing. Your opinion on business practice should probably be more interesting and commenting on GomTV's actions if one of your players would receive similar treatment and feel a lot more relevant.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: the public sentiment seems to be somewhere between 65/35 and 70/30 in disapproval of NaNiwa's action
As you explore the history of similar events earlier, such as Idra vs Nerchio, I can only agree that it is not something good. However, in a game of 100% mental and cognitive ability judging that one is not capable of playing should be an option. If the option isn't respected there is, in my opinion, a clear disconnect between the actual game and too much focus on mimicking big sports leagues in a disconnected context.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: Scenarios A, B, and C all happen, regularly, in professional sports...
Speaking of the big sports league analogues, why do you do this? they are not the same. Starcraft 2 as an esport has nothing owed to their formats. Esports is different and that is a good thing. Using the event at hand, we have two players playing a pointless game which was not something planned, but something that occurred as a result of previous games, all awesome and breath taking games.
Why is not the big sports league relevant? Firstly, our players in this scenario had 4 potentially important games to play in a relative short period of time. The last, and pointless game, had made no fan pay more money, put in more effort or in anyway held any expectation on fan effort. Big league sports have a VERY different format for their monetary ecosystem, where each match is an event for fans to come to arenas or turn on the TV. Televised commercials are planned months ahead and the arena-based snacks and merchandise revenue is a the monetary factor. This does not apply in this situation, there is NO WAY you can justify an analogue with one game of a big sports league game. No money was lost, the tournament format however became a joke.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: Without all parties contributing, the industry cannot produce a quality product for our fans and community
The grudge-match argument. As a continuation on my previous paragraph, the real disappointment is how the absolutely most interesting game, from a Western perspective, became a game with NOTHING at stake. It is GomTV's responsibility to actually give our players something worth fighting for. This is why the match was a joke from the beginning and this is in extension why the majority of TL users feel no offense of the outcome (See poll link above).
The game was NOT a show match, it was an unnecessary game, a sham. The grudge-match argument is a selling point which lost its value before the game was played.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers. What NaNiwa did was basically akin to a last-place MLB team, during its final game of the season, intentionally striking out in every at bat. Just imagine what would happen in that situation: fans would ask for their money back; advertising contracts would be violated; and the league would certainly take action against the team and its players - just like GOM did with NaNi - in order to protect its product.
You are surprised because you express a very superficial view of fans and still, the analogue to a game day at a stadium does not translate.
DISCLAIMER I do not think NaNiWa's actions were good, and I think he had a disciplinary punishment coming his way. However, I think the judgment from Alex and GomTV passed is out of proportion for this instanced event.
I am of course biased as a NaNiWa fan and I do not judge Alex beyond the text here. The issue at hand is the first time I have felt true disappointment in a Starcraft 2 organization and is the first event which have caused me to feel the need to express my feelings on the a subject. I have a low post count since I have chosen to not involve myself in exponentially growing threads, but I have followed the SC2 community and esports since the days of the beta.
my favorite part is how idra doesnt even show up for his games, and it happened more than once.
then you shittalk nani for folding a game.
brool story.
while you motivate your stance on the naniwa situation well, and base it on a well argued opinion, you still come across as a hypocrite since idra has done worse, or comparable, things several times.
sorry, but its hard to respect you when you seem like such a hypocrite. you did have a few fair points though.
I agree naniwa should have been punished, losing code s is taking it too far though
On December 15 2011 20:25 yousaba wrote: my favorite part is how idra doesnt even show up for his games, and you sure as hell didnt punish him for that.
so i guess not even showing up, or just 6pooling MC over and over, is much better than folding a game with a proberush.
I feel you bro, cant be easy to have written this long post shittalking nani while trying to avoid mentioning your own player doesnt even show up to play his matches, and it have happened more than once.
...He did mention Idra and the events you referenced.
(1)You are the money handler of EG, how could you think that your opinion on the matter is relevant for public display? The opinion expressed here is concerned with money and good relation with those holding money, in this case GomTV and their sponsors. You want puppets, I, as a fan, want games that matters with emotions attached. Not an awkward fight between the players with nothing to gain, the tournament is the defining factor of motivation.
(2)Idra got lucky, skipping up and downs is quite favorable, and has indeed both money and fame attached to it. Best of luck to him and Sen.
(3)A wall of text from the CEO of the buyout team might not be the best idea how to spend the hours you are paid, since the bias of money is showing. Your opinion on business practice should probably be more interesting and commenting on GomTV's actions if one of your players would receive similar treatment and feel a lot more relevant.
As you explore the history of similar events earlier, such as Idra vs Nerchio, I can only agree that it is not something good. However, in a game of 100% mental and cognitive ability judging that one is not capable of playing should be an option. If the option isn't respected there is, in my opinion, a clear disconnect between the actual game and too much focus on mimicking big sports leagues in a disconnected context.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: Scenarios A, B, and C all happen, regularly, in professional sports...
Speaking of the big sports league analogues, why do you do this? they are not the same. Starcraft 2 as an esport has nothing owed to their formats. Esports is different and that is a good thing. Using the event at hand, we have two players playing a pointless game which was not something planned, but something that occurred as a result of previous games, all awesome and breath taking games.
Why is not the big sports league relevant? Firstly, our players in this scenario had 4 potentially important games to play in a relative short period of time. The last, and pointless game, had made no fan pay more money, put in more effort or in anyway held any expectation on fan effort. Big league sports have a VERY different format for their monetary ecosystem, where each match is an event for fans to come to arenas or turn on the TV. Televised commercials are planned months ahead and the arena-based snacks and merchandise revenue is a the monetary factor. This does not apply in this situation, there is NO WAY you can justify an analogue with one game of a big sports league game. No money was lost, the tournament format however became a joke.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: Without all parties contributing, the industry cannot produce a quality product for our fans and community
The grudge-match argument. As a continuation on my previous paragraph, the real disappointment is how the absolutely most interesting game, from a Western perspective, became a game with NOTHING at stake. It is GomTV's responsibility to actually give our players something worth fighting for. This is why the match was a joke from the beginning and this is in extension why the majority of TL users feel no offense of the outcome (See poll link above).
The game was NOT a show match, it was an unnecessary game, a sham. The grudge-match argument is a selling point which lost its value before the game was played.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers. What NaNiwa did was basically akin to a last-place MLB team, during its final game of the season, intentionally striking out in every at bat. Just imagine what would happen in that situation: fans would ask for their money back; advertising contracts would be violated; and the league would certainly take action against the team and its players - just like GOM did with NaNi - in order to protect its product.
You are surprised because you express a very superficial view of fans and still, the analogue to a game day at a stadium does not translate.
DISCLAIMER I do not think NaNiWa's actions were good, and I think he had a disciplinary punishment coming his way. However, I think the judgment from Alex and GomTV passed is out of proportion for this instanced event.
I am of course biased as a NaNiWa fan and I do not judge Alex beyond the text here. The issue at hand is the first time I have felt true disappointment in a Starcraft 2 organization and is the first event which have caused me to feel the need to express my feelings on the a subject. I have a low post count since I have chosen to not involve myself in potentially growing threads, but I have followed the SC2 community and esports since the days of the beta.
Sincerely, Kim
Saying that games don't matter unless money is on the line quite frankly appalls me, that's a direction I don't want to see Sc2 headed in at all; you're dismissing the game as a sham because of the lack of dollars attached to it.
On December 15 2011 20:25 yousaba wrote: my favorite part is how idra doesnt even show up for his games, and you sure as hell didnt punish him for that.
so i guess not even showing up, or just 6pooling MC over and over, is much better than folding a game with a proberush.
I feel you bro, cant be easy to have written this long post shittalking nani while trying to avoid mentioning your own player doesnt even show up to play his matches, and it have happened more than once.
...He did mention Idra and the events you referenced.
Repeatedly.
yes, fixed it. my bad, browsed through iphone and must have accidentally scrolled past it.
my apologize to whomever i offended. it was a mistake.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Well NaNiwa vs Nestea MATTERS for pro-gamers and many fans. NaNiwa also mentioned later that the match against wasn't meaningless as he previously thought. GomTV is doing their job by broadcasting the game that matters.
I don't want to drag this topic off on a tangent so I'll try to keep this short. This is the type of things where some people will think one way, and others will think another. To me the match doesn't effect the progression of the tournament, so no longer matters, for other people, any chance to watch Nestea vs Naniwa is important even if nothing but "honour" is on the line, so it does matter. Its just a situation the ideal tournament format will avoid, you want the players to be trying their best, not half assing it, like I said in my post, if this format is used again, the exact same situation will re-occur sooner or later, it is inevitable, the player won't do something as blatant as what Naniwa did, but it will be the same.
pretty much this. actually officialy the game did NOT matter.
for me it doesn't matter. and i hate to see progamers play if i have the feeling they don't play real - so i don't want to see this games at all. Nobody can expect that a progamers does his best, if there is nothing on the line. It's psychological very unplausibly that someone actually is able to do his best in such a situation. Some eventually are able some will never be able - you can't blame them. It is just normal.
so if i can't be sure they are giving his best, i would rather not see this game.
and aside from that it even made this silly game more interesting cause it wasn't expected and i was thankful for a short game (because it didn't matter anyway ).
in terms of entertainment value it was the best thing that could have happened.
I disagree, the game does matter.
Naniwa agreed to the format and he agreed to compete with.. oh... just the top players of 2011 in SC2's most prestigious tournament organizer. Therefore, Naniwa has an obligation to the fans, to his team, and to the tournament organizers to play it out (after all they're all putting time and/or money to see him succeed.)
At the end of the day, the game does matter or it wouldn't have caused this community backlash. It wouldn't have led to his candidacy for Code S being revoked. The posters and fans that continue to defend Naniwa, know this, you're not doing him any favors. In fact Naniwa himself (along with other notable figures in the sc2 world) have agreed that this situation will only make him better if he learns from it.
I think you misinterpret the intention of their posts. What they are trying to say is not whether or not the game matters objectively, but rather that it is a subjective question for everyone to judge for themselves. Which is clearly true, due to the splitting we have seen in the community these last couple of days. I, for one, couldn't care less about the outcome of the game, and in terms of entertainment I think this was, for me personally, the best solution.
Edit: Oh, and also, great blog. This brings up points I hadn't thought about prior to reading, thank you for that!
y'know, it's hard to argue against these points and i'm not some eg fan boy, or even a particular fan of alex (although I respect him greatly, especially after this post) because of the milkis debacle, but this was very clearly written and i pretty much agree. Thanks for your insight on this from a team management stand point, especially one who has had to deal with a very similar matter on multiple occasions.
Exactly my thoughts on this subject ! I was really starting to be considering to make the same post despite all my years of lurking lazyness I 've had on this forum :D ... Bref ! Naniwa is paid for entertainment. (I even would have used the same sport image ! with tennis though)
I agree that, put in the position he was, Naniwa should have done something more than that completely disinterested probe rush.... If only to save himself the shitstorm...
But I understand why he did and hold GOM responsible for making them play the match, for the terrible format and for what I regard as a completely disingenuous response to the situation. Their handling of it smacks of the retrospective application of some hitherto undefined code of conduct, some creative rule 'application' and a disproportionate penalty.
I think, as you rightly concede here, conduct that effectively amounts to throwing of matches occurs in many sports the world over, and is accepted because of the ridiculous facade put on by the teams/players involved. Typically it occurs during leagues that are structured and ongoing, with some form of yearly reset. People are duped into accepting that conduct as part of the system on the basis of thinly veiled arguments that what they did 'could have worked' or 'they tried a new strategy' or 'they had to test their roster ahead of the finals'. Well, I'm one of the people who doesn't buy that. I believe that their actions effectively undermined the true competitive spirit generally required and displayed in that particular sport. Regardless I'm not offended by it, because I can see the reasons why they do it. I'm not offended by Nani's actions either.... For the same reason.
This incident was not such a situation. It was a group stage of an elimination tournament for single players. It is not an anual event to which both players will always be invited. Both players were eliminated. Neither had any chance of progressing. However, in this situation, unlike previous examples of Code S/A group play, and ALL best of X competitions, these two were forced to play a dead rubber. It is here the similarity to sports starts.... What I do not understand is why people wish so readily to have this completely fake, low standard 5-15 minute game played out. We'd all know it was bullshit. Everyone would be jumping to make excuses for the low calibre of gameplay... Nani just spared us all the crap. And GOM could have spared EVERYONE the crap, by not playing the match... Just like they don't play a match between people who are 0-2 in the group stages of GSL... Just like they dont force the playing of the last 3 matches when Nestea 4-0's Inca in the Code S final.
And in those circumstances, I cannot understand how GOM reacted as they did. I am so disappointed with it that I will not be purchasing any of their products in the coming year, as voting with my dollars is about the only real way I have to protest against their response.
Not commenting on the actual opinions expressed, but I think some of the comparisons used are a bit off. You compare Naniwa's game to modern professional sports games where the average game goes for approx 1 hour minimum with a bit of padding etc. The average starcraft game may be around 10-15min in comparison. To compare these two scenarios in terms of customer satisfaction is inaccurate imo. If it was a best of 5 or 7 between Naniwa and Nestea and obviously threw every match then it would be completely different. Short version: 10-15 minute game cannot be compared to 1-2 hour game.
I totally agree with all of your views. We must hold players to a higher standard of professionalism if eSports is to make an even bigger splash in 2012.
Well I am glad Alex is honest enough to say that Naniwa should learn to lie for the good of money making. Otherwise to say that what Idra has done in the past is not as bad as what Naniwa did just doesn't hold up as his argument was mostly that gom is a bigger stage and the match was more important. However from Naniwa's point of a view a placement match at MLG is far more important then this match vs nestea as it has implications for future tournaments, this match didn't.
For me as a fellow swede raised in a culture that teaches us to never ever lie I see what Naniwa did as little different to Jinro swearing or Thorzain being chill and not showing much emotion, these guys are not playing a game with you, they are not putting up any fronts its just how they are, no fluff as you Americans like to say (yeah what Nani did is actually no fluff where as a 4gate would have been fluff.).
I don't mean to sound pro swedish or anti American or whatever but this post from alex very clearly shows that mental difference between how we think and most of the world. Honesty for us is not something that is based on how much money is involved. Naniwa was just being honest and that is what other countries will just have to learn to deal with.
For me personally what Nestea did at the blizzcon finals was MUCH MUCH worse then what Naniwa did and neither do I have any interest of watching players that pretend to care about a game, that is just insulting to my intellect. Next season of GSL will be the first time I do not buy a ticket as I choose to vote with my wallet as I quite simply feel unwelcome now, swedes are going to be honest as its hardwired into our very core, learn to deal with it.
Great post even though I disagree. Starcraft is a competition, and the competitors sole job is to win. If people are entertained by watching, that is secodary. Sports wasn't created for entertainment purposes.
Of course, GOM has the rights to not invite a player like that to a tournament, but actually penalizing an athlete for something that is against the rules is wrong (which of course didn't happen here).
The arguments on both sides are mainly based on how they believe professional SC2 players should act. These always going to be subjective and therefore based on opinions. The only objective way to look at this situation is to follow the rules GOM themselves laid out for the tournament and they have said Naniwa broke none of them.
Everything else is fluff, people can attempt to convince and sway people to agree with their opinions on the matter with endless blogs, posts and polls and that's fine, but it has no real effect on the actual situation. The world keeps turning and Naniwa will continue to compete in SC2. The most important people in this situation - gomtv, the tournament decision makers have acted out of hand and outside their own rules. They have no competition in South Korea so they can do what they want I guess but they are the only people I truly lose respect for.
Maybe we need pro gamer licenses, or some other pledge that professionals agree to before they start competing in tournaments. Attempt to compete to win all matches in a tournament you enter would be a fair start.
On December 15 2011 20:43 Krogan wrote: I don't mean to sound pro swedish or anti American or whatever but this post from alex very clearly shows that mental difference between how we think and most of the world. Honesty for us is not something that is based on how much money is involved. Naniwa was just being honest and that is what other countries will just have to learn to deal with.
For me personally what Nestea did at the blizzcon finals was MUCH MUCH worse then what Naniwa did and neither do I have any interest of watching players that pretend to care about a game, that is just insulting to my intellect. Next season of GSL will be the first time I do not buy a ticket as I choose to vote with my wallet as I quite simply feel unwelcome now, swedes are going to be honest as its hardwired into our very core, learn to deal with it.
Why should anyone have to adapt to this supposedly intrinsic, death before lies attitude, that you allege all Swedes possess? He's in Korea, in a Korean tournament. When in Rome dude...
Let me first and foremost say, I agree that Nani's actions are unacceptable for all parties involved. However, I do not agree with you in a couple of points and pointing at Nani alone is pretty short sighted and shrouds the issue of GOM and others making mistakes, too.
Additionally, I would also point out the fact that, as illustrated above, every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist.
The difference is that every major professional sports league has a much better rule set than GOM, better precedence to be cited for single decisions and most importanly a 99% chance that games are actually NOT meaningless. Be it B-players playing for an A-spot, international standings used for seeding, different monetary rewards (placement / wins) or some other thing. In this instance Nani had close to no motivation to play a good game except his duty to perform for his fans as well as the businesses involved. There is no A-team spot to play for as he's already among the top of the foreigner scene, there was no monetary reward, there was no standing implication. There have to be incentives and they have to be made clear to the player by teams, leagues and preferrably some form of association. Professionals often times (and the best ones at that) focus on exactly one thing: winning. Nani was not willing to put effort into this game because his mentality is one of playing 100% to win tournaments, nothing else matters to him. That in itself is admirable because it makes him practice like few do. Yes, he should be aware of his duties outside of this but I argue that these duties have to be made clear to him by somebody else if there is a chance he won't realize it himself. That way he can focus on his game but one could avoid this kind of situation entirely. This could have been done with better rules, coaching him on the issue or any other way but I do not agree that players are solely responsible here. There are reasons why teams have coaches and management and this is one of them. Again, look at major sports. There are many examples where exactly these guys take care of that. The whole All Star match point I won't even argue about because show matches and matches in a competition are not even remotely related.
The term "ecosystem" is a buzzword as of late for those of us on the business side of the industry, because we all recognize the fact that in order for eSports to keep growing and find stability, the industry needs to become more self-sustaining, and less reliant on outside income, like corporate sponsorships.
Here let me just ask: why? How is PPV access a better model than advertising and sponsorship revenue? E-sports as a growing market will happen a lot faster if people get free access to it. The whole internet revolves around free, ad financed things growing, from Google to League of Legends. Freemium or not, getting everything you want without paying actual money (obviously you pay in different terms like time etc.) means people pick it up a lot more quickly. I can't even show my friends a set of GSL VoDs without paying GOM for it, how am I going to get them into it with a broadcast schedule that makes it close to impossible to follow it live for many parts of the world? You may not like to rely on sponsors but again there's a reason why this happens in major sports. Obviously, that doesn't change your point in Naniwa hurting business, be it GOM subscribers not getting their money's worth or sponsors instead, it's really more of an issue of splitting the damage between leagues and teams instead of just letting the leagues take the hits for player actions, making them a lot less lenient. Obviously, this way teams have an easier time but again my question is, is that actually a good thing?
What I'd like to do in this blog is plead my case for why NaNi's actions were completely unacceptable, not only to the 30-35% of the community blaming GOM for the incident, but also to the other 60-65% of the community who agree that NaNi's actions were unacceptable, but for reasons different from mine.
I do not believe that these 30-35% actually blame GOM for it happening. Obviously it's Naniwa's own decision and he is at fault but it just means that these 30-35% understand the problematic situation of GOM having this format. I also strongly believe that much of the anti-GOM outrage and Naniwa-justification is based on GOM's reaction, much less on the actual incident. While some people are upset because of the format, I argue that the majority is just extremely pissed about the form of punishment and its justification provided (although it may be correct to punshim him, the case they make is pretty circumstancial). I just have to say that multiple parties are at fault and this post may not be intended as such but its clear focus on Naniwa makes it hard to perceive as a singled out issue. Many of the environmental factors you quote there just blow this just as much out of proportion as you already anticipated yourself.
I really appreciate people from the industry stepping up and sharing their thoughts, it's just hard for me to agree with too much of it, not only because of differing opinions but also because of the way you presented it. Obviously, this is the internet and this kind of thing will happen but please consider the next time to actually focus more clearly on what you want to express and its implications.
(1)You are the money handler of EG, how could you think that your opinion on the matter is relevant for public display? The opinion expressed here is concerned with money and good relation with those holding money, in this case GomTV and their sponsors. You want puppets, I, as a fan, want games that matters with emotions attached. Not an awkward fight between the players with nothing to gain, the tournament is the defining factor of motivation.
First, thanks for your reply. I'm not sure what you mean by "money handler" here, but in case there is an actual confusion or misinformation regarding what exactly I do for EG, I'm definitely much more than an accountant . Regarding why my opinion is relevant, I feel that I understand the economics and business side of the eSports industry as well as anyone around; given that EG is generally viewed as a successful business (even by those who don't like us very much), I feel that I have some reputability on the subject.
(3)A wall of text from the CEO of the buyout team might not be the best idea how to spend the hours you are paid, since the bias of money is showing. Your opinion on business practice should probably be more interesting and commenting on GomTV's actions if one of your players would receive similar treatment and feel a lot more relevant.
What exactly do you mean by "the bias of money"? Are you criticizing me for approaching the situation from the perspective of someone who would like to see the eSports industry be sustainable, and employing logical business sense?
I think you may be misreading the results of the poll. As of now, the results are:
A) Disappointing, but no big deal: 40% B) Completely unacceptable: 24% C) Understandable: 24% D) Completely justified: 12%
My interpretation of this information is that A) equates to mild disapproval, B) equates to strong disapproval, C) equates to mild approval, and D) equates to strong approval. According to the numbers above, this would place public opinion at 64/36 in disapproval, which is only one percentage point away from my proposed figures (when I began writing my blog, the numbers added up to exactly 65/35).
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: Without all parties contributing, the industry cannot produce a quality product for our fans and community
The grudge-match argument. As a continuation on my previous paragraph, the real disappointment is how the absolutely most interesting game, from a Western perspective, became a game with NOTHING at stake. It is GomTV's responsibility to actually give our players something worth fighting for. This is why the match was a joke from the beginning and this is in extension why the majority of TL users feel no offense of the outcome (See poll link above).
The game was NOT a show match, it was an unnecessary game, a sham. The grudge-match argument is a selling point which lost its value before the game was played.
Well, once again, as I mentioned above, I think you're misreading the results of that poll. They show the opposite conclusion of what you're claiming.
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by grudge-match argument, but I'm assuming that you're claiming that my logic involves some kind of textbook logical fallacy. The point that the system only works when all parties (teams, players, tournaments, and fans) do their part is entirely accurate. I would be happy to elaborate on why this is, and how the different pieces work together, if you like.
I think you may be misreading the results of the poll. As of now, the results are:
A) Disappointing, but no big deal: 40% B) Completely unacceptable: 24% C) Understandable: 24% D) Completely justified: 12%
My interpretation of this information is that A) equates to mild disapproval, B) equates to strong disapproval, C) equates to mild approval, and D) equates to strong approval. According to the numbers above, this would place public opinion at 64/36 in disapproval, which is only one percentage point away from my proposed figures (when I began writing my blog, the numbers added up to exactly 65/35).
That's my rough understanding as well. It's tricky though, because whilst I felt it was poor what Naniwa did, there's such a large difference between option A and B in tone. I think a lot of people hesitate to call it completely unacceptable even if they didn't like it and therefore select A. On the other hand, I think some people voting A are saying that not seeing the game was disappointing but they didn't mind too much. Overall though, most people who didn't think he should be punished or that there wasn't anything wrong with it probably voted C or D, so therefore I think it's reasonable to extract mild censure from option A.
On December 15 2011 19:45 tar wrote: Thank you for this quite enlightening post from the perspective of a team owner. I too was - on from the beginning - of the opinion that Naniwa deserved to be punished (just disagreeing with the particular punishment GOM went for). Regarding the need to play meaningless games in a tournament situation, however, I have to disagree:
The comparision with professional -offline- sports is too general. You need to further differentiate between League and Tournament systems. In the case of a league system matches and broadcasting time are planned beforehand (i.e. before knowing if a specific game will be meaningless at the end of a season). In those cases all games will be played no matter if they are important or not.
On the other hand, with a tournament system at hand, meaningless games are hardly ever played out. Usually (think olympics or soccer world cups) there will only be a petite finale besides the overall finale. The reasoning behind that is that without at least 3rd place left to fight for and after an exhausting tournament, there wouldn t be interesting games, simply because u cannot force a competition without something to compete for - even in professional sports.
So I think we shouldn't ask too much of a pro gamer (esp considering their average age), at the very least not ask more of them then we would of professional offline athletes.
Which then brings me to one final point I really, really want to bring forward especially after this statement:
As most of you know, IdrA is one of my team's most high-profile players. He's also been involved in some of the more controversial moments in SC2 history (most notably, his early GG's against MMA and HuK). Now, as of late, these kinds of occurrences are much less frequent for Greg - to his credit, he has improved that aspect of his play tremendously. But, back when leaving the game too early was a both common and serious problem for IdrA, people (both fans and community pillars alike) would often ask, "What, exactly, is EG's stance on this? Are they trying to prevent it from happening? Are they talking to IdrA about it? If not, when are they going to step in and do something about it?" The reality is that we really didn't want to intervene, for the most part. Even after the storied games against HuK and MMA, we really didn't say much, other than to be supportive of Greg and let him know that we were there for him. We approached the situation this way for a very long time because we felt that it was Greg's problem to solve (and, to his credit, he eventually did for the most part solve it). However, after taking a passive approach for almost a year, something happened that we felt required our direct intervention.
Last September, in TL Open #22, IdrA faced Nerchio in the bo3 Semifinals. After dropping the first map to some surprise baneling pressure from Nerchio, Greg's frustration boiled over, and he forfeited the second game of the bo3, giving Nerchio the free win and a spot in the finals. This was, frankly, completely unacceptable. And I expressed this point to Greg without any sugar-coating. Out of the many early GG- and bad manner-related IdrA moments that have taken place during his tenure on EG, this was the first time I felt that I needed to step in and say something. And as of now, it's still the only time I've tapped Greg on the shoulder.
Entertaining fans and viewers sure is very important in sports, yet I think there are limits to what you can tolerate if you want to further professionalism in that sport - all the more if the sport at hand is a young one struggling for acceptance:
When Idra played Mana in the IPL he called the game a "fucking joke" but more importantly Mana a " fucking idiot"
Up to today I cannot believe that this did not have a larger impact on the scene. Why wasn't Idra tapped on the shoulder for that one? Why wasn't there a public apology? This is not meant to be some kind of idra-bashing but rather an expression of my utter bafflement how this could be acceptable on a pro level. Entertaining the fans (i am thinking the bad boy factor here) at all costs is not professional but a mere reduction of professionalsim to the extend it creates revenue. That is acceptable (and only logical) if we see sc2 as mere entertainment programme like for example Big Brother. If one wants to speak of eSports though, professionalsim requires more than that.
Dear EGalex, I'd really appreciate your opinion on the level of professionalism that sc2 in general but more specifically EG as a business is striving for considering my above statement ( esp the part below ur quote). In short: Do you see sc2 as a sport or an mere entertainment programme?
You are certainly a very smart man and this is very well written. However, if the team you support have NO CHANCE at all in winning their final game of MLB (unless their opponants are equally unmotivated, wich would only generate a really poor match), will you go watch it? Would you really want to see a game, where you know that your team won't stand a chance, because their competitive morale is so low from the past seasons poor results?
I know I wouldn't, and that's why I don't feel betrayed or upset about what NaNi did.
First time commenting on this issue, and Alex mirrors my thoughts more or less. I also like that you have not taken a stand on the punishment in this write-up (other than there should be one), which have diluted most of the threads on this issue until now.
On December 15 2011 20:43 Krogan wrote: Well I am glad Alex is honest enough to say that Naniwa should learn to lie for the good of money making. Otherwise to say that what Idra has done in the past is not as bad as what Naniwa did just doesn't hold up as his argument was mostly that gom is a bigger stage and the match was more important. However from Naniwa's point of a view a placement match at MLG is far more important then this match vs nestea as it has implications for future tournaments, this match didn't.
For me as a fellow swede raised in a culture that teaches us to never ever lie I see what Naniwa did as little different to Jinro swearing or Thorzain being chill and not showing much emotion, these guys are not playing a game with you, they are not putting up any fronts its just how they are, no fluff as you Americans like to say (yeah what Nani did is actually no fluff where as a 4gate would have been fluff.).
I don't mean to sound pro swedish or anti American or whatever but this post from alex very clearly shows that mental difference between how we think and most of the world. Honesty for us is not something that is based on how much money is involved. Naniwa was just being honest and that is what other countries will just have to learn to deal with.
For me personally what Nestea did at the blizzcon finals was MUCH MUCH worse then what Naniwa did and neither do I have any interest of watching players that pretend to care about a game, that is just insulting to my intellect. Next season of GSL will be the first time I do not buy a ticket as I choose to vote with my wallet as I quite simply feel unwelcome now, swedes are going to be honest as its hardwired into our very core, learn to deal with it.
the views and opinions expressed by some swedes and claimed to be "swedish" does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of all swedes, or even the majority of swedes. Honesty is not hardwired into our very core, even if we would be more honest on average (which i have no reason to believe) the individual differences far outweigh any such increased honesty.
On December 15 2011 20:43 Krogan wrote: Well I am glad Alex is honest enough to say that Naniwa should learn to lie for the good of money making. Otherwise to say that what Idra has done in the past is not as bad as what Naniwa did just doesn't hold up as his argument was mostly that gom is a bigger stage and the match was more important. However from Naniwa's point of a view a placement match at MLG is far more important then this match vs nestea as it has implications for future tournaments, this match didn't.
For me as a fellow swede raised in a culture that teaches us to never ever lie I see what Naniwa did as little different to Jinro swearing or Thorzain being chill and not showing much emotion, these guys are not playing a game with you, they are not putting up any fronts its just how they are, no fluff as you Americans like to say (yeah what Nani did is actually no fluff where as a 4gate would have been fluff.).
I don't mean to sound pro swedish or anti American or whatever but this post from alex very clearly shows that mental difference between how we think and most of the world. Honesty for us is not something that is based on how much money is involved. Naniwa was just being honest and that is what other countries will just have to learn to deal with.
For me personally what Nestea did at the blizzcon finals was MUCH MUCH worse then what Naniwa did and neither do I have any interest of watching players that pretend to care about a game, that is just insulting to my intellect. Next season of GSL will be the first time I do not buy a ticket as I choose to vote with my wallet as I quite simply feel unwelcome now, swedes are going to be honest as its hardwired into our very core, learn to deal with it.
the views and opinions expressed by some swedes and claimed to be "swedish" does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of all swedes, or even the majority of swedes. Honesty is not hardwired into our very core, even if we would be more honest on average (which i have no reason to believe) the individual differences far outweigh any such increased honesty.
PS. you are embarrassing.
I agree, there are many dishonest Swedish people. Don't see how that is a good thing though. :/
I didn't watch the games, but I'm pretty sure I'd "enjoy" watching a proberush more than I'd like to see a long game that didnt affect any tournament results. When a game doesn't affect tournament results, it won't be as good as a game that would, even if it's not mearningless in a sense that sponsors care.
As a fan I'll go; "omg, if he wins this he's first in his group omgomg", not; "OMG, sponsorships/team will be so happy he's playing this out!"
I do not understand the "Playing for his fans"-argument. As a fan I want to see him play matches that matters, I don't want to see him and another player play a match everybody knows isnt what it could be. I do however, ofcourse, understand the reasons that he should've done it differently.
I'd rather watch people being themselves, showing their emotions, than what is happening right now. It broke my heart yesterday when Naniwa seemed really scared to say something he shouldn't.
Your argument is all about professional behavior, put a smiling face on and delivering a good game to the industry and the audience. But I question your definition of sports. Does sports necessarily have to involve industry, merchandising, franchises or any broadcasts or audiences? No! Sports in its core sense is competition between two or more parties, involving physical and/or mental accomplishments. Sports does not necessarily have to be broadcasted to be sports.
With that being said, I ask you. Does being an athlete automatically imply, that you have to be a clown to entertain the audience? No it does not. Because being an athlete does not per se involve the need to have fans nor to please them. You can be a professional athlete who gives a **** about fans. As long as you do not harm anyone in your surroundings, it is your right to choose and ignore people. Sure that's bad for you reputation but that's another story.
Where would sports end up, if an athlete would be forced to play games just to please some random audience. I personally used to believe that athletes do what they do for passion and sportsmanship. There are plenty of sportsmen/women who do not have twitter and give a **** about the audience. They play for achievements. They play for relaxing, They play for amusement. But why do they have to play to please the audience? Why do they have to put on a smily face and play along? It is the choice of the athlete to please or not to please the audience.
Naniwa has not agreed to any obligation of entertaining anyone whatsoever. He was invited as an athlete who might be able to climb up the throne of esports. However, he was not contracted as a clown to just please the audience. And he can not be forced, neither can he be held responsible for not playing along the sunny boy.
I personally appreciate honest players showing true passion and feelings not giving a **** what others think of him/her, than some made up fake emotional half-hearted hyped game.
Very insightful post, thanks for posting it! I hope more people read this as it seems as though many posts in the numerous threads regarding the incident might have a different stance after reading your blog.
While you have presented your argument quite nicely, I feel that the big issue is that while Naniwa may have crossed a line, that line is extremely fuzzy. Consider your analogy of a baseball team intentionally striking out at each at bat. Had Naniwa in-base proxied, without passion in his mind to drive the micro in his hand, it would have been essentially the same thing. If he four gated and placed his proxy pylon recklessly, only to have it discovered, it would have been essentially the same thing. If he had gged early during a similar cheesy play, it would have been essentially the same thing. He would still have been depriving the fans of the game they wanted to see.
People are disappointed when marquee players are cheesy, get cheesed, make big blunders, etc. They aren't getting the product they want. If a player plays a subpar game, are esports fans justified in being angry about it? Had Naniwa faked it, played a shitty set and tapped out early, would that have fixed the problem? Is a thin veneer that important?
Naniwa isn't a performer. He is a professional. It says something about the community that we would force him to put on a farcical show in a situation like this.
This was a great blog. Have you ever seen a football team that just sit on the grass and let the other team score 100 goals non stop on them just because they cannot advance to the knockout stage and they're pissed? That was pretty much what naniwa did in my eyes.
Great article and I agree with basically all of it. I'll quickly say first, don't say that nobody but you thought of this, I was saying shortened versions of this on the forums on the day it happened, as were many others. These points were all discussed on SOTG as well. This point isn't too important. I'm just sayin'...... I am so sorry..
Now, yes I do put a SMALL amount of blame onto GOM for producing a flawed format, but it is only small. The major blame is definitely on Naniwa. I found myself agreeing almost entirely with Incontrol's points on SOTG. He is paid to be there, he is paid to play, he is paid to entertain, he is paid to bring in fans. Money is the life blood of everything, whether we like it or not.
While it would of been disappointing to see Naniwa do a 4 gate or some other quick easy strategy, it would not of been as bad as what he did. While yes tournament formats like this need to be fixed, but it wasn't. This is the kind of thing that the players and team should be complaining about AFTER the tournament. Not making an extremely bold statement of "I don't give a fuck." On a Live stream in front of paying customers. Yes GOM and every other tournament needs to fix possible flaws such as this, but that's to be done in the conference rooms where we aren't paying to watch, when we aren't ruining our sleep patterns to see it Live, and when we aren't wearing our passions on our sleeves and cheering for who we support loud and proud. I was so excited to watch Nestea play. When I saw the probes pulled, I felt like punching my monitor. I would of been happy if Naniwa tried a 4 gate and Nestea crushed it, because I get to see one of my favourite players win against a real strategy. I would of been impressed if Naniwa tried a 4 gate and won, it proves he is on the rise and maybe that Nestea was falling. EITHER WAY. Its better than a fucking 7 probe rush.
On December 15 2011 20:53 Timerly wrote: Let me first and foremost say, I agree that Nani's actions are unacceptable for all parties involved. However, I do not agree with you in a couple of points and pointing at Nani alone is pretty short sighted and shrouds the issue of GOM and others making mistakes, too.
Additionally, I would also point out the fact that, as illustrated above, every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist.
The difference is that every major professional sports league has a much better rule set than GOM, better precedence to be cited for single decisions and most importanly a 99% chance that games are actually NOT meaningless.
First, thanks for your post.
By your criteria, GOM's rule set is far better than professional sports leagues (at least those in North America). The structure of every professional sports league in North America provides a 100% chance of meaningless games occurring each season. While I admit that my knowledge of European professional sports leagues is not as comprehensive as my understanding of those in North America, I'm fairly certain this is also the case for many leagues in Europe.
Be it B-players playing for an A-spot, international standings used for seeding, different monetary rewards (placement / wins) or some other thing. In this instance Nani had close to no motivation to play a good game except his duty to perform for his fans as well as the businesses involved. There is no A-team spot to play for as he's already among the top of the foreigner scene, there was no monetary reward, there was no standing implication. There have to be incentives and they have to be made clear to the player by teams, leagues and preferrably some form of association. Professionals often times (and the best ones at that) focus on exactly one thing: winning. Nani was not willing to put effort into this game because his mentality is one of playing 100% to win tournaments, nothing else matters to him. That in itself is admirable because it makes him practice like few do. Yes, he should be aware of his duties outside of this but I argue that these duties have to be made clear to him by somebody else if there is a chance he won't realize it himself. That way he can focus on his game but one could avoid this kind of situation entirely. This could have been done with better rules, coaching him on the issue or any other way but I do not agree that players are solely responsible here. There are reasons why teams have coaches and management and this is one of them. Again, look at major sports. There are many examples where exactly these guys take care of that.
All of this is different justifications/excuses for why he wasn't motivated to play the match. I'm not making the argument that he should've been motivated, given that the match was inconsequential. In fact, I directly state multiple times in the OP that I completely understand why he wasn't motivated and why he was mentally exhausted. My point is that whether or not a player is motivated should really have no effect on whether or not he shows up to play, and being unmotivated is not an acceptable reason for not playing.
The whole All Star match point I won't even argue about because show matches and matches in a competition are not even remotely related.
How are they not related? They both produce revenue for any league in the same way; both involve the same kinds of ticket sales and advertising. If anything, the All-Star game is more important to the league than a standard game, because usually All-Star games carry more attention, higher ticket prices, more expensive ad buys, and a larger viewership.
The term "ecosystem" is a buzzword as of late for those of us on the business side of the industry, because we all recognize the fact that in order for eSports to keep growing and find stability, the industry needs to become more self-sustaining, and less reliant on outside income, like corporate sponsorships.
Here let me just ask: why? How is PPV access a better model than advertising and sponsorship revenue? E-sports as a growing market will happen a lot faster if people get free access to it. The whole internet revolves around free, ad financed things growing, from Google to League of Legends. Freemium or not, getting everything you want without paying actual money (obviously you pay in different terms like time etc.) means people pick it up a lot more quickly. I can't even show my friends a set of GSL VoDs without paying GOM for it, how am I going to get them into it with a broadcast schedule that makes it close to impossible to follow it live for many parts of the world?
Direct-to-consumer revenue is, by definition, a better revenue stream than business-to-business revenue, and getting paid to market to the consumer indirectly. The former offers you more stability and control over your revenue stream, and a higher return on investment per person reached.
Most tournaments, including GOM, offer free access of some kind. I'm not sure what your point is here; you're kind of contradicting yourself. You criticize GOM, but cite LoL as an example of the right way to do things - well, just like you can get LoL for free, but have to pay extra for special features, you can watch the GSL for free live, in low quality, but have to pay extra for special features (HQ and VODs). They're pretty similar.
You may not like to rely on sponsors but again there's a reason why this happens in major sports.
That's not what happens in major sports. The vast majority of revenue generated by professional sports teams comes from direct-to-consumer revenue streams like ticket sales and merchandise. Business-to-business revenue (like television contracts and in-stadium advertising) is also important, but these are mostly ad buys, not sponsorship.
Obviously, that doesn't change your point in Naniwa hurting business, be it GOM subscribers not getting their money's worth or sponsors instead, it's really more of an issue of splitting the damage between leagues and teams instead of just letting the leagues take the hits for player actions, making them a lot less lenient. Obviously, this way teams have an easier time but again my question is, is that actually a good thing?
I would say that both GOM and Quantic were hurt by his actions.
On December 15 2011 21:07 Ninjahoe wrote: You are certainly a very smart man and this is very well written. However, if the team you support have NO CHANCE at all in winning their final game of MLB (unless their opponants are equally unmotivated, wich would only generate a really poor match), will you go watch it? Would you really want to see a game, where you know that your team won't stand a chance, because their competitive morale is so low from the past seasons poor results?
I know I wouldn't, and that's why I don't feel betrayed or upset about what NaNi did.
I would then have to direct to you the Toronto Maple Leafs
Despite garbage results season after season the fan continue to pack the stadium for every game all year. Fans are important to this community. Whether its the Leafs being down and out in the last game of the year despite missing play off, or Naniwa being eliminated from the play offs from this tournament, as a fan I wanna see that surge. That "alright I've blown it up till now but I'm gonna fucking smash this next guy and prove to them that next season you have to watch out for me".
Granted when I saw the rush I laughed i thought it was kinda funny but at the same time I felt as though I've been denied a game I really wanted to see. Personally I was really hoping to see Nestea be like all right here is where I show you I'm still a champion.
I feel that the punishment may have been hard but at the same time something had to be done and now he has to live with his decision.
On December 15 2011 21:24 don_kyuhote wrote: This was a great blog. Have you ever seen a football team that just sit on the grass and let the other team score 100 goals non stop on them just because they cannot advance to the knockout stage and they're pissed? That was pretty much what naniwa did in my eyes.
well you know there is a rule agianst that in football. thats the thing it wasnt in GSL,
so they gotta follow that rule. and nani shouldnt have to as there isnt a rule agianst it
Major kudos for posting. You've not been the most popular individual on this site a few times but the reason I browse TL.net is for people in the industry making posts rather than random punters.
I can see the point you're making, although I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on the severity of the punishment. It seems that Nani hurt the product with his performance, sure, but GSL then goes on to shoot themselves in the foot by kicking Naniwa out and seemingly replacing him with Sen, who is good, but not as popular I feel.
Do you think the severity of the punishment was intentionally rough to prevent anything like that happening again?
"If you don't understand why people do what they do, or why they believe what they believe, that is your failing not theirs" is kind of my guide in life. I personally liked what naniwa did, and set out to try to understand the other people watching the game who thought it was disgusting. To keep this post reasonably short, I will simplify it a whole lot but I think the sentiment is still kind of close to the truth.
To me, it seems like this all boils down to why we watch sports. If this thread is a good representative for the general public's thoughts on the matter this differs between me and most people.
The group I belong to watch sports to see what lengths, given a set of rules, human beings can push themselves to better their opponent and win. I want to see the emotions when everything is on the line. If I don't trust the players to want it bad enough to push themselves to their limit, I don't care. I rather see a bunker rush in a GSL final, the despair in the losers eye and the triumph in the winners, than an epic 50 minute game with every unit possible during a ladder session, where tomorrow, no one cares about the outcome. I'm extreme in this case, and therefore I have very easy to relate to naniwa's decision.
Then there are those that just watch sports for the show. They will not care if the games were played on the ladder or in the GSL finals, as long as the moves are good. Pro-wrestling, all-star games, 8-7 in an inconsequential game during the preseason. Naniwa-Nestea in a game which makes no difference for the outcome of the tournament. It is all good entertainment for this group.
Most people are probably, like in everything, somewhere in between. Nice moves are important, but also the setting. Epic ladder game is better than a four-gate final, but a four-gate final is better than a ladder banelingbust. Which is why I think most people in the poll linked somewhere earlier in this thread answered, "disappointing but understandable".
I understand that business is always about catering to the majority, and most people seem to still rather see a faked game than no game. I see where you are coming from Alex. To me, it is however not that obvious that players ALWAYS are morally obliged to cater to the people who rather see a faked smile than an honest frown. It is not obvious to me why it is better to make people who rather see a meaningless four-gate than a probe-rush happy. Not obvious enough to punish someone who honestly didn't seem to understand.
On December 15 2011 20:43 Krogan wrote: Well I am glad Alex is honest enough to say that Naniwa should learn to lie for the good of money making. Otherwise to say that what Idra has done in the past is not as bad as what Naniwa did just doesn't hold up as his argument was mostly that gom is a bigger stage and the match was more important. However from Naniwa's point of a view a placement match at MLG is far more important then this match vs nestea as it has implications for future tournaments, this match didn't.
For me as a fellow swede raised in a culture that teaches us to never ever lie I see what Naniwa did as little different to Jinro swearing or Thorzain being chill and not showing much emotion, these guys are not playing a game with you, they are not putting up any fronts its just how they are, no fluff as you Americans like to say (yeah what Nani did is actually no fluff where as a 4gate would have been fluff.).
I don't mean to sound pro swedish or anti American or whatever but this post from alex very clearly shows that mental difference between how we think and most of the world. Honesty for us is not something that is based on how much money is involved. Naniwa was just being honest and that is what other countries will just have to learn to deal with.
For me personally what Nestea did at the blizzcon finals was MUCH MUCH worse then what Naniwa did and neither do I have any interest of watching players that pretend to care about a game, that is just insulting to my intellect. Next season of GSL will be the first time I do not buy a ticket as I choose to vote with my wallet as I quite simply feel unwelcome now, swedes are going to be honest as its hardwired into our very core, learn to deal with it.
the views and opinions expressed by some swedes and claimed to be "swedish" does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of all swedes, or even the majority of swedes. Honesty is not hardwired into our very core, even if we would be more honest on average (which i have no reason to believe) the individual differences far outweigh any such increased honesty.
PS. you are embarrassing.
I agree, there are many dishonest Swedish people. Don't see how that is a good thing though. :/
of course it's not a good thing! coming to think of it, krogan is a great example of a dishonest swede making such ridiculous generalizations about swedes and on top of it claiming he doesn't want to sound pro swedish or anti american when it seems to be his only fucking agenda.
On December 15 2011 21:20 z0nk wrote: Dear Mr Garfield:
Your argument is all about professional behavior, put a smiling face on and delivering a good game to the industry and the audience. But I question your definition of sports. Does sports necessarily have to involve industry, merchandising, franchises or any broadcasts or audiences? No! Sports in its core sense is competition between two or more parties, involving physical and/or mental accomplishments. Sports does not necessarily have to be broadcasted to be sports.
With that being said, I ask you. Does being an athlete automatically imply, that you have to be a clown to entertain the audience? No it does not. Because being an athlete does not per se involve the need to have fans nor to please them. You can be a professional athlete who gives a **** about fans. As long as you do not harm anyone in your surroundings, it is your right to choose and ignore people. Sure that's bad for you reputation but that's another story.
Where would sports end up, if an athlete would be forced to play games just to please some random audience. I personally used to believe that athletes do what they do for passion and sportsmanship. There are plenty of sportsmen/women who do not have twitter and give a **** about the audience. They play for achievements. They play for relaxing, They play for amusement. But why do they have to play to please the audience? Why do they have to put on a smily face and play along? It is the choice of the athlete to please or not to please the audience.
Naniwa has not agreed to any obligation of entertaining anyone whatsoever. He was invited as an athlete who might be able to climb up the throne of esports. However, he was not contracted as a clown to just please the audience. And he can not be forced, neither can he be held responsible for not playing along the sunny boy.
I personally appreciate honest players showing true passion and feelings not giving a **** what others think of him/her, than some made up fake emotional half-hearted hyped game.
You make a valid point but you are missing the fact that the game is still young and that this kind of shit in no way helps the growth of the sc2 industry, which is pretty much EGAlex's point, I for one think that Naniwa's actions were very disrespectful towards everyone involved and that they should be punished, just like any other similar form of throwing a game , except probe rushing is easier to discern as such.
Well, I made several posts/tweets regarding that I was incredibly disappointed to see a grand rematch between those two for my 10$ (which is relatively expensive for a week-long tournament compared to other GSL events). However I am in no position to throw a stone considering I sometimes slack off (or even worse) at something where I should put my whole effort into.
The whole All Star match point I won't even argue about because show matches and matches in a competition are not even remotely related.
How are they not related? They both produce revenue for any league in the same way; both involve the same kinds of ticket sales and advertising. If anything, the All-Star game is more important to the league than a standard game, because usually All-Star games carry more attention, higher ticket prices, more expensive ad buys, and a larger viewership.
They are not related since in a tournament setting you are playing to win. In a show match you are playing to please the fans. Naniwa was their to win the tournament, when he was out it was over for him. It's not like Naniwa would have probe rushed in a show match that GOM held, he just felt that the tournament for him was done.
I also wonder, where's the line drawn for you between not trying their hardest and throwing the game? If he had done a proxy 2-gate would it have been ok with you? A 4-gate? It's not as if he did not have a chance of winning with the probe rush, it's extremely unlikely but it's still plausible. In champions league last week Bayern had already advanced. They were facing Manchester City who were at third place in the group. Bayern played that game with a horrible line up. They did not even use their b-team. Manchester City won the game of course and that put Napoli who had second place in a rough spot. Is that not throwing the game? I'd say that Bayern had a smaller chance of winning vs Man city with that line up than Naniwa had to win vs Nestea. You can't say that they always tries. Naniwa's probes tried, but Naniwa didn't. The players in Bayern tried but the coach didn't. There's no difference, stuff like this happends all the time in pro sports.
On December 15 2011 21:24 don_kyuhote wrote: This was a great blog. Have you ever seen a football team that just sit on the grass and let the other team score 100 goals non stop on them just because they cannot advance to the knockout stage and they're pissed? That was pretty much what naniwa did in my eyes.
well you know there is a rule agianst that in football. thats the thing it wasnt in GSL,
so they gotta follow that rule. and nani shouldnt have to as there isnt a rule agianst it
What you don't understand is that the whole thing is not about rules. It's about common sense. You just don't do that because because you KNOW some people are gonna feel disrespected.
The whole All Star match point I won't even argue about because show matches and matches in a competition are not even remotely related.
How are they not related? They both produce revenue for any league in the same way; both involve the same kinds of ticket sales and advertising. If anything, the All-Star game is more important to the league than a standard game, because usually All-Star games carry more attention, higher ticket prices, more expensive ad buys, and a larger viewership.
They are not related since in a tournament setting you are playing to win. In a show match you are playing to please the fans. Naniwa was their to win the tournament, when he was out it was over for him. It's not like Naniwa would have probe rushed in a show match that GOM held, he just felt that the tournament for him was done.
I also wonder, where's the line drawn for you between not trying their hardest and throwing the game? If he had done a proxy 2-gate would it have been ok with you? A 4-gate? It's not as if he did not have a chance of winning with the probe rush, it's extremely unlikely but it's still plausible. In champions league last week Bayern had already advanced. They were facing Manchester City who were at third place in the group. Bayern played that game with a horrible line up. They did not even use their b-team. Manchester City won the game of course and that put Napoli who had second place in a rough spot. Is that not throwing the game? I'd say that Bayern had a smaller chance of winning vs Man city with that line up than Naniwa had to win vs Nestea. You can't say that they always tries. Naniwa's probes tried, but Naniwa didn't. The players in Bayern tried but the coach didn't. There's no difference, stuff like this happends all the time in pro sports.
Naniwa's probes tried? Are you even serious? I can't tell if you are trolling or not...
On December 15 2011 21:24 don_kyuhote wrote: This was a great blog. Have you ever seen a football team that just sit on the grass and let the other team score 100 goals non stop on them just because they cannot advance to the knockout stage and they're pissed? That was pretty much what naniwa did in my eyes.
well you know there is a rule agianst that in football. thats the thing it wasnt in GSL,
so they gotta follow that rule. and nani shouldnt have to as there isnt a rule agianst it
What you don't understand is that the whole thing is not about rules. It's about common sense. You just don't do that because because you KNOW some people are gonna feel disrespected.
but aslong as you follow the rules you shouldn't get punished? its like you follow the rules but does something disrespectful and you get a ticket or even worse get in jail
I doubt many people will read this. But I would like to echo EGAlex's sentiments in that post.
EGAlex brought up this huge, over-riding thought of professional sports teams playing their last game of the season. Playing football for many years, on a high-school and semi-professional level, I feel that this correlation is 100% accurate.
Yes, at the end of the season, when a football team is undefeated, you will see them pull starting players to put in secondary players. Does that mean they aren't trying to win the game? Of course they are...why wouldn't they? But since the meaning of the game has drastically lower connotations, they would much rather get real playing time to their back-ups...to the third stringers...In highschool, at the last game of our seasons, we would let the 4th Quarter be played entirely by our second-string/sophomore players. Why? Because it was policy at our school that you had to have 15 plays under your belt by the end of the season to earn your Varsity letter. If we had a huge winning record, and we were going to make the playoffs...why wouldn't we do that?
EGAlex touched on pride of the game, and how two MLG teams playing their last games wouldn't play their hearts out...I generally agree, with only one major exception.
If you were to tune in to the last game of the regular MLG season to two losing teams, who were already out of the playoffs, but those teams happened to be the New York Yankees and the Boston Red Sox, do you really think that they are going to half-ass their attempts to win the game? We saw some huge plays between Naniwa and NesTea at MLG Providence, not only in that tournament, but in the Open Tournament beforehand. Most players can say 100% that the rivalry is already brewing up between the two players. Why wouldn't you akin this to a rivalry in professional Sports? That's exactly what it's becoming - and that's exactly what we want.
I don't think I can tell you the action that i'm thinking of that relates to this incident. I'm sure many of you reading this know the meaning. But come on. Where is your pride of being a progamer? I can think of thousands of people that would have loved to been on stage, against arguably one of the best Zerg's in the world, and played a legit game with them. Where's the pride and respect?
The whole All Star match point I won't even argue about because show matches and matches in a competition are not even remotely related.
How are they not related? They both produce revenue for any league in the same way; both involve the same kinds of ticket sales and advertising. If anything, the All-Star game is more important to the league than a standard game, because usually All-Star games carry more attention, higher ticket prices, more expensive ad buys, and a larger viewership.
They are not related since in a tournament setting you are playing to win. In a show match you are playing to please the fans. Naniwa was their to win the tournament, when he was out it was over for him. It's not like Naniwa would have probe rushed in a show match that GOM held, he just felt that the tournament for him was done.
I also wonder, where's the line drawn for you between not trying their hardest and throwing the game? If he had done a proxy 2-gate would it have been ok with you? A 4-gate? It's not as if he did not have a chance of winning with the probe rush, it's extremely unlikely but it's still plausible. In champions league last week Bayern had already advanced. They were facing Manchester City who were at third place in the group. Bayern played that game with a horrible line up. They did not even use their b-team. Manchester City won the game of course and that put Napoli who had second place in a rough spot. Is that not throwing the game? I'd say that Bayern had a smaller chance of winning vs Man city with that line up than Naniwa had to win vs Nestea. You can't say that they always tries. Naniwa's probes tried, but Naniwa didn't. The players in Bayern tried but the coach didn't. There's no difference, stuff like this happends all the time in pro sports.
Naniwa's probes tried? Are you even serious? I can't tell if you are trolling or not...
It's the same thing, Naniwa had a chance of winning, but his players were weak since he did not feel like using his best players. But none the less the players tried to win.
On December 15 2011 21:20 z0nk wrote: Dear Mr Garfield:
Your argument is all about professional behavior, put a smiling face on and delivering a good game to the industry and the audience. But I question your definition of sports. Does sports necessarily have to involve industry, merchandising, franchises or any broadcasts or audiences? No! Sports in its core sense is competition between two or more parties, involving physical and/or mental accomplishments. Sports does not necessarily have to be broadcasted to be sports.
With that being said, I ask you. Does being an athlete automatically imply, that you have to be a clown to entertain the audience? No it does not. Because being an athlete does not per se involve the need to have fans nor to please them. You can be a professional athlete who gives a **** about fans. As long as you do not harm anyone in your surroundings, it is your right to choose and ignore people. Sure that's bad for you reputation but that's another story.
Where would sports end up, if an athlete would be forced to play games just to please some random audience. I personally used to believe that athletes do what they do for passion and sportsmanship. There are plenty of sportsmen/women who do not have twitter and give a **** about the audience. They play for achievements. They play for relaxing, They play for amusement. But why do they have to play to please the audience? Why do they have to put on a smily face and play along? It is the choice of the athlete to please or not to please the audience.
Naniwa has not agreed to any obligation of entertaining anyone whatsoever. He was invited as an athlete who might be able to climb up the throne of esports. However, he was not contracted as a clown to just please the audience. And he can not be forced, neither can he be held responsible for not playing along the sunny boy.
I personally appreciate honest players showing true passion and feelings not giving a **** what others think of him/her, than some made up fake emotional half-hearted hyped game.
You make a valid point but you are missing the fact that the game is still young and that this kind of shit in no way helps the growth of the sc2 industry, which is pretty much EGAlex's point [...]
I find it much worse for the growth of the sc2 industry, that some corporate bully can decide on its fishy ruleset to expell their athletes just because they did not put up a smily face. I prefer to believe that the players play each match because they want to achieve something. Not just to avoid punishment.
On December 15 2011 21:47 Chromodoris wrote: It's the same thing, Naniwa had a chance of winning, but his players were weak since he did not feel like using his best players. But none the less the players tried to win.
Man, you can't call the units a team and a player its coach. That's just ludicrous and it distracts from more tenable arguments that an injustice was committed.
Another wise article, hope all the GOM-hating spoiled brats stops with their incessant whining after reading this and acknowledging that Naniwa himself had also apologized and truly understands the immaturity of his actions.
On December 15 2011 21:07 Ninjahoe wrote: You are certainly a very smart man and this is very well written. However, if the team you support have NO CHANCE at all in winning their final game of MLB (unless their opponants are equally unmotivated, wich would only generate a really poor match), will you go watch it? Would you really want to see a game, where you know that your team won't stand a chance, because their competitive morale is so low from the past seasons poor results?
I know I wouldn't, and that's why I don't feel betrayed or upset about what NaNi did.
I would then have to direct to you the Toronto Maple Leafs
Despite garbage results season after season the fan continue to pack the stadium for every game all year. Fans are important to this community. Whether its the Leafs being down and out in the last game of the year despite missing play off, or Naniwa being eliminated from the play offs from this tournament, as a fan I wanna see that surge. That "alright I've blown it up till now but I'm gonna fucking smash this next guy and prove to them that next season you have to watch out for me".
Granted when I saw the rush I laughed i thought it was kinda funny but at the same time I felt as though I've been denied a game I really wanted to see. Personally I was really hoping to see Nestea be like all right here is where I show you I'm still a champion.
I feel that the punishment may have been hard but at the same time something had to be done and now he has to live with his decision.
If that is so then it sure is admireable. I would love to see those attendance numbers, if there really is the same interest for a non-important game. But more importantly you can't compare it like this. Remember that the Leafs earn lots of money on having their game broadcasted, and ticket sales, so there is actually personal interest for all of the players, whether it's money or stanley cup, and this is the key diffrence we all have been talking about this past 10.000 posts on this forum.
The whole All Star match point I won't even argue about because show matches and matches in a competition are not even remotely related.
How are they not related? They both produce revenue for any league in the same way; both involve the same kinds of ticket sales and advertising. If anything, the All-Star game is more important to the league than a standard game, because usually All-Star games carry more attention, higher ticket prices, more expensive ad buys, and a larger viewership.
They are not related since in a tournament setting you are playing to win. In a show match you are playing to please the fans. Naniwa was their to win the tournament, when he was out it was over for him. It's not like Naniwa would have probe rushed in a show match that GOM held, he just felt that the tournament for him was done.
I also wonder, where's the line drawn for you between not trying their hardest and throwing the game? If he had done a proxy 2-gate would it have been ok with you? A 4-gate? It's not as if he did not have a chance of winning with the probe rush, it's extremely unlikely but it's still plausible. In champions league last week Bayern had already advanced. They were facing Manchester City who were at third place in the group. Bayern played that game with a horrible line up. They did not even use their b-team. Manchester City won the game of course and that put Napoli who had second place in a rough spot. Is that not throwing the game? I'd say that Bayern had a smaller chance of winning vs Man city with that line up than Naniwa had to win vs Nestea. You can't say that they always tries. Naniwa's probes tried, but Naniwa didn't. The players in Bayern tried but the coach didn't. There's no difference, stuff like this happends all the time in pro sports.
Naniwa's probes tried? Are you even serious? I can't tell if you are trolling or not...
It's the same thing, Naniwa had a chance of winning, but his players were weak since he did not feel like using his best players. But none the less the players tried to win.
What are you talking about? Even if I would use your terrible analogy, the player is Naniwa and the coach is his team. Considering that his team hyped the game on twitter, I would say that in your analogy, the coach tried, and the players just didnt want to play.
On December 15 2011 21:47 Chromodoris wrote: It's the same thing, Naniwa had a chance of winning, but his players were weak since he did not feel like using his best players. But none the less the players tried to win.
Man, you can't call the units a team and a player its coach. That's just ludicrous and it distracts from more tenable arguments that an injustice was committed.
The thing is that it shows that the same things happends in real sports. Who's to judge what build you are allowed to use in starcraft and who's to judge what players you are to use in a football game?
On December 15 2011 21:47 Chromodoris wrote: It's the same thing, Naniwa had a chance of winning, but his players were weak since he did not feel like using his best players. But none the less the players tried to win.
Man, you can't call the units a team and a player its coach. That's just ludicrous and it distracts from more tenable arguments that an injustice was committed.
The thing is that it shows that the same things happends in real sports. Who's to judge what build you are allowed to use in starcraft and who's to judge what players you are to use in a football game?
I suggest you read the OP... it is well explained there.
On December 15 2011 21:47 Chromodoris wrote: It's the same thing, Naniwa had a chance of winning, but his players were weak since he did not feel like using his best players. But none the less the players tried to win.
Man, you can't call the units a team and a player its coach. That's just ludicrous and it distracts from more tenable arguments that an injustice was committed.
The thing is that it shows that the same things happends in real sports. Who's to judge what build you are allowed to use in starcraft and who's to judge what players you are to use in a football game?
I suggest you read the OP... it is well explained there.
Yeah, but I'm saying that they do not always "put on a show for the spectators, and delivered a quality product to its respective league" in real sports either. I disagree with Alex's statement that no games are thrown in real sports. If you say that Naniwa threw the game vs Nestea then Bayern threw the game vs Man city
This is hands down the best opinion I've read on this matter. I agree on almost everything you've posted. Perhaps the only part we might disagree with is that I believe Naniwa got away with a very mild punishment relative to what he did: disrespect and disregard GOM and its league GSL, his team management, his opponent's team, the viewers, fans, sponsors.
I can't even wrap my head around how immature this person must be to be completely oblivious to what he did. I'd understand it on the heat of the moment (understand, not condone or accept), but Naniwa still came out and defended his position after the fact, thinking he had done nothing wrong, and even directly criticizing the Korean community for blowing things out of proportion. It will be difficult for me to support Naniwa again, at least until he has proven a change in character, because just wanting to win at the expense of anything is not enough.
On December 15 2011 21:24 don_kyuhote wrote: This was a great blog. Have you ever seen a football team that just sit on the grass and let the other team score 100 goals non stop on them just because they cannot advance to the knockout stage and they're pissed? That was pretty much what naniwa did in my eyes.
well you know there is a rule agianst that in football. thats the thing it wasnt in GSL,
so they gotta follow that rule. and nani shouldnt have to as there isnt a rule agianst it
What you don't understand is that the whole thing is not about rules. It's about common sense. You just don't do that because because you KNOW some people are gonna feel disrespected.
How do you punish people for not having what you consider to be common sense, though? Did you read Naniwa's statement? He didn't KNOW some people were going to feel disrespected. It all becomes a question of morals / ethics / ideals, etc., which is very ambiguous. Just look at the responses following the incident -- a lot of people are on both sides of the argument, some feeling that it was very disrespectful, some disagreeing and saying he didn't do anything wrong. Obviously the public's opinion matters less than Gom's, and I don't think it should be surprising that they're upset with him, but he's still been punished fairly severely and has taken a lot of shit here on TL for something that he didn't realize at the time would cause a problem.
I don't know, I just feel really bad for him because basically his mistake was not being mature / experienced enough to understand all the implications of his actions, and I really don't think that's something you should get angry at someone for. Yeah, he made a mistake, he's learned from it, and Gom is probably within their rights to punish him, but all this talk about how he was so horribly disrespectful to esports and everyone and how he's a terrible person is just wrong in my opinion. The guy made an honest mistake, he's been punished, let's stop trying to crucify him already.
On December 15 2011 21:50 MildSeven wrote: Another wise article, hope all the GOM-hating spoiled brats stops with their incessant whining after reading this and acknowledging that Naniwa himself had also apologized and truly understands the immaturity of his actions.
Well, if they don't understand, I'm sure that calling them names will help them open their eyes.
The whole All Star match point I won't even argue about because show matches and matches in a competition are not even remotely related.
How are they not related? They both produce revenue for any league in the same way; both involve the same kinds of ticket sales and advertising. If anything, the All-Star game is more important to the league than a standard game, because usually All-Star games carry more attention, higher ticket prices, more expensive ad buys, and a larger viewership.
They are not related since in a tournament setting you are playing to win. In a show match you are playing to please the fans. Naniwa was their to win the tournament, when he was out it was over for him. It's not like Naniwa would have probe rushed in a show match that GOM held, he just felt that the tournament for him was done.
You're merely pointing out the fact that a player's experience and/or mental approach to a tournament match is different from his experience and/or mental approach to a show match. This is obviously true, but it has no logical relationship whatsoever to whether or not the same expectations of effort and play quality apply to both kinds of matches.
Different experience for the player in a tournament match vs. a show match (doesnotequal) different standards of play quality/good faith for the player in a tournament match vs. a show match.
I also wonder, where's the line drawn for you between not trying their hardest and throwing the game? If he had done a proxy 2-gate would it have been ok with you? A 4-gate? It's not as if he did not have a chance of winning with the probe rush, it's extremely unlikely but it's still plausible. In champions league last week Bayern had already advanced. They were facing Manchester City who were at third place in the group. Bayern played that game with a horrible line up. They did not even use their b-team. Manchester City won the game of course and that put Napoli who had second place in a rough spot. Is that not throwing the game? I'd say that Bayern had a smaller chance of winning vs Man city with that line up than Naniwa had to win vs Nestea. You can't say that they always tries. Naniwa's probes tried, but Naniwa didn't. The players in Bayern tried but the coach didn't. There's no difference, stuff like this happends all the time in pro sports.
It's not really my place to weigh in on where the line is; I make no subjective assertions on this subject in the OP. In fact, my point is entirely that this kind of subject matter is unbelievably subjective. It's not really up to me to decide what would or wouldn't have been sufficient. What did happen was certainly insufficient, but to comment any further than that would be purely my subjective opinion.
yesterday I wrote a blog with almost exactly the same content (only shorter ^____^). people you listen to alex, since there is much truth in what he wrote down. thanks for the effort.
On December 15 2011 21:40 Chromodoris wrote: I also wonder, where's the line drawn for you between not trying their hardest and throwing the game? If he had done a proxy 2-gate would it have been ok with you? A 4-gate? It's not as if he did not have a chance of winning with the probe rush, it's extremely unlikely but it's still plausible. In champions league last week Bayern had already advanced. They were facing Manchester City who were at third place in the group. Bayern played that game with a horrible line up. They did not even use their b-team. Manchester City won the game of course and that put Napoli who had second place in a rough spot. Is that not throwing the game? I'd say that Bayern had a smaller chance of winning vs Man city with that line up than Naniwa had to win vs Nestea. You can't say that they always tries. Naniwa's probes tried, but Naniwa didn't. The players in Bayern tried but the coach didn't. There's no difference, stuff like this happends all the time in pro sports.
It's not really my place to weigh in on where the line is; I make no subjective assertions on this subject in the OP. In fact, my point is entirely that this kind of subject matter is unbelievably subjective. It's not really up to me to decide what would or wouldn't have been sufficient. What did happen was certainly insufficient, but to comment any further than that would be purely my subjective opinion.
What makes what happened "certainly insufficient"? To say that something has clearly crossed that line, you must have some idea where it is.
If your point is that it is a subjective issue, what is it subject to? That might give us a clearer perspective of the circumstances. If we are going to come down on someone for crossing a boundary, lets work together to find out what that boundary is.
I 100% agree with everything Alex said. Let's say Arsenal & Manchester United had a poor season and were 10th & 11th respectively in the Premier League with 1 game to go against each other. Whoever wins gets that 10th spot and a little extra cash from the league, but other than that they're not fighting for anything (no european spots, no relegation struggle). As a viewer I would be absolutely livid if one team proceeded to sit their collective arses on the grass after the kick-off, and not play. They have a duty as a professional team & players to show up and give everyone a game. Yes it would be ideal if both teams used the fact that they're playing against their rival to close out the season as a motivation to do their best, but I would understand if some or even the majority of the players on the field weren't due to their poor season. That still doesn't give them any excuse to just throw the game. The amount of shitstorm they would bring on themselves is unfathomable.
It is clear that Naniwa did not realise what his status as a professional gamer entailed. You sometimes have to put aside your own emotions & needs and just do your damn job. I hope he has learned from this and returns as a professional and not just a 'progamer'.
Nice to see what Alex has to say on the subject. Particularly interesting given his role with the top North American team and his relationship with IdrA. Very well written and raises a lot of good points, of which I tend to agree with most of them.
On December 15 2011 22:10 thopol wrote: What makes what happened "certainly insufficient"? To say that something has clearly crossed that line, you must have some idea where it is.
If your point is that it is a subjective issue, what is it subject to? That might give us a clearer perspective of the circumstances. If we are going to come down on someone for crossing a boundary, lets work together to find out what that boundary is.
I've given this a lot of thought but I don't think you can ever define the line. You can't find the boundary. You can however spot outliers. A lot of people come up with gray area examples as a counter to outliers - they're not the same. We are able to tell when we're sure someone is giving it their earnest and we are able to tell when someone doesn't try at all. It's not possible to determine where the line is and effectively use it for any sort of policy. As such the policies need to be directed at the outliers where everyone can agree no effort was made to win.
On December 15 2011 21:07 Ninjahoe wrote: You are certainly a very smart man and this is very well written. However, if the team you support have NO CHANCE at all in winning their final game of MLB (unless their opponants are equally unmotivated, wich would only generate a really poor match), will you go watch it? Would you really want to see a game, where you know that your team won't stand a chance, because their competitive morale is so low from the past seasons poor results?
I know I wouldn't, and that's why I don't feel betrayed or upset about what NaNi did.
You're not really a fan, then are you? So if that's your logic, you obviously did not watch Naniwa vs Nestea because he's out of the tournament anyway right? You're such a great fan. You're basically a bandwagon fan. Why would you not support a team, who is already down and out, just to make them even feel more down when their fans are not there? Are these seriously your thought patterns? I notice alot of Swedes are with Naniwa's decision. They're obviously biased, nationalistic opinions.
What you even said was totally off tangent in the first place. The thing is people DID watch Naniwa vs Nestea and were anticipating a great game, but didn't happen and lead to this huge controversy which will not die because people DID watch it. Please think before you type. I suggest this to anyone who thinks Naniwa is a saint because you are 100% wrong.
What makes what happened "certainly insufficient"?
I spend my whole OP addressing this question .
To say that something has clearly crossed that line, you must have some idea where it is.
I'm sorry, but this statement just isn't accurate. You can make an argument for something fitting into one of two binary extremes (i.e. acceptable/unacceptable) without making any claims about the area between them.
(I never said anything about a logical construct involving a line; if anything, the space between acceptable and unacceptable is most certainly a spectrum or gray area)
If your point is that it is a subjective issue, what is it subject to? That might give us a clearer perspective of the circumstances. If we are going to come down on someone for crossing a boundary, lets work together to find out what that boundary is.
I think that you're misinterpreting the word "subjective" - by describing certain issues as "subjective," I'm making the point that they have no definite, empirical answers, or objectively right/wrong analyses, but rather, that they're very much matters of personal opinion.
On December 15 2011 22:12 Telcontar wrote: I 100% agree with everything Alex said. Let's say Arsenal & Manchester United had a poor season and were 10th & 11th respectively in the Premier League with 1 game to go against each other. Whoever wins gets that 10th spot and a little extra cash from the league, but other than that they're not fighting for anything (no european spots, no relegation struggle). As a viewer I would be absolutely livid if one team proceeded to sit their collective arses on the grass after the kick-off, and not play. They have a duty as a professional team & players to show up and give everyone a game. Yes it would be ideal if both teams used the fact that they're playing against their rival to close out the season as a motivation to do their best, but I would understand if some or even the majority of the players on the field weren't due to their poor season. That still doesn't give them any excuse to just throw the game. The amount of shitstorm they would bring on themselves is unfathomable.
It is clear that Naniwa did not realise what his status as a professional gamer entailed. You sometimes have to put aside your own emotions & needs and just do your damn job. I hope he has learned from this and returns as a professional and not just a 'progamer'.
yeah lets say that. and now we can talk early on about the carling cup, noone of them would play their best players in there, and therefore would not give the fans the real show.
and for the fact that they are rivals. they never want to loose agianst eachothers. and its not that little extra . and every income in football is important. we all know that that have intresst in that game.
and they will might get relegation if they just sit on the pitch. cos its not allowed in football.
they will play their b-squad mixed with u18 sqaud with some key players on the bench.
thast exactelly what naniwa did. he took a B strat cos its not important.
On December 15 2011 22:10 thopol wrote: What makes what happened "certainly insufficient"? To say that something has clearly crossed that line, you must have some idea where it is.
If your point is that it is a subjective issue, what is it subject to? That might give us a clearer perspective of the circumstances. If we are going to come down on someone for crossing a boundary, lets work together to find out what that boundary is.
I've given this a lot of thought but I don't think you can ever define the line. You can't find the boundary. You can however spot outliers without any issues. A lot of people come up with gray area examples as a counter to outliers - they're not the same. We are able to tell when we're sure someone is giving it their earnest and we are able to tell when someone doesn't try at all. It's not possible to determine where the line is and effectively use it for any sort of policy. As such the policies need to be directed at the outliers where everyone can agree no effort was made to win.
On December 15 2011 22:17 matiK23 wrote: I notice alot of Swedes are with Naniwa's decision. It's obviously biased.
wait what. before and in the naniwa games. i thought i saw the chat goes NaNi Make america proud! nani is american? ow so all the non american players is americans til they mess up?
On December 15 2011 21:48 GodZo wrote: I'm sorry but I can't defend GOM.
While i respect your opinion, opinions and posts like these are pointless unless you state your reasons why so..
On December 15 2011 22:21 LaoShuAiDaMi wrote: So if you think this about Naniwa, what about EG.dota refusing to play at SMM loser bracket and misery throwing all the 1v1 games at G-league?
That was simply to boycott the tournament. Tournament org made a horrible decision(s) and thus EG team didn't bother to continue.
There was bigger issues than boycottin the tournament by EG's DOTA team. If you followed the tournament or read about it, you know what i'm talking about.
e. Well, Alex also posted about this couple post under.
On December 15 2011 21:07 Ninjahoe wrote: You are certainly a very smart man and this is very well written. However, if the team you support have NO CHANCE at all in winning their final game of MLB (unless their opponants are equally unmotivated, wich would only generate a really poor match), will you go watch it? Would you really want to see a game, where you know that your team won't stand a chance, because their competitive morale is so low from the past seasons poor results?
I know I wouldn't, and that's why I don't feel betrayed or upset about what NaNi did.
You're not really a fan, then are you? So if that's your logic, you obviously did not watch Naniwa vs Nestea because he's out of the tournament anyway right? You're such a great fan. You're basically a bandwagon fan. Why would you not support a team, who is already down and out, just to make them even feel more down when their fans are not there? Are these seriously your thought patterns? I notice alot of Swedes are with Naniwa's decision. They're obviously biased, nationalistic opinions.
What you even said was totally off tangent in the first place. The thing is people DID watch Naniwa vs Nestea and were anticipating a great game, but didn't happen and lead to this huge controversy which will not die because people DID watch it. Please think before you type. I suggest this to anyone who thinks Naniwa is a saint because you are 100% wrong.
Scuse me? I would still support my team, I would however not go and pay to watch a game i knew weren't going to be good anyway. Your logic makes no sense at all, and i'd beg for you to rethink what you just said, and come back when you can discuss like an adault. You can twist and turn nationalities as much as you want, f.ex. Hey, I see you are american, you are obviously biased because you hate NaNi for calling MLG a joke tournament.
I never said NaNi is a saint, nor do I think what he did was even close to good. I do however feel that it's not that big of a deal that has been made out of it for the reasons I previously stated.
And yes, I did sit and were excited about the game, because I wanted naniwa to show all haters out there that he is indeed a truly great player. This doesn't mean that I were offended by not seeing this, but more relived that the tension in this rivalry wasn't relived after a half-assed try, and everyone would keep bashing, saying Providence were a fluke.
On December 15 2011 22:21 LaoShuAiDaMi wrote: So if you think this about Naniwa, what about EG.dota refusing to play at SMM loser bracket and misery throwing all the 1v1 games at G-league?
That happened without the knowledge or consent of EG management.
I think it was absolutely unacceptable, and I am not at all happy with the way it represented the EG brand. I have told the players as much. It has been a hot topic of discussion internally within our company.
Ultimately, it's our job to make sure our players behave professionally, so saying "we didn't know about it and we didn't approve of it" is, to be fair, an excuse. We failed to manage our players appropriately in that situation.
Still, having communication problems with our DotA players is quite different from engaging in hypocrisy. I think that the former (which is what happened) is pretty excusable, while the latter (which isn't the case) would be much worse.
With that said, I also think it's fair to point out that boycotting a match is quite different from throwing a match, but I don't want to derail the conversation.
i'd be really curious to know how i'd react if i had bought that premium ticket-thingy - for now i still think that the shitstorm unleashed by the controversy was very much so worth the upset. as i stated in some other thread, i found this to be really entertaining. in addition, i would like to thank you for the amount of elaboration you seem to have put into that blog, it adds to the amount of entertainment i did gain from this one single game.
I agree with most of Alex' statement and I must say that his statement is not at all that different from the one I heard from other players and otherwise notable community figures, just more elaborate (I like elaborate)
So thanks for the writeup, it gives some good insight.
In line with this, selling subscriptions and season passes is, obviously, crucially important to GOM.TV's business model. And ultimately, the quality of their product is defined by the entertainment value of their matches. So, when one of the world's most famous players, in an exciting grudge match (regardless of the players' records in their group), decides to probe rush in front of thousands upon thousands of spectators, many of whom are paying subscribers, he's single-handedly denying GOM a quality product to deliver to its consumer base. That is, simply, unacceptable. It is, objectively, bad for everyone who cares about eSports.
Reading this it is totally and completely baffling that GomTV created a tournament format that allows the Naniwa/Nestea scenario to happen and happen pretty easily. Alex talks about professionalism. I do agree with that the players are professionals and should behave as such, but the same thing should be expected of the tournament organization and structure.
When a Bo3 or Bo5 is played, and one player is 2-0 or 3-0 against the other player, the other games don´´t get played. Because, even if it´s Flash vs Jaedong or even when it´s the grudgematch of the century. This is because we agree and have agreed on the fact that these games have no meaning whatsoever.
How weird is it then that the same thing is expected of a player when this Bo5 is played against not 1 but different players
GomTV have put themselves in a great position to be shot in the foot like they did because at the end of the day, they´re selling entertainment in the form of a competative SC2 tournament. When the tournament, or parts of the tournament are no longer competative, you cannot expect any entertainment to derive from it. Sure you can berate the competitors if no entertainment is reaped from your efforts. But they themselves must realize that a competitor can only be expected to prodcuce entertainment when put in a competative enviroment.
I have been reading posts like this from the very beginning. Even one thing has to be said, none were this well articulated. Its hard to disagree with the post and I will try to articulate why.
But the thing that annoys me the most about this situation is how shallow and political are all the posts. There are facts that cannot be mediated by ignoring them and it creates this whole pitchfork mistrust between viewers.
Does this happen in regular sports? Yes, person would be real dummy, if they said it does not. Does the stated fact have any direct correlation? Well besides the obvious elephant in the room, being the sponsorship, there is not a single correlation. Why is there no correlation? Well, because everything is stated on a clear business model before anything even starts. Every professional organization in Europe and probably in US too has rule sets to provide better options. Does that mean that GOMTV failed to do a professional job? 100% yes. There is the issue of Koreans depending on platitudes likes honor and misconceptions (Professional sportsman is not a sportsman) and they fucked up again.
I was interested in EGAlex opinion because this could have happened to EG with all the business around Puma too. they(Obviously this is a different party. There is no evidence GomTV was a part of the incident with Puma) realized they fucked up there too and created (This was pretty much clearly stated) the whole pitchfork reaction from korean side of things.
I am quite disappointed that there is no reaction to the fact they decided to punish him through means they didnt have, then they change the tunes twice. (Ban/NotBan). Does that mean Alex does not care much about leagues bending their rules to punish something (That yes it needs to be punished), by breaking the whole idea of law based society? The rule they tried to enforce at first was broke by nearly all the Code S/GSL players from the very beginning of Starcraft 2 at GOMTV and did not even have correlation with what naniwa did.
EDIT: If the post was compartmentalized my point still stands, because we cannot do that. We cannot ignore the snakes in the room, because there is an elephant.
PS: Yes MLG has a part of rule set that would prohibit naniwa from throwing the match
EDIT 2: What would be really interesting situation, when Naniwa would be an actual douche bag. Because then he would not accept any blame and this would have to be a real issue, not just a blown up mistake. (He clearly isnt and anyone calling him money hungry whore and etc is stupid)
After reading so many angry oneliners, it's good to read something reflected showing more than one side or a simple black-and-white viewpoint. Very good post, Alex.
I agree with what you wrote almost entirely. However, I don't think it's fair to divorce the discussion from GOM's reaction.
Very few people think Naniwa shouldn't be punished at all. I think a fair number of people find GOM's reaction to be disproportionate to the severity of the offense.
It is completely unacceptable that "Providence didn't actually count for Code S seeds" only becomes publicized as rationalization for a penalty levied against Naniwa. Most everyone, including MLG writing staff, were under the impression that the entire 2011 season from Columbus onward provided the Code S seeding. And by denying Naniwa the seed, GOM certainly implied that it existed. Even if they can legally interpret the vague wording of the agreement as "only tournaments with championship pools count", the fact that they are publicizing it only after they wanted to punish Naniwa is completely unethical.
I don't agree with your sentiment that it is a pro players responsibility to put on a good show for the spectators. No pro practices hours upon hours so he can put on good shows, no pro motivates himself by saying "if I practice these couple more hours I can put on a better show." Associating entertainment with a pro players job is silly IMO. You play to win the game. Period. For Naniwa, this game was the blizzard cup, of which he could not win, so he did not play. Very simple, very understandable.
On December 15 2011 22:43 [NSL]BansheeHero wrote: I have been reading posts like this from the very beginning. Even one thing has to be said, none were this well articulated. Its hard to disagree with the post and I will try to articulate why.
But the thing that annoys me the most about this situation is how shallow and political are all the posts. There are facts that cannot be mediated by ignoring them and it creates this whole pitchfork mistrust between viewers.
Does this happen in regular sports? Yes, person would be real dummy, if they said it does not. Does the stated fact have any direct correlation? Well besides the obvious elephant in the room, being the sponsorship, there is not a single correlation. Why is there no correlation? Well, because everything is stated on a clear business model before anything even starts. Every professional organization in Europe and probably in US too has rule sets to provide better options. Does that mean that GOMTV failed to do a professional job? 100% yes. There is the issue of Koreans depending on platitudes likes honor and misconceptions (Professional sportsman is not a sportsman) and they fucked up again.
I was interested in EGAlex opinion because this could have happened to EG with all the business around Puma too. they realized they fucked there too and created (This was pretty much clearly stated) the whole pitchfork reaction from korean side of things.ore "
I am quite disappointed that there is no reaction to the fact they decided to punish him through means they didnt have, then they change the tunes twice. (Ban/NotBan). Does that mean Alex does not care much about leagues bending their rules to punish something (That yes it needs to be punished), by breaking the whole idea of law based society? The rule they tried to enforce at first was broke by nearly all the Code S/GSL players from the very beginning of Starcraft 2 at GOMTV and did not even have correlation with what naniwa did.
EDIT: If the post was compartmentalized my point still stands, because we cannot do that. We cannot ignore the snakes in the room, because there is an elephant.
PS: Yes MLG has a part of rule set that would prohibit naniwa from throwing the match
I agree with most of the things here specially related to the competitions. I am kinda tired of seeing competitions randomly made. I understand that they have to satisfy the sponsors....and i understand that players need to be professional...but what about competitions? Who decides if they get a fine for not being "professional" ... who makes sure they don't fk up like they did.
The fact that redundant matches exist doesn't mean it can't be fixed or even try atleast. I want competitions to become "professional" also. I have seen alot of misscomunication between GOM and MLG regarding Code S seeds....how did this happen?
My 2 cents on this is that a big part of the blame is on the competitions themselfs. A biger authority..or a union between all competitions at a business level is clearly needed. U guys need to meet and discuss common competition formats or in that vecinity. U need to help eachother get more "professional" if u guys want this thing to grow..don't expect only the players to get professional and u just sit in the back and profit from the hype.
Again these are my 2 cents on the topic i might be right or wrong..but as i see it..each competition does what it wants. There's no consistency jumping from 1 competition to another..there are no clear rules between tournament managers...communication is very low. There needs to be a high union (authority) that fines tournaments if they fk up so that they improve not just themselfs but the revenue from the e-sport movement. Tournaments in their turn can fine players for not being professional.
I don't say they have to be the exact same that would be bull... what i am saying is that some rules have to be common so that a player for example has to play as less useless games as possible (common format rule)....players don't have to change their training based on the same map but with small modifications...for fk sake CHOSE A MAP..and then use it globally..at the moment each tournament has it's own map..i consider that degrading. That does not help either the player..the tournament or the viewers..because everyone is confused. As a pro player if u are confused u can't give it 100% (see what happened at MLG with naniwa-cross pos). These are the kind of stuff i am talking about...common rules...common mindsets....a bit of consistency and everything is MUCH clearer. If u don't respect u fine...if u fine u won't repeat that mistake...easy right? Apply to tournaments the same professionalism treatment u apply to players...because "we are in it together".
Bottom line is that tournaments need a higher authority so that they can "mature". If they mature..everything else does together with them without even asking for it. U can't make the exact same tournament everywere on the planet just because of the cultural differences and so on and so forth (witch for viewers doesn't even mater) BUT u need small common rules that can be accepted like formats..matches...stuff like that... "forfeit rules" bla bla bla.
With that said, I also think it's fair to point out that boycotting a match is quite different from throwing a match, but I don't want to derail the conversation.
I have to disagree with this since they both do exactly the same thing. They rob the viewer of what they came there to see, a professional game between two (or more) players or teams. There is no distinguishable difference between them in any way shape or form for the viewer or the tournament, they both cheat viewers and organizers alike.
On December 15 2011 21:07 Ninjahoe wrote: You are certainly a very smart man and this is very well written. However, if the team you support have NO CHANCE at all in winning their final game of MLB (unless their opponants are equally unmotivated, wich would only generate a really poor match), will you go watch it? Would you really want to see a game, where you know that your team won't stand a chance, because their competitive morale is so low from the past seasons poor results?
I know I wouldn't, and that's why I don't feel betrayed or upset about what NaNi did.
You're not really a fan, then are you? So if that's your logic, you obviously did not watch Naniwa vs Nestea because he's out of the tournament anyway right? You're such a great fan. You're basically a bandwagon fan. Why would you not support a team, who is already down and out, just to make them even feel more down when their fans are not there? Are these seriously your thought patterns? I notice alot of Swedes are with Naniwa's decision. They're obviously biased, nationalistic opinions.
What you even said was totally off tangent in the first place. The thing is people DID watch Naniwa vs Nestea and were anticipating a great game, but didn't happen and lead to this huge controversy which will not die because people DID watch it. Please think before you type. I suggest this to anyone who thinks Naniwa is a saint because you are 100% wrong.
I personally expected at least an interesting game, because I thought every sportsman wants to end the tournament with a good performance. (especially when they're out) Naniwa not only threw this chance away for himself, but also took this chance away from nestea.
Alex explained very well, why this kind of behavior is really damaging esports out of an economic point of view. I really liked this. But I think, especially for us as an audience, it's ruining every value of sportsmanship for nearly everyone involved. So out of this reasons, such actions can't be tolerated at all and GOM wanted to make sure, that this and every possible action of this kind never happens again, so they choosed a (non-formal) - this point has still to be clearified by MLG - punishment, which seemed very harsch due to the given situation at first, but after I thought it for a while, I think it's fully acceptable. I personally didn't mind it so much when it happened but on the other hand, I don't want these things to ever happen again, maybe even on a regular basis, so it was actually a really big deal!
I think at this point of time a large part of the community understands, that what's happened was wrong and that the punishment by GOM is quite adequate. So I hope everyone learned something from this and we'll have a nice year 2012!
Agree on most of this article. It more or less is my opinion, but with better english.
On the GOM responsability of organizing tournament with bad format... well you always have the right to refuse the invite. If you don't, then you agree with the rules and the format, retarded/bad or not. That is also professionalism from my point of view.
I hope that this situation won't have a too much negative impact on Naniwa, be it his reputation or his motivation.
On December 15 2011 22:10 thopol wrote: What makes what happened "certainly insufficient"? To say that something has clearly crossed that line, you must have some idea where it is.
If your point is that it is a subjective issue, what is it subject to? That might give us a clearer perspective of the circumstances. If we are going to come down on someone for crossing a boundary, lets work together to find out what that boundary is.
I've given this a lot of thought but I don't think you can ever define the line. You can't find the boundary. You can however spot outliers. A lot of people come up with gray area examples as a counter to outliers - they're not the same. We are able to tell when we're sure someone is giving it their earnest and we are able to tell when someone doesn't try at all. It's not possible to determine where the line is and effectively use it for any sort of policy. As such the policies need to be directed at the outliers where everyone can agree no effort was made to win.
I understand what you mean, and I don't really think you can define a line either. This means though, that when a player is in that grey area, they are at risk of professional repercussions because of something fundamentally unrelated to their ability to play the game. We are judging a player's acting ability on a case-by-case. What does it mean that we are put in a situation where success in esports is subject to how well someone puts on a show? Do fans expect players to be entertainers or to do their best to win?
When we have a situation where a player can be punished for something, there needs to a rule against it. If it is to be judged on a case by case basis, we need to have criteria that we look at. If our sole criterion is effort, we need to define how we measure that as best we can.
If this remains a vague area, there are ramifications for the whole scene. Players and organizers both need to consider this new angle when preparing strategies and event formats in the future.
To EGAlex, if Nazgul's position is exactly what you were getting at, great. If you would like to hear a response to your rebuttal, I would prefer if we took it to PM.
On December 15 2011 21:07 Ninjahoe wrote: You are certainly a very smart man and this is very well written. However, if the team you support have NO CHANCE at all in winning their final game of MLB (unless their opponants are equally unmotivated, wich would only generate a really poor match), will you go watch it? Would you really want to see a game, where you know that your team won't stand a chance, because their competitive morale is so low from the past seasons poor results?
I know I wouldn't, and that's why I don't feel betrayed or upset about what NaNi did.
You're not really a fan, then are you? So if that's your logic, you obviously did not watch Naniwa vs Nestea because he's out of the tournament anyway right? You're such a great fan. You're basically a bandwagon fan. Why would you not support a team, who is already down and out, just to make them even feel more down when their fans are not there? Are these seriously your thought patterns? I notice alot of Swedes are with Naniwa's decision. They're obviously biased, nationalistic opinions.
What you even said was totally off tangent in the first place. The thing is people DID watch Naniwa vs Nestea and were anticipating a great game, but didn't happen and lead to this huge controversy which will not die because people DID watch it. Please think before you type. I suggest this to anyone who thinks Naniwa is a saint because you are 100% wrong.
after alex long post, this is the 2nd best post i have read on this whole topic since the begining...
also, the insight of how teams in SC2 are managed is interesting as well, thx for the very nice write-up alex!
Guys, I know that he stated that there is no BIAS but you have to remember that EG runs some online cups. I think it was the EG masters cup? I am on a dumb timezone to watch it so I skipped it.
Saying that though, Naniwa should not have done the probe rush. It a dumb and brash move that he must insanely regret.
Exactly what I think and what i've been saying irl with my friends, almost to the word. Thanks for explaining it to people who refused to see it in others thread.
On December 15 2011 22:55 CharlieBrownsc wrote: I don't agree with your sentiment that it is a pro players responsibility to put on a good show for the spectators. No pro practices hours upon hours so he can put on good shows, no pro motivates himself by saying "if I practice these couple more hours I can put on a better show." Associating entertainment with a pro players job is silly IMO. You play to win the game. Period. For Naniwa, this game was the blizzard cup, of which he could not win, so he did not play. Very simple, very understandable.
With that said, I also think it's fair to point out that boycotting a match is quite different from throwing a match, but I don't want to derail the conversation.
I have to disagree with this since they both do exactly the same thing. They rob the viewer of what they came there to see, a professional game between two (or more) players or teams. There is no distinguishable difference between them in any way shape or form for the viewer or the tournament, they both cheat viewers and organizers alike.
There is a difference. Had Naniwa refused to go into that booth to play a meaningless match vs Nestea, he would've at least been upfront about his stance. However, going into that booth, setting up, and starting the game only to just simply throw it is different. He deceived the viewers, organisers, sponsors, staff and etc into thinking he will play a game of SC2 vs Nestea when he clearly didn't intend to. Do you not see the difference between a player refusing to play, and agreeing to play only to not?
When I saw 7 probes rushing a hatchery, I knew that Naniwa (foolishly) chose to act honestly instead of doing what so many other pro gamers have done before. The esports world should not be parallel with athletic sports for many reasons, one being the seasonal and physical aspects of athletic sports, and I do believe his actions were unacceptable
But I think that a player can never play his best games when he knows there is nothing at stake, and it is the responsibility of the tournaments to host formats that create meaningful games.
Too often I see players feign motivation when they are put into those situations you described, and those games truly anger me. Watching a player perform a game where it is apparent he is not motivated to play his best is insulting to my intelligence. I am paying for honest competition, not a fake and empty showmatch that is supposed to entertain me. I pay these companies to create a tournament where the players are motivated because the games are important to them. The situation does occur quite often, but they are rarely ever pointed out.
It's quite laughable how you parallel these situations to athletic sports to justify their existence. Nobody cares about the last two teams playing their final match of the season, and the turnouts for those games are always abysmal. Because the fans are not stupid.
The fans know when a game is meaningless. They know when the players don't give a damn, but the players slug on and half-ass it because "it's their job". Well you are selling the fans short. Naniwa's game angered me. But if Naniwa chose the politically correct strategy of 2 base all in or 4 gate, I would have been equally angered. Both strategies are equally meaningless to me, because the situation itself was meaningless.
Drama queens, jesus. This whole thing is so blown out of proportion that it's silly. I'm embarrassed for the whole community. Yes, he fucked up. We know. The only reason why we're still talking about this is because there's nothing else going on in SC2 right now. No one is going to give two shits about this a month from now. Stop throwing more wood to the fire, all these threads are silly. Also, this korean honor thing is just a bunch of BS. Korean honor isn't worth a damn. You can do whatever the fuck you want in their honor code as long as you're sneaky about it. I.E, a four-gate would be totally acceptable. Removing his Code S is completely unacceptable punishment made up by some imaginary rule or something, it's just GOM being bullies, saying that if you dont play their kind of game they'll punish you, severely. It's all about keeping that fake exterior up, nothing else.
The whole All Star match point I won't even argue about because show matches and matches in a competition are not even remotely related.
How are they not related? They both produce revenue for any league in the same way; both involve the same kinds of ticket sales and advertising. If anything, the All-Star game is more important to the league than a standard game, because usually All-Star games carry more attention, higher ticket prices, more expensive ad buys, and a larger viewership.
They are not related since in a tournament setting you are playing to win. In a show match you are playing to please the fans. Naniwa was their to win the tournament, when he was out it was over for him. It's not like Naniwa would have probe rushed in a show match that GOM held, he just felt that the tournament for him was done.
You're merely pointing out the fact that a player's experience and/or mental approach to a tournament match is different from his experience and/or mental approach to a show match. This is obviously true, but it has no logical relationship whatsoever to whether or not the same expectations of effort and play quality apply to both kinds of matches.
Different experience for the player in a tournament match vs. a show match (doesnotequal) different standards of play quality/good faith for the player in a tournament match vs. a show match.
I also wonder, where's the line drawn for you between not trying their hardest and throwing the game? If he had done a proxy 2-gate would it have been ok with you? A 4-gate? It's not as if he did not have a chance of winning with the probe rush, it's extremely unlikely but it's still plausible. In champions league last week Bayern had already advanced. They were facing Manchester City who were at third place in the group. Bayern played that game with a horrible line up. They did not even use their b-team. Manchester City won the game of course and that put Napoli who had second place in a rough spot. Is that not throwing the game? I'd say that Bayern had a smaller chance of winning vs Man city with that line up than Naniwa had to win vs Nestea. You can't say that they always tries. Naniwa's probes tried, but Naniwa didn't. The players in Bayern tried but the coach didn't. There's no difference, stuff like this happends all the time in pro sports.
It's not really my place to weigh in on where the line is; I make no subjective assertions on this subject in the OP. In fact, my point is entirely that this kind of subject matter is unbelievably subjective. It's not really up to me to decide what would or wouldn't have been sufficient. What did happen was certainly insufficient, but to comment any further than that would be purely my subjective opinion.
First of all, throwing showmatches and tournament matches together does not help here. They are very different and nobody expects a thrilling, 110% game in exhibition match, it's just not happening, the mental factor is part of it. You try to overemphasize the business side as both work the same way but you underestimate how reality sometimes beats you to it. The honesty with which Naniwa acted was part of his personality, much less of a business decision and as I said, you may have the same standards but if reality shows that somebody has to be motivated in some cases, why not shoulder that weight and go motivate him instead of pounding on ideals that simply aren't met? Sure, you can get rid of the brilliant player Naniwa because you don't want to take care of him but it remains questionable whether that is better than letting a worse player play who does it out of himself. I dare say the level of play produced and enjoyment generated for customers is greater if you can motivate Naniwa. People like Ronaldo who are crybaby divas and just stop trying all the time still play because they are arguably the best and somebody makes sure they perform with whatever appropriate measures. You can not state "Naniwa should have" without asking yourself "why didn't he?" and "how could we have made him do?". Yes, people have expectations to be met but making sure these are met is not only the players fault. Again, it's far too easy to just blame a tilted Naniwa.
Considering all star games, these are some American phenomenon. They generate great revenue but the level of play is often times much worse or based around the actual approach of trying to entertain (Globetrotters). They make you money and are important for business but they don't represent the actual sport. Plus, as I said, meaningless matches do not exist in most sports. There's always incentive and there's a reason why there is.
I also do not understand how you can compare LoL and GSL VoDs. One gives you access to 1/7th of a final for free, the other gives you free access to everything if you're willing to play it. One is Freemium, the other is a direct pay model. Any marketing specialist can tell you how that affects your customer base. It's not just extras, it's essentials that are "pay only" given that live is fleeting, unrepeatable. If they had multiple reruns and rotationg free season VoDs and whatnot you could argue similiarity. There's much less opportunity cost involved for time spent otherwise, something that consumers usually punish.
That's not what happens in major sports. The vast majority of revenue generated by professional sports teams comes from direct-to-consumer revenue streams like ticket sales and merchandise. Business-to-business revenue (like television contracts and in-stadium advertising) is also important, but these are mostly ad buys, not sponsorship.
Merchandise for most teams is not nearly as big, at least not in the first and second division football teams I could take a look at from a controlling perspective. Tickets, TV rights and shares of ad revenue collected by the handlers of these rights were the most dominant with much less emphasis on ticket sales with lower public interest (GOM has like 100 seats max anyways). However, you also get huge cost from ticket sales because they affect your capacity and do not create economies of scale too well (the opposite of what ad revenue does). Essentially you wind up with the indirect sales to customers (TV rights -> pay per view etc.) which arguably could be direct sales and shared ad revenue.
Direct-to-consumer revenue is, by definition, a better revenue stream than business-to-business revenue, and getting paid to market to the consumer indirectly. The former offers you more stability and control over your revenue stream, and a higher return on investment per person reached.
Now, you argue that you have more control over direct sales but how so, the only extra factor for ad revenue would be an agency you hire yourself. Whether you handle sales directly or ads directly is much less of a difference. Then you get a lot less stability and planability based purely on performance. Ad revenue is often times a set amount paid per viewer, especially in online streaming. How is that different in scaling? You have 100% control as your marketing efforts directly translate into more viewers which means more revenue. Your whole argument is based on some beliefs that have been argued about in economic science for years. Marketing professors quote that, controlling professors show them opposite results and at some point people will agree that the bottom line matters. Obviously, from the purely theoretical perspective the value created and the value paid differ here but that is based on the consumer perception of the value. The thing is, consumers decide where your pricing is for b2c and businesses decide where your pricing is for b2b. There's no differentiation except that handling business relationships is usually less expensive if done right (might be an EU thing because of differing laws). The question where you get more ROI per consumer does not matter that much when they offer completely different market shares. You reach more people with ad financed, free content than with paid content (you reach even more with the option to pay to turn off ads etc.).
On December 15 2011 20:43 Krogan wrote: Well I am glad Alex is honest enough to say that Naniwa should learn to lie for the good of money making. Otherwise to say that what Idra has done in the past is not as bad as what Naniwa did just doesn't hold up as his argument was mostly that gom is a bigger stage and the match was more important. However from Naniwa's point of a view a placement match at MLG is far more important then this match vs nestea as it has implications for future tournaments, this match didn't.
For me as a fellow swede raised in a culture that teaches us to never ever lie I see what Naniwa did as little different to Jinro swearing or Thorzain being chill and not showing much emotion, these guys are not playing a game with you, they are not putting up any fronts its just how they are, no fluff as you Americans like to say (yeah what Nani did is actually no fluff where as a 4gate would have been fluff.).
I don't mean to sound pro swedish or anti American or whatever but this post from alex very clearly shows that mental difference between how we think and most of the world. Honesty for us is not something that is based on how much money is involved. Naniwa was just being honest and that is what other countries will just have to learn to deal with.
For me personally what Nestea did at the blizzcon finals was MUCH MUCH worse then what Naniwa did and neither do I have any interest of watching players that pretend to care about a game, that is just insulting to my intellect. Next season of GSL will be the first time I do not buy a ticket as I choose to vote with my wallet as I quite simply feel unwelcome now, swedes are going to be honest as its hardwired into our very core, learn to deal with it.
the views and opinions expressed by some swedes and claimed to be "swedish" does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of all swedes, or even the majority of swedes. Honesty is not hardwired into our very core, even if we would be more honest on average (which i have no reason to believe) the individual differences far outweigh any such increased honesty.
PS. you are embarrassing.
I agree, there are many dishonest Swedish people. Don't see how that is a good thing though. :/
of course it's not a good thing! coming to think of it, krogan is a great example of a dishonest swede making such ridiculous generalizations about swedes and on top of it claiming he doesn't want to sound pro swedish or anti american when it seems to be his only fucking agenda.
indeed! however, naniwa seems to be a VERY honest person, so when he says he didnt realize how the ppl would react, I believe him 100%. I'm sure all parties has learned from their mistakes these last few days, and I think we need to forgive (both naniwa and GOMTV) and move on, seriously.
This is a very nice read and some very good points are very well explained, i think it is pretty clear to everyone that Naniwa shouldn't have done what he did, there were other and better ways to handle the situation, but at the same time I also think that this should have been a matter fixed more privately by his team like EG did with Idra, was Idra in anyway censured by the tournament itself where he forfeit the game? Or even in IPL where he forfeit not one but three games in the group stages because he was tired? I was looking forward to those games but i understood that Idra just couldn't deliver the product, its not the same situation, but it is very similar. I don't agree that GOM is not to blame in this matter too, as said, GOM job is to deliver a good product to the viewers, by using the weird formats that they used in both GSL and this last cup, i must say they have been failing allot in delivering consistently good tournaments and the reason of their success is much due to the fact that it is The korean league, the GOM solution here was easy, the game would only be played if both players felt that they could deliver. They leave loop holes in their format that allow for this kind of situation to happen, they should either find a more fitting format (MLG manages to make every game count) or have someone stay close to the players and see if they are in good conditions to play, GOM should control their product and not only hope that players will do what is expected, with that model alot can go wrong all the time, and the reason that it hasn't is a testament of the extreme professionalism of the overall SC2 players. This happens in most sports, it's been used allot the comparison that this does not happen in professional sports, but its not fair to put just the 1 player in the same role as a full team, in those teams the player that just isn't able to perform can be replaced and, in fact, it is not at all unusual for teams to just use their B team when they have nothing to win and want to save their players, atleast here in europe i see that frequently. I'm kind of glad that this question is coming up and we are having the chance to discuss this and maybe the people responsible for both sides of hipotetical situations like this can understand a bit better the good way to handle this.
Ninawa reminds me of the guy sitting in the train ^^ acting like a 5 year old jerk doesnt remove the rights you actually have in this case participating in GSL
With that said, I also think it's fair to point out that boycotting a match is quite different from throwing a match, but I don't want to derail the conversation.
I have to disagree with this since they both do exactly the same thing. They rob the viewer of what they came there to see, a professional game between two (or more) players or teams. There is no distinguishable difference between them in any way shape or form for the viewer or the tournament, they both cheat viewers and organizers alike.
There is a difference. Had Naniwa refused to go into that booth to play a meaningless match vs Nestea, he would've at least been upfront about his stance. However, going into that booth, setting up, and starting the game only to just simply throw it is different. He deceived the viewers, organisers, sponsors, staff and etc into thinking he will play a game of SC2 vs Nestea when he clearly didn't intend to. Do you not see the difference between a player refusing to play, and agreeing to play only to not?
There is no real difference in it at all, in either case you don't get to see the match you thought you were going to see. Everyone gets robbed equally in both cases. You personally may feel more cheated by watching a thrown game but that matters little as everyone gets robbed of a good game equally in both cases.
As far as "meaningless" games go, maybe GOM/MLG/ETC should look at creating a slightly better payout system, for these games, so even if from a tournament sence it's meaningless, the players still have something to play for, it is my understanding that naniwa recieved in the vacinity of $900 just for competing, this may be wrong, but i'm going to use this value in the following example.
Each game rather then offering $900, offers $225 to the winner, and $100 to the loser. still giving players a reason to play "meaningless" matches.
Naniwa did 2 things wrong. \
1. he made it completely obvious that he was throwing the game,
2. he didn't even try to explain it after the game beyond saying "i couldn't be bothered"
he could have claimed he was attempting to push into the base at a timing when nestea could be 6pooling, 7 probes > 5 drones. valid strategy, spends 30 seconds microing, loses, everyone was excited that someone tried that dispite being wrong.
I agree with alex that it's the responsibility of the players to provide good games to the viewers, i mean ultimatly we are thier paycheck. but a good game doesn't have to be a long game (though i do prefer those ) one of my main GSL memories was Idra vs Jinro in which idra 6pooled, and jinro somehow managed to escort his marine into a bunker with like 1-2 health left on it. the game only lasted 5-6 minutes, but the suspense of wether he would get that marine in or not, and the "OMG I CAN'T BELIEVE HE JUST DID THAT" when he did, made it imo a very memorable game.
As long as a player can explain (validly) why his strategy completely failed, i'm happy that they put in the effort.
PS, change how money is paid to remove "meaningless" games at least from group/seeded players (MLG/Dreamhack) where they are garenteed a paycheck.
I agree with your sentiment, but the I don't think the fact that Naniwa draws a salary from his team excuses GOM for asking players to play games where neither they or their team will be making any real amount of money. And you wouldn't see anyone tell Michael Jordan that he was making money off of underwear and the Bulls weren't going to pay him to. Naniwa seems at fault here, but I still think it's reasonable to believe that GOM.tv has some improvements left to make.
A lot of people where quite hyped for Nada - Idra and Nada had to stay up all night for this lol. I'm not quite sure if it's appropriate to criticize the behavior of another teams player if your players are doing the same.
Firstly, my first post was something I seldom do, a long rant. I wanted to save it as a blog post. However, I misunderstood that TL uses blog as synonym to forum post. I wished to save my own post in a personal blog, not as a new discussion thread. The “blog post” is locked and might as well be deleted since I was confused by the structure of TL and apologize for clogging the forums.
On December 15 2011 20:28 TheButtonmen wrote: Saying that games don't matter unless money is on the line quite frankly appalls me, that's a direction I don't want to see Sc2 headed in at all; you're dismissing the game as a sham because of the lack of dollars attached to it.
I think this is a quote worth exploring. One perspective is if Naniwa's actions is bad because of the money lost by 3rd parties, organizers and sponsors. That is, the player's situation is less worth than that of the organizers. This is still a perspective focused around the money surrounding the business.
The other is of course what I think TheButtonmen wants to express, that a player should play no matter the potential money attached. I think the pro-scene is beyond that point a long time ago, professional players earn their money from the game and 3rd parties earn their money of sponsors and paying viewers.
What IS interesting is if it's OK to demand the player to be an entertainer as well as a competitor?
My opinion is simply that a match set in the context of a tournament where to motivation is high placement and money attached. Which the tournament gave in the bigger picture, but lost in this particular game. I don't think anyone can blame Naniwa for not playing his best in the first three games, being the competitor.
Both players and their previous history deserved to be in a situation where their game had an impact. Not a placement/show match for second to last place in one of two groups.
To Egalex
Thank you for your reply. Being quoted I recognize my simplification of your role in esports. However, this is also my main concern of your argument where the player as a competitor is not respected. Professional can absolutely be interpreted in various ways, having a vocation for money. But I see the players as competitors not sponsorship representatives and/or entertainers for entertainment's sake.
On December 15 2011 20:56 EGalex wrote: What exactly do you mean by "the bias of money"? Are you criticizing me for approaching the situation from the perspective of someone who would like to see the eSports industry be sustainable, and employing logical business sense?
Yes I think I do. There is a disconnect between the respect of the player as a competitor versus his/her role as a revenue stream. The competitor deserves to compete in a competition where each game is competitive in its context. It is also what motivates the fans, at least those respecting honest games. The growth of esports should not be the concern of the competitor.
On December 15 2011 20:56 EGalex wrote: My interpretation of this information is that A) equates to mild disapproval, B) equates to strong disapproval, C) equates to mild approval, and D) equates to strong approval. According to the numbers above, this would place public opinion at 64/36 in disapproval, which is only one percentage point away from my proposed figures (when I began writing my blog, the numbers added up to exactly 65/35).
It is really open for interpretation what the poll actually says. I argue for sympathy, which is in three of the four alternatives, A, C and D. You argue the disapproval of alternatives A and B and no one is wrong. What is quite clear is that B is the only option which would hold true to your argument of completely unacceptable. I voted A and I'm writing here, arguing against your points.
I do not think Naniwa's actions was a wise move. However, completely unacceptable is, I feel, a stretch contrasted with sympathy and understanding.
On December 15 2011 20:56 EGalex wrote: I'm not sure exactly what you mean by grudge-match argument, but I'm assuming that you're claiming that my logic involves some kind of textbook logical fallacy. The point that the system only works when all parties (teams, players, tournaments, and fans) do their part is entirely accurate. I would be happy to elaborate on why this is, and how the different pieces work together, if you like.
I used a wrong introductory sentence to this paragraph, since it relates more to the potential value of the game. The logical fallacy is that of analogues to arena sports. The main point being whether all parties did their part refers to the potential entertainment value of the game. The poll, again, indicates a big majority in understanding for Naniwa's actions as a result of the ridiculous match situation.
Are you not more concerned that competitive players are forced into uninteresting games than their unmotivated play in such an event? Isn't your business to exploit good and exciting competitors rather than famed names playing without gain for their efforts?
Finally, I do not hold you personally responsible for your players' previous actions, but it will be interesting to see the presented argument followed through in future actions of the EG players and teams.
On December 15 2011 22:55 CharlieBrownsc wrote: I don't agree with your sentiment that it is a pro players responsibility to put on a good show for the spectators. No pro practices hours upon hours so he can put on good shows, no pro motivates himself by saying "if I practice these couple more hours I can put on a better show." Associating entertainment with a pro players job is silly IMO. You play to win the game. Period. For Naniwa, this game was the blizzard cup, of which he could not win, so he did not play. Very simple, very understandable.
I would agree that a player's primary focus, and primary expense of practice time, is directed towards winning. However, there's a difference between what a player wants to do with his time in an ideal world, and what a player needs to do with his time in reality.
You say that associating entertainment with a pro player's job is silly. I'm sorry, but this couldn't be more backwards. If a pro player had no involvement with entertainment, he wouldn't be a pro player. You can idealize unrealistic, over-romanticized notions of "winning is the only thing that matters" all you want to, but the reality is that pro players are pro players because they get paid by tournaments and teams. And, how do those tournaments and teams get the money which they then redistribute to the players? By selling entertainment to the community, and advertising sponsors to the community via entertainment.
TL;DR if there's no entertainment within a pro player's job, then there are no pro players.
On the topic of meaningless matches : it was «meaningless» for seeding, I agree. But you can't even call the game «meaningless» when you know Naniwa was PAYED to play it. The $s where the reason why he played, and god should he have played the game ! It was worth 225$s.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: There are (for the most part) three kinds of situations in which players usually throw matches, or don't put forth maximum effort. [...] There's Scenario B, in which the match is meaningless for the player himself, but has meaning for his opponent and/or a third-party (example: IdrA vs. White-Ra at the IPL3 Finals, in which IdrA forfeited because he had already qualified for bracket play - which was seeded randomly - and wanted to get some rest). [...] Scenarios A, B, and C all happen, regularly, in professional sports. [...] And, during absolutely every regular season in such leagues, there are teams who are eliminated from playoff contention well before the season is over, but still have to play out their schedules in full - including games against other teams who are still in the playoff hunt (Scenario B). [...] My point is that in all of the scenarios, examples, and hypotheticals I've outlined above, the player or team - at the very least - still did its job, put on a show for the spectators, and delivered a quality product to its respective league. All of them, of course, except for the one we're all so feverishly discussing.
Can you explain how you can go from the eSport scenario B (Idra forfeiting & not playing games) to "In all scenarios the player [...] put on a show for the spectators"? The difference between "Professional sport" B and "eSport" B is exactly that. In one scenario the players put on a show - in the other not. Similiar to how Naniwa didnt put on a show.
On December 15 2011 23:26 Neelia wrote: I fail to see a difference between what naniwa did and what idra did @nasl s1 tie breakers against SjoW and Nada:
A lot of people where quite hyped for Nada - Idra and Nada had to stay up all night for this lol. I'm not quite sure if it's appropriate to criticize the behavior of another teams player if your players are doing the same.
You didn't read the OP, I guess. your concerns (though not on the same matches) were already addressed by Alex.
And Alex did not criticize Nani, he just tried to generalize the situation to make his point about losing/throwing meaningless match is not correct.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: There are (for the most part) three kinds of situations in which players usually throw matches, or don't put forth maximum effort. [...] There's Scenario B, in which the match is meaningless for the player himself, but has meaning for his opponent and/or a third-party (example: IdrA vs. White-Ra at the IPL3 Finals, in which IdrA forfeited because he had already qualified for bracket play - which was seeded randomly - and wanted to get some rest). [...] Scenarios A, B, and C all happen, regularly, in professional sports. [...] And, during absolutely every regular season in such leagues, there are teams who are eliminated from playoff contention well before the season is over, but still have to play out their schedules in full - including games against other teams who are still in the playoff hunt (Scenario B). [...] My point is that in all of the scenarios, examples, and hypotheticals I've outlined above, the player or team - at the very least - still did its job, put on a show for the spectators, and delivered a quality product to its respective league. All of them, of course, except for the one we're all so feverishly discussing.
Can you explain how you can go from the eSport scenario B (Idra forfeiting & not playing games) to "In all scenarios the player [...] put on a show for the spectators"? The difference between "Professional sport" B and "eSport" B is exactly that. In one scenario the players put on a show - in the other not. Similiar to how Naniwa didnt put on a show.
Edit: Misunderstood your point. OP is fine.
eSports example B differs significantly from eSports example C in that in example B, IdrA had absolutely no effect on IPL's broadcast product, since the broadcast was running behind schedule and there wasn't enough time to broadcast all of the day's remaining matches anyway. Furthermore, IPL was in communication with IdrA regarding his decision to not play the White-Ra match, and IdrA's decision was allowed, both for the reason mentioned above, and because it was already very late at night, with the tournament running well behind schedule.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: There are (for the most part) three kinds of situations in which players usually throw matches, or don't put forth maximum effort. [...] There's Scenario B, in which the match is meaningless for the player himself, but has meaning for his opponent and/or a third-party (example: IdrA vs. White-Ra at the IPL3 Finals, in which IdrA forfeited because he had already qualified for bracket play - which was seeded randomly - and wanted to get some rest). [...] Scenarios A, B, and C all happen, regularly, in professional sports. [...] And, during absolutely every regular season in such leagues, there are teams who are eliminated from playoff contention well before the season is over, but still have to play out their schedules in full - including games against other teams who are still in the playoff hunt (Scenario B). [...] My point is that in all of the scenarios, examples, and hypotheticals I've outlined above, the player or team - at the very least - still did its job, put on a show for the spectators, and delivered a quality product to its respective league. All of them, of course, except for the one we're all so feverishly discussing.
Can you explain how you can go from the eSport scenario B (Idra forfeiting & not playing games) to "In all scenarios the player [...] put on a show for the spectators"? The difference between "Professional sport" B and "eSport" B is exactly that. In one scenario the players put on a show - in the other not. Similiar to how Naniwa didnt put on a show.
It's a typo in the OP. Thanks for finding it; I've fixed it.
This is an excellent post and well worth the read. It's good to see someone from a prominent team take time out of their schedule to post their opinions, even if I don't agree with them
I don't know if you're ever going to see this Alex, but I just want to let you know that I have new-found respect for you. This is an absolutely necessary write-up for everyone within the e-Sports community. To be frank, I've been very irritated by the amount of people who have spoken of boycotting Gom and attempting to justify NaNiwa's actions. I feel that once you reach a certain level of maturity, you must realize that just because the rules don't say not to do it, doesn't mean it's okay to do it. Anyway, I want to keep this short, so all I will say is that I absolutely agree with everything you've said within this write-up. And also hats off to you for doing this, despite not being directly involved in any way. Community figures stepping up is an admirable and necessary step for e-Sports. Thank you.
Professional players do not have a direct contractual responsibility to entertain the way that an actor/actress/circus clown does, but ultimately, with respect to an ad-based revenue stream, that is the reason for their existence.
Under the currently popular business model found in most major league sports, the underlining assumption is that the player will give a reasonable effort on the court/field of competition. It's not written in stone, but its assumed. Furthermore, professional sports leagues in general are not the Olympics, the competitor is not just a talented "amateur" who competes only for the spirit of competition, for pride, and for the sport, etc., Professional players in a televised league have a list of fiduciary duties to their sponsors who are trying to sell/promote content. That list of fiduciary duties includes underlining assumptions about the reasonable effort made by each player to fulfill his or her obligations - in this case, it can be strongly argued that among the obligations of Naniwa is one to play out his televised games.
I see a lot of posters on this forum talking about written rules, direct responsibility and contracts. I am not familiar with Naniwa's employment/sponsorship contract with Quantic, but i can tell you that in service contracts between players and sponsors, there is an underlining assumption (even if unwritten) that the player will make a reasonable effort to provide what is expected of him based on the nature of the agreement. As stated above, it is not difficult to see why Naniwa is expected, or rather his contract assumes that he should put forth his best effort even when the game is meaningless. This is because the revenue stream, the value generated from the service agreement does not stem for the actual winning of any tournaments, it does not even stem from a win loss record, it stems from the players attempts to win - his struggles and the fan following of this struggle is what generates viewership and ad revenue. Winning may cause a larger fan following, but lack of winning does not preclude the other methods of generating said following (close losses generate fan followings, so do grudge matches), his game vs. Nestea has great potential for generating viewership and revenue, deprivation of said revenue is against the spirit of his contract, one might argue.
There is a major difference between a competitor - such as a collegiate or olympic athlete, and a professional - a sponsored athlete with endorsement contracts and expectations (both contractual and social) as to everything from their practice habits and performance to their interactions with fans and behavior as role models.
To the people saying that "probe rushing is entertaining," that is not the good/service promised by GOM or MLG to its paying viewership - they promised competitive Starcraft, and their obligation is to tear down heaven and earth to provide said content. I posted about this concept earlier in a blog (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=294923), but it was closed, I am glad that the same concept is so well articulated here.
I am starting to see the same sense of entitlement in SC2 players that I see in football/basketball players. And that's great, and one day hopefully there will be plenty of SC2 players who can afford to think in whichever way they want and get paid tons of money because the industry is that big; but it doesn't make it right or conducive to the growth of e-sports.
On December 15 2011 23:13 Remb wrote: When I saw 7 probes rushing a hatchery, I knew that Naniwa (foolishly) chose to act honestly instead of doing what so many other pro gamers have done before. The esports world should not be parallel with athletic sports for many reasons, one being the seasonal and physical aspects of athletic sports, and I do believe his actions were unacceptable
But I think that a player can never play his best games when he knows there is nothing at stake, and it is the responsibility of the tournaments to host formats that create meaningful games.
Too often I see players feign motivation when they are put into those situations you described, and those games truly anger me. Watching a player perform a game where it is apparent he is not motivated to play his best is insulting to my intelligence. I am paying for honest competition, not a fake and empty showmatch that is supposed to entertain me. I pay these companies to create a tournament where the players are motivated because the games are important to them. The situation does occur quite often, but they are rarely ever pointed out.
It's quite laughable how you parallel these situations to athletic sports to justify their existence. Nobody cares about the last two teams playing their final match of the season, and the turnouts for those games are always abysmal. Because the fans are not stupid.
The fans know when a game is meaningless. They know when the players don't give a damn, but the players slug on and half-ass it because "it's their job". Well you are selling the fans short. Naniwa's game angered me. But if Naniwa chose the politically correct strategy of 2 base all in or 4 gate, I would have been equally angered. Both strategies are equally meaningless to me, because the situation itself was meaningless.
You have obviously never played sports at a competitive level. It's called Pride. There is a reason no one ever wants to go out of anything with winning one game, one series, ect. It's because they will be viewed as a joke. There is a huge parallel between Real Sports and eSports. If there wasn't, why are people like Sundance pushing to get eSports syndicated on major networks, say ESPN? It's comments like the above that kill the scene.
On December 15 2011 23:30 EGalex wrote: TL;DR if there's no entertainment within a pro player's job, then there are no pro players.
I have to disagree, the entertainment ARE the pro players, they dont make entertainment they ARE entertainment, just by playing the game they are entertaining, there is no need for them to "train" entertaining. because they already are entertaining.
If Naniwa was fined with the 850$ he would receive for participating nobody would care that much, but the community blowout is directly proportionate to the punishment GOM gave but you took that out of your context like it doesn't matter. We all agree that playing a fake match is better than probe rushing. What we don't agree is with the hard punishment and the way Koreans exaggerated.
MKP wished he could be in Naniwas place (from his tweeter)? What does that even have to do with the event? Naniwa did 100% in his first 3 games. He didn't mock the event or insult the koreans. He just didn't see the point of a match between two unmotivated players that have nothing to gain. There is no grudge match if it's nothing at stake, it's just ladder game.
Initially I was very skeptical as to if your point would actually hold, but seeing as you point out the "putting on a show" part as the important aspect, there's really nothing to argue over there and I even agree.
So while my view on the situation doesn't necessarily invalidate yours, I think I have a few interesting, albeit philosophical considerations.
You mention other sports as a precedence, and your main point is that they still put on a show, which Naniwa didn't (though I suppose the aftermath is quite a show). Like I said: that's a fool-proof argument, but besides that I would not as most others say there's much of a difference between what Naniwa did and what teams do as in your examples. And actually it seems we agree there, but unlike you I would argue that it's not any more subjective whether or not the team is throwing the match away or not compared to what Naniwa did (well, that's not entirely true but I'll get to that). Consider the coach who decides who are allowed to play and who are benched. His position isn't much unlike Naniwa's position. It is they, not the coach's players nor Naniwa's units that set the stage for what is going to unfold. It's irrelevant that the players have their own free will whereas the units are under Naniwa's complete control (besides the targetting-AI and such). They set the stage, and everything that unfolds is a direct consequence of that. Also, there's hardly any difference between selecting players that have virtually no chance of winning and probe rushing. What if the enemy does a 6-pool? Then you've got a chance, though even at that point you would have to utterly out-micro your opponent who has to make some sort of mistake, so the chance of winning is extremely small. However, that doesn't apply to Naniwa's probe rush because from what I heard he didn't even micro his probes. He obviously just forfeited, but I would still argue that the coach forfeits the match whether or not his mediocre players try to win or not. If they somehow win it's just a fluke, while the coach's intentions were pretty clear all along.
To give some perspective on your view that Naniwa's mental state or his reasoning after the three first games was irrelevant, picture Naniwa as a professional athlete that has to exert himself physically in whatever sport he's competing in. He's just finished three extremely tough matches, and he can barely stand, let alone compete in a fourth match. To have the referee force him to play his fourth match is not the same as GOM expecting Naniwa to play his match against Nestea, simply because unlike with the physical sports situation no one knows how broken Naniwa is. We still can't say how broken he was, and obviously GOM can't just let it slide just because Naniwa says he was mentally broken. They can't rely on such uncertainties that may later be used as excuses by other players, and that would be disastrous for their credibility. But the community has the freedom to accept Naniwa's reasons for what he did, and still be able to tell him that he made the wrong decision and now that he knows he better not do it again. In fact, even GOM has the freedom to accept his explanation, but kindly inform him that he still has to be punished to make sure this doesn't happen again, even though I completely understand that GOM as an entity lacks the wisdom and composure required.
So to end my post similarly to yours:
Against Nestea, Naniwa didn't do his part. But as a community, understand his situation and don't belittle his struggle. Tell him very firmly that he better not do that again, that you expect better from him, but that you can forgive him this time. For all the honesty and regret that he exudes in his voice (at Live On 3), he deserves as much.
On December 15 2011 23:39 HyperLethality wrote: I don't know if you're ever going to see this Alex, but I just want to let you know that I have new-found respect for you. This is an absolutely necessary write-up for everyone within the e-Sports community. To be frank, I've been very irritated by the amount of people who have spoken of boycotting Gom and attempting to justify NaNiwa's actions. I feel that once you reach a certain level of maturity, you must realize that just because the rules don't say not to do it, doesn't mean it's okay to do it. Anyway, I want to keep this short, so all I will say is that I absolutely agree with everything you've said within this write-up. And also hats off to you for doing this, despite not being directly involved in any way. Community figures stepping up is an admirable and necessary step for e-Sports. Thank you.
Why? because they took naniwa's code S spot with rules that barely even apply? because they denie awarding him a code S spot even tho MLG confirmed it on over 10 occasions? People are all jumping on the naniwa thing, but there are more things than the naniwa thing that made people boycot Gom. I suggest you educate yourself with peoples thoughts and don't write thing that you don't have a clue of.
On December 15 2011 23:24 Nikerym wrote: Naniwa did 2 things wrong. \
1. he made it completely obvious that he was throwing the game,
.
I completely disagree with this. I'd rather know that a player was throwing the game/wanted to forfeit. I don't want to watch a game thinking that both players are giving 100% when one player isn't really trying that hard. Then the viewers are just getting tricked into thinking they are watching a real game.
Excellent article, I agree with all of your points, the distinctions you make are also helping to gain common ground for proper discussion on the matter. Ty.
I can agree with most of what you wrote concerning the Naniwa case. As far as Idra is concerned, I don't think your right. The fact that a game isn't streamed makes forfeiting the game less bad, but it's still a bad thing. For me it's disrespectful towards his opponents and the tournament organisers.
On December 15 2011 23:40 raheelp wrote: who knew egs ceo was an idiot
He is certainly not an idiot, on the contrary he is very intelligent. I do not always agree with him or cheer for his team but to say he is an idiot is a gross error in judgement.
This is all quite ironic coming from IdrA's manger but I guess you already made that perfectly clear in your post... anyways
It really bothers me that no one sees the thought process that "Naniwa owes it to his fans to undermine them and deceive GOMtv with a fake game" as a completely poisonous way of thinking. Its going to be interesting to see the next time this happens on a level that isn't the absolute extreme with this as the standard by which people accept it.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: I myself find NaNi's actions completely unacceptable, but for a very different reason than I believe has been popularly expressed. I also find GOM's decision to punish NaNi to be completely reasonable
So what punishment did you give Idra when he bailed out on those Dreamhack and IPL matches because he didn't care about them?
As you found it "completely unacceptable", why did you, obviously, accept it when Idra did it and has done it multiple times?
On December 16 2011 00:11 pPingu wrote: Why do so many people want to compare esports with other sports to make a point?
Can you compare soccer, pool and chess?
You can compare their professional sportsperson's obligation to be PROFESSIONAL for the good of the sport they represent. What's the difference between a football player who sits down on the grass in the middle of a match and refuses to do anything, a pool player who starts a game but proceeds to foul every single shot afterwards, and a chess player who starts a game only to knock down his king right after? Nothing. They're throwing the game. It doesn't matter what their reasons are, they're throwing it and making it blatant. That hurts the image of the sport as well as everyone who is involved in it. The viewers, the organisers, the sponosers, the opposition, the broadcasting team...etc. It is one thing to take a stance and refuse to take part in the first place, and another to agree and start something, only to treat it like nothing and blatantly give up. Do you get it?
On December 16 2011 00:25 kirdie wrote: I don't agree, I prefer him to not lie to people and pretend to want to win with a 4 gate but make it clear - does no one value honesty anymore?
Honesty would've been refusing to take part before the match and standing your ground. GOM may have threatened Nani, but they could not have physically made him play a game vs Nestea. What he did was agree to play a game and throw it. How is that honesty? Honest to his own emotions? Sure, but that's what a professional must sometimes ignore & sacrifice for the greater good IF you agree to take part.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Did you read the OP? Every sports league has games played and televised that don't matter. People even pay and show up in person to watch games that don't matter. That is really fucked up to deprive a player the opportunity to show their ability just because they no longer can advance in the tournament. Not everyone is Naniwa, many players would jump at the chance to be able to show their skills against Nestea to thousands of fans even if they were playing for beans.
This is an excellent point. The reason "pointless" games are shown is because even if a player like NesTea or NaNi has no chance to advance, they have fans that would be delighted to watch them play games against top competition. NaNi showed zero regard for his fans or those of NesTea.
Perhaps more importantly, there are legions of top-flight SC2 players who would have killed for the opportunity to play in a televised match (hell, NesTea spent the entire night of his birthday preparing for the match) such as Squirtle, Seed, Hack, etc. etc.
On December 16 2011 00:25 kirdie wrote: I don't agree, I prefer him to not lie to people and pretend to want to win with a 4 gate but make it clear - does no one value honesty anymore?
Once the all mighty dollar comes into the picture I guess honestly is suppose to take a back seat. Its a shame to see this type of thinking being displayed here.
And ultimately, the quality of their product is defined by the entertainment value of their matches.
This statement is a double edged sword. Well GOM should strive to bring a quality product (as its in their best interest) the player must be allowed absolute freedom of expression in their gameplay. Let that sink in for just a second.... Naniwa had either been invited or earned a place at the blizzard cup and as pro has right to expression in his playstyle. His choice of expression that particular game showed no effort and bad sportsmanship BUT that is his right.
Unless prior to matches the players are given contracts or other stipulations are put on their gameplay GOM should have no say on how a game plays out. Essentially they punished Nani for his lack of sportsmanship. However I call bullshit on GOM's behavior to expel Nani his code S spot for his lack luster play....... If GOM wants a perfect product than games should be scripted to make them have the highest possible entertainment value......... Would any of you watch that?
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: For those of you who, after reading this, agree that NaNi's actions were unacceptable, but still blame GOM for utilizing a format which allows for inconsequential matches, I would ask you to consider holding players to higher standards of professionalism; and to also consider the fact that it's not GOM's responsibility to cater their format solely to suit players. GOM's job (as is the case with any professional sports league) is to provide a quality product to its viewers, while providing its competitors with fair, reasonable playing conditions, and the Blizzard Cup's format balanced these factors acceptably. Additionally, I would also point out the fact that, as illustrated above, every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist.
I agree with a lot of what Alex says, except the above paragraph. I feel perfectly comfortable wanting to hold players to a higher standard of professionalism while at the same time putting some blame at gom's (and any other organization) feet for having stupid formats. If you brought NASL's regular season into this part of the argument i'd be more inclined to agree, but not these much shorter tournaments. I have problems with NASLs format for similar reasons (and others), but that's a whole other thing. In terms of group play (which is where the thing happened, and had the possibility of happening at all, it was a 1day event. (1day per group).
Also the comparison to the all-star games is, not to be rude, simply stupid.
At first I was afraid this would be verbose and unnecessary. I think, however, this blog concisely epitomized everything that we as fans and members of this community should feel and think. I agree with you sir.
I don't get why people don't see the problem. You don't purposefully lose a game, it's the worst thing a progamer can do. He can not give is all to it. Thats fine (just cannonrush/4 gate... who cares, play something that could win). He can play some weird shit. Thats fine (even Bratok and Stephano, while obviously wanting to lose did this and i was actually entertained by that offensive Hatchery/Spinecrawler-Rush vs BC-Rush game). He can not just send his first probes in the direction of his opponent and remove his hand from the keyboard/stop playing.
I think people are upset because there seems to be a double standard with naniwa. Other pro gamers (mentioned in OP) do it with much more on the line, and get nothing. Naniwa does it, and the lynch mob is out in full force. Maybe it is a cultural thing. Foreigners doing it against othet foreigners, okay. Do it against korean, pitchforks
On December 16 2011 00:37 Velr wrote: Brilliant post .
I don't get why people don't see the problem. You don't purposefully lose a game, it's the worst thing a progamer can do. He can not give is all to it. Thats fine (just cannonrush/4 gate... who cares, play something that could win). He can play some weird shit. Thats fine (even Bratok and Stephano, while obviously wanting to lose did this and i was actually entertained by that offensive Hatchery/Spinecrawler-Rush vs BC-Rush game). He can not just send his first probes in the direction of his opponent and remove his hand from the keyboard/stop playing.
Really, what we see all around is people who post because they cared about that match. I didn't care at all because as Nani said (before being somewhat forced to apologize due to public pressure), that match had nothing at stakes. At the moment of the game, I prefered seeing that probe rush that made me laugh than a poorly executed 4gate that would have really meant nothing. Do GOM subscribers pay to watch a stupid 4gate ? I doubt so. I prefer spending my time seeing the next match if he wasn't capable to play a real game. Please don't fake it. Then what's the line ? Would a carrier / mothership rush be fine ?
France in world cup 2010 did exactly what naniwa did, now you have a sport reference that shows that the same thing DOES happen in sports, where they don't even try.
On December 16 2011 00:37 Velr wrote: Brilliant post .
I don't get why people don't see the problem. You don't purposefully lose a game, it's the worst thing a progamer can do. He can not give is all to it. Thats fine (just cannonrush/4 gate... who cares, play something that could win). He can play some weird shit. Thats fine (even Bratok and Stephano, while obviously wanting to lose did this and i was actually entertained by that offensive Hatchery/Spinecrawler-Rush vs BC-Rush game). He can not just send his first probes in the direction of his opponent and remove his hand from the keyboard/stop playing.
You enjoy being fooled for your own amusement?
IFirst and foremost I enjoy being amused. If you have to fool me to amuse me, then i support you to fool me.
I don't expect the best game ever from two players being 0-3 in their group. BUT i expect a game. What Stephano and Bratok did was wrong too, but it was WAY better than what Naniwa did. Stephano/Bratok still delivered a game, Naniwa did not.
The people who agree with GOMs decision obviously think that this was the right way to handle the "throwing game" issue. So this is a rule and a principle you agree should be used in a global event. I expect all of you to demand very harsh punishments for anyone who does anything similar in any global/international tournament after this. The main arguement seems to be the one of sportsmanship and professionalism. That means that whether the game is broadcasted or not shouldnt matter and the size of the tournamens is not important either. The principle you claim to stand for now you must defend after this, regardless of the player, team, nationality.
On December 16 2011 00:45 Fjodorov wrote: The people who agree with GOMs decision obviously think that this was the right way to handle the "throwing game" issue. So this is a rule and a principle you agree should be used in a global event. I expect all of you to demand very harsh punishments for anyone who does anything similar in any global/international tournament after this. The main arguement seems to be the one of sportsmanship and professionalism. That means that whether the game is broadcasted or not shouldnt matter and the size of the tournamens is not important either. The principle you claim to stand for now you must defend after this, regardless of the player, team, nationality.
Uhm, ok?
And you are supporting everyone throwing their matches left and right because they don't feel like playing no matter the audience or anythign?...
On December 16 2011 00:37 Velr wrote: Brilliant post .
I don't get why people don't see the problem. You don't purposefully lose a game, it's the worst thing a progamer can do. He can not give is all to it. Thats fine (just cannonrush/4 gate... who cares, play something that could win). He can play some weird shit. Thats fine (even Bratok and Stephano, while obviously wanting to lose did this and i was actually entertained by that offensive Hatchery/Spinecrawler-Rush vs BC-Rush game). He can not just send his first probes in the direction of his opponent and remove his hand from the keyboard/stop playing.
You enjoy being fooled for your own amusement?
IFirst and foremost I enjoy being amused. If you have to fool me to amuse me, then i support you to fool me.
I don't expect the best game ever from two players being 0-3 in their group. BUT i expect a game. What Stephano and Bratok did was wrong too, but it was WAY better than what Naniwa did. Stephano/Bratok still delivered a game, Naniwa did not.
Ok. Just to make sure we are on the same page. As long your amused you don't care if you've just been tricked or deceived into that joy... doesn't matter how or why, so long as your being amused?
I really do agree with everything you are saying. And I do also think nani realizes this too; I think he said himself that he would do just four-gate if he had could redo it. I think just the fact that probe rushing is such an obvious forfeit is why it caused such a huge problem.
Tossing out funny numbers. Come on now, this isn't a sales meeting.
Dig deep.
There are (for the most part) three kinds of situations in which players usually throw matches, or don't put forth maximum effort. There's Scenario A, in which throwing the match would be in the player's own best interests (example: Stephano vs. BratOK at Assembly Summer 2011, in which both players did their best to the lose the match because they each wanted to avoid facing Sen in bracket play). There's Scenario B, in which the match is meaningless for the player himself, but has meaning for his opponent and/or a third-party (example: IdrA vs. White-Ra at the IPL3 Finals, in which IdrA forfeited because he had already qualified for bracket play - which was seeded randomly - and wanted to get some rest). And then, there's Scenario C, in which the match is truly meaningless, and throwing it would be due purely to the fact that the player (for whatever reason) doesn't put forth the time and effort required to play for real (example: NaNi's probe rush vs. NesTea, which sparked all of the recent community discussion and commentary, including this blog).
Scenarios A, B, and C all happen, regularly, in professional sports. At the end of almost every regular season in leagues like the NFL, NBA, NHL and Major League Baseball, there are teams that have the opportunity to determine their first-round playoff opponent, or to prevent a certain team from qualifying for the playoffs, by tanking a couple of games (Scenario A). And, during absolutely every regular season in such leagues, there are teams who are eliminated from playoff contention well before the season is over, but still have to play out their schedules in full - including games against other teams who are still in the playoff hunt (Scenario B). And, lastly, also every regular season in such leagues, there are games late in the schedule between teams who have both already been eliminated from playoff contention (Scenario C).
Now, to be fair, there's a difference between throwing a match, and not putting forth maximum effort, and just not playing well - and that difference is subject to a massive gray area. Professional sports teams often bench their best players in the final game of the regular season, if they've already made the playoffs and their playoff opponent has already been determined. Does that mean that they're throwing the game? Most would say, no. But, what about a sports team that does have something to gain by losing its last game of the season, and starts its best players, but they all happen to have off days? Did the team throw the match? Did the players not try as hard as they could've? Or did the the team try hard, but just not play well? That's a much more complex question, with no uniform answer.
Additionally, while most would agree that flat out throwing a match isn't a good thing, things get much murkier when the subject shifts to effort and passion. Is it necessarily unacceptable, dishonorable or disrespectful to the sport for a team or player to not put forth maximum effort, every game or match? Again, that's a complicated question, and it has no blanket answer. For a highly-paid player or team that's phoning it in on a regular basis, many would say the answer is yes. But, if two last-place MLB teams are facing off on the last day of the regular season, should both sides really be expected to play their hearts out? Many would say, no.
--
The bottom line is that players and teams - in all professional sports - regularly find themselves in Scenarios A, B, and C. And they correspondingly - in all professional sports - throw matches; don't try their hardest on every occasion; and play poorly at convenient times. Furthermore, in most of these situations, it's not even possible to discern which of those three (or what combination thereof) is truly the case - let alone to try and determine, with any level of certainty, whether or not what's happened is unacceptable, or dishonorable, or disrespectful to the sport and its community. Essentially, for the vast majority of situations like these, there are two massive layers of subjectivity standing in the way of any objective conclusion or analysis. That's why you very rarely see league officials involve themselves in such matters.
But if that's the case, then what's the point of this very, very long - sorry... it's just my style - write-up? I stated at the beginning of this blog that NaNiwa's decision to probe rush NesTea was absolutely unacceptable; that I believe everyone in our community should view it as unacceptable; and that I support GOM's decision to levy punishment on NaNi (the severity of the punishment is a different subject altogether). Yet, I've basically used the past five paragraphs to make the argument that... well... that it's not really possible to put together a definitive argument about situations like this one; that they're all just part of professional sports.
So, what's my point?
My point is that in all of the scenarios, examples, and hypotheticals I've outlined above, the player or team - at the very least - still did its job, put on a show for the spectators, and delivered a quality product to its respective league. All of them, of course, except for the one we're all so feverishly discussing.
Direct, community-to-industry revenue is the single, most important aspect of both the short- and long-term stability and growth of eSports. The StarCraft 2 community's willingness and enthusiasm to support its teams, players, and tournaments - by watching ads on their streams, buying their merchandise, and purchasing their subscriptions and season passes - has contributed, more than any other factor, to the amazing growth we've seen over the past year and a half. The term "ecosystem" is a buzzword as of late for those of us on the business side of the industry, because we all recognize the fact that in order for eSports to keep growing and find stability, the industry needs to become more self-sustaining, and less reliant on outside income, like corporate sponsorships.
In line with this, selling subscriptions and season passes is, obviously, crucially important to GOM.TV's business model. And ultimately, the quality of their product is defined by the entertainment value of their matches. So, when one of the world's most famous players, in an exciting grudge match (regardless of the players' records in their group), decides to probe rush in front of thousands upon thousands of spectators, many of whom are paying subscribers, he's single-handedly denying GOM a quality product to deliver to its consumer base. That is, simply, unacceptable. It is, objectively, bad for everyone who cares about eSports.
For the most part three scenarios? Yes, let's skip over all the scenarios that resonate with what Johan did. That's smart.
You willingly choose to ignore them because it doesn't help your argument. Cool beans.
Let me present Scenario D: your team is near the bottom of the league and making the playoffs doesn't look eminent. The team lacks confidence, players start questioning the game-plan and they start slacking off. The team is in utter turmoil.
Fans still show up to the games, but boo at the product they see. That ticket entitles them to boo, but everything else is considered over excessive.
Can I ask for my money back from the ticket booth because Phil Kessel didn't score or come back on the back check to stop Eric Staal from scoring? He should have had plenty of gas in the tank! He was only out there for twenty-four seconds!
Can I get my money back because Vince Carter is playing as if he wants a trade? (Sadly this was the case for the last couple of years he was in Toronto)
Likewise, the fans boo the shit out of him anytime he comes back.
Please,
Lots of players don't always show up for work and the effort & passion gets displaced for whatever reason. The coach will keep giving them opportunities to prove themselves, but if a player is really in a funk. That's when the coach will bench them or worse. If they are a star player they will keep giving them the benefit of the doubt. Sort of like what you did with IdrA, no?
*
There are plenty of scenarios where players face adversity like Johan. They all have their reasons.
Here's the thing,
They are all human. They all do stupid shit. It happens to the best of us.
It's very awkward when another manager/CEO feels its their duty to speak out against another team's player when it comes to work ethic. It's just something you don't fucking do in the professional sports. Good thing this is esports right?
Sure, your player takes a jab at another or some shit goes down on the playing field and you feel compelled to speak. That's a different scenario though!
Remember, we're talking about work ethic! If anything, I would think you would be more understandable in this circumstance. You've had to deal with Greg this entire time. If anything, I would think this would bring you closer to Mark more than anything else. You should know firsthand at how difficult it can be to manage certain players.
You know, I really enjoy the fact that your so forthcoming and outspoken about such scenarios unlike other CEOs and managers, but sometimes I think you need to hold back a little more.
On December 16 2011 00:45 Fjodorov wrote: The people who agree with GOMs decision obviously think that this was the right way to handle the "throwing game" issue. So this is a rule and a principle you agree should be used in a global event. I expect all of you to demand very harsh punishments for anyone who does anything similar in any global/international tournament after this. The main arguement seems to be the one of sportsmanship and professionalism. That means that whether the game is broadcasted or not shouldnt matter and the size of the tournamens is not important either. The principle you claim to stand for now you must defend after this, regardless of the player, team, nationality.
Uhm, ok?
And you are supporting everyone throwing their matches left and right because they don't feel like playing no matter the audience or anythign?...
If we are talking about professionalism it doesnt matter if the audience is 300 or 10 000. I personally didnt mind players throwing meaningless games before this happened, and i wont mind after this.
Absolutely great post. You tried your best to cover all the points and all sides, even those opposing, and then stated your point without making it a personal vendetta against NaNiwa. This is a great example of how to write a post like this. Also I agree with your point 100%, the games are for the fans and for GOM just as much the player; that's what it means to be an entertainer.
On December 16 2011 00:37 Velr wrote: Brilliant post .
I don't get why people don't see the problem. You don't purposefully lose a game, it's the worst thing a progamer can do. He can not give is all to it. Thats fine (just cannonrush/4 gate... who cares, play something that could win). He can play some weird shit. Thats fine (even Bratok and Stephano, while obviously wanting to lose did this and i was actually entertained by that offensive Hatchery/Spinecrawler-Rush vs BC-Rush game). He can not just send his first probes in the direction of his opponent and remove his hand from the keyboard/stop playing.
You enjoy being fooled for your own amusement?
IFirst and foremost I enjoy being amused. If you have to fool me to amuse me, then i support you to fool me.
I don't expect the best game ever from two players being 0-3 in their group. BUT i expect a game. What Stephano and Bratok did was wrong too, but it was WAY better than what Naniwa did. Stephano/Bratok still delivered a game, Naniwa did not.
Ok. Just to make sure we are on the same page. As long your amused you don't care if you've just been tricked or deceived into that joy... doesn't matter how or why, so long as your being amused?
I guess ignorance really is bliss.
edit: nice ninja edit
Are you actually trying to be as daft as possible? I want to see the better player or my fav win when both playeres give their best.
Now this is unliekly in a case where the game does not matter or losing actually gives a later advantage, as it was in Stephano vs Bratok or the recent Naniwa/Nestea. Everyone has to accept this but the fact is simple: The gameis broadcasted to thousands of viewers which expect to see a game, if possible a good or at least entertaining one, but most of all a game. What NO ONE wants to see is a professional losing in the fastest way possible because he does not feel like playing. It does not matter if you or others do not care about tournament games that do not matter anymore. There are people that care about Nestea vs Naniwa, GOM cared (and paid) for Nestea vs Naniwa and did not get what they have paid for, therefore they punished Naniwa.
I agree 100% with the OP and i really don't see how anyone can disagree.
Btw: There is one thing i see diffrent. I thinkt he punishment is pretty mild.
On December 16 2011 00:45 Fjodorov wrote: The people who agree with GOMs decision obviously think that this was the right way to handle the "throwing game" issue. So this is a rule and a principle you agree should be used in a global event. I expect all of you to demand very harsh punishments for anyone who does anything similar in any global/international tournament after this. The main arguement seems to be the one of sportsmanship and professionalism. That means that whether the game is broadcasted or not shouldnt matter and the size of the tournamens is not important either. The principle you claim to stand for now you must defend after this, regardless of the player, team, nationality.
I think you missed the point then. Yes he said that the professionalism should be there not to do this, but his reasoning for agreeing with GOM is that NaNiwa's decision hurt their buisness, and all of Esports on some scale, as his games were a product of GOM and of Esports. A game thrown that blatantly would have repercussions in any sport and it should be the same for Esports.
*For those of you eager to pull out the pitchforks, the IPL3/White-Ra situation is quite different; at the time of IdrA's match against White-Ra, IPL3 was already behind schedule, and didn't even have time to broadcast all of its remaining group play matches. Last edit: 2011-12-15 19:11:49
You truly care about professionalism and sportsmanship then what has the broadcasting situation got to do with anything?
A broadcasted game is a game that fans will and can see. A not broadcasted game will never be seen and therefore the fans don't get "robbed" of a game?
I would rather watch an honest forfeit, than a dishonest simulation, but to each their own.
In Idra's case vs Nerchio, as also in Naniwa's and others; tilt may play a more serious role than considered here. If an athlete is injured, he can't play and has to go on the bench. In esports psychology is as important. While I personally never get on tilt enough to be unable to play, there are people who do, and I respect that.
Also, this is one game in a set of 10 (+ possible triple rounds of tiebreaks). It doesn't break significantly the flow of the daily broadcast, there's no need for tickets to be returned, the TV crew did not get set up with nothing to be televised etc. That's why the comparison to a fully forfeited match in most other sports is unfair. The fair comparison would be, if enough players of that set in the SC2 event refused to play altogether, so that no games could be played / televised / spectated live in the studio.
edit: Nazgul mentioned another interesting argument which is betting. But to that I'd say part of the odds implicitly include the possibility that one player just forfeits the game for some personal or technical reason.
edit2: One last thing. To me, a community that punishes the only people who are honest enough to publicly forfeit, is in trouble. We should uphold what Naniwa, Coca, and Idra have done. Maybe not their chosen administrative approach, but the essence of their statement. They showed a rare level of maturity and honesty. And I'd wish everyone would clearly forfeit, when they can't play or don't want to win a game; instead of simulating or deceiving the audience.
On December 16 2011 01:10 Velr wrote: A broadcasted game is a game that fans will and can see. A not broadcasted game will never be seen and therefore the fans don't get "robbed" of a game?
So if the game is broadcasted it is bad sportsmanship and unprofessional but without the broadcast its not. Amazing way of living up to the principles and values everyone is praising and demanding.
I don't know all the back door dealings of the e-sports world, but isn't this sort of thing breach of contract?
I'm sure his team paid for him to be there, GOM paid to have him at the studio AND for it to be broadcast on TV and above all that he refused to hold up his end of the bargain which is to...play a video game. It's like someone working at McDonalds who decides he's bored and sits in the ball pit for the last hour of his shift. He'd get fired on the spot.
I mean that's where it comes to me, yes, you can derive the whole "unprofessional" critique from that, but for me it simply comes down to him not doing the job he's being paid to do.
On December 15 2011 22:55 CharlieBrownsc wrote: I don't agree with your sentiment that it is a pro players responsibility to put on a good show for the spectators. No pro practices hours upon hours so he can put on good shows, no pro motivates himself by saying "if I practice these couple more hours I can put on a better show." Associating entertainment with a pro players job is silly IMO. You play to win the game. Period. For Naniwa, this game was the blizzard cup, of which he could not win, so he did not play. Very simple, very understandable.
In fact when asked, most Korean progamers will tell you that they play for the fans.
Anyway, on topic, this is a great blog, huge props to EGAlex for taking the time to write it.
Exactly. This is exactly how I felt, but you sir, just put it the right way.
Great article imo.
I really think that he made a mistake and got his punishment, has accepted it and seemed sorry. What I 'd prefer is letting him learn from it instead of continually throwing it in his face by having 100001 forum posts arguing about whether he's right or wrong.
Thanks for the post, I've been thinking about these types of things and glad you wrote them down in a well-thought-out manner.
My thought is (and I apologize if it's been discussed already, no time to read all comments) is about the timing. With these pro sports teams, days and or weeks go by between the matches. For example, two last-place teams that are playing only for "pride" still have a few days or a whole week to take the time to mentally focus and prepare for the coming match. I feel that comparing the NaNiwa - NesTea match to a pro sports match does not, therefore, have the same effect. NaNiwa has said in his statements that he was mentally exhausted. He stated that he had a strategy explicitly set up for this match, but he was unable to execute it because of his mental state, left over from the previous matches. Therefore I wonder, if he had been given one or two days to recover from the losses and mentally psyche himself up, get into a better state of mind, etc ... would we have seen the same outcome? I highly doubt it, especially in that match-up.
good write up - but the major league sports example was rather out of context....NFL coaches pull star players when the game no longer matters; baseball plays minor league guys when the game doesn't matter etc. I agree that what Naniwa did was unprofessional and objectively I can see why GOM TV had to do what they did (as you say its a part of the business model etc) but the general public is faulting him for a mistake that is VERY overblown simply because of the controversy surrounding Nestea and Naniwa. The trash talk at MLG providence made this a 'relevant' match even though from the standpoint of the tournament it was irrelevant
I would ask you to consider holding players to higher standards of professionalism; and to also consider the fact that it's not GOM's responsibility to cater their format solely to suit players. GOM's job (as is the case with any professional sports league) is to provide a quality product to its viewers, while providing its competitors with fair, reasonable playing conditions, and the Blizzard Cup's format balanced these factors acceptably. Additionally, I would also point out the fact that, as illustrated above, every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist.
Sorry, I couldn't help myself! Have a bone to pick at this paragraph too.
*
If you want us to hold players to higher standards of professionalism then perhaps you should do so yourself. I've already explained this in my above post, but I'll dig deeper:
In some scenarios general managers and coaches are fined by the league if they cross certain boundaries. One of them being, speaking out about a player's work ethic that isn't on your team.
Now let me address GOM. Let's say GOM was the actual team that you came out to see. You bought your ticket to the dance. You have the right to boo or cheer. Certain players show up for work (MMA, MVP, etc.) whereas others don't.
I like hockey, so I'll continue down that road. I'd say Johan showed up for the first fifty minutes of the game. He put up a valiant effort, but he fell apart in the last ten minutes as the game became lopsided. The effort and passion was there in the first fifty. People cheered, but as it became a blowout. The fans started to boo!
I think you get the picture. We have to look at the whole.
Once again, the team played their heart in the first fifty, but once the game didn't matter anymore. Shit hit the fan and stupid penalties were taken (Johan took a fighting major and a game misconduct). It's just one game. Have to wait till the next day!
That's how I picture it anyway.
--
Now let me touch base on All-Star games. Your right. All-Star games shouldn't exist. Have you seen the new NHL All-Star format let alone how players make the team? It's a total travesty and if anything. Several of the players who are going to make it don't necessarily deserve to be there. Not all All-Star games are bad though. Take the MLB for example. They finally came around and made their All-Star game meaningful again, as home field advantage is up for grabs in the World Series. More than just bragging rights. Players now have more incentive to play and voting the right players is more meaningful again.
On December 16 2011 01:10 Velr wrote: A broadcasted game is a game that fans will and can see. A not broadcasted game will never be seen and therefore the fans don't get "robbed" of a game?
So if the game is broadcasted it is bad sportsmanship and unprofessional but without the broadcast its not. Amazing way of living up to the principles and values everyone is praising and demanding.
I never said that, no one has.
It's bad sportmanship either way and i'm against it in both cases BUT in one case it is actually "hurting" the tournament and the audience and in the other it isn't. Thats why one is worse.
On December 16 2011 01:12 figq wrote: I would rather watch an honest forfeit, than a dishonest simulation, but to each their own.
In Idra's case vs Nerchio, as also in Naniwa's and others; tilt may play a more serious role than considered here. If an athlete is injured, he can't play and has to go on the bench. In esports psychology is as important. While I personally never get on tilt enough to be unable to play, there are people who do, and I respect that.
Also, this is one game in a set of 10 (+ possible triple rounds of tiebreaks). It doesn't break significantly the flow of the daily broadcast, there's no need for tickets to be returned, the TV crew did not get set up with nothing to be televised etc. That's why the comparison to a fully forfeited match in most other sports is unfair. The fair comparison would be, if enough players in the SC2 event refused to play altogether, so that no games could be played.
This.
... and as totally not CEO of anything, I don't agree with OP points despite some logic and long arguments.
I don't care for simulation matches. Let's pretend it matters? What for? Players goal is to win tournaments, team goal is to make profit.
Corporate way of ''professionally growing eSports'' will work, of course leading to mass viewers, but much less human like personalities and passion - just work.
The only difference is that NaNiwa is a player, not a team manager. For all we know, he might not give a rat's ass about the growth of eSports, or the sustainability of certain business models, and that's completely legitimate. Whether his team has a policy that says players should or shouldn't throw away games, that's their business. Not the broadcasters', and not the viewers'.
On December 16 2011 01:12 figq wrote: I would rather watch an honest forfeit, than a dishonest simulation, but to each their own.
In Idra's case vs Nerchio, as also in Naniwa's and others; tilt may play a more serious role than considered here. If an athlete is injured, he can't play and has to go on the bench. In esports psychology is as important. While I personally never get on tilt enough to be unable to play, there are people who do, and I respect that.
Also, this is one game in a set of 10 (+ possible triple rounds of tiebreaks). It doesn't break significantly the flow of the daily broadcast, there's no need for tickets to be returned, the TV crew did not get set up with nothing to be televised etc. That's why the comparison to a fully forfeited match in most other sports is unfair. The fair comparison would be, if enough players in the SC2 event refused to play altogether, so that no games could be played.
This.
... and as totally not CEO of anything, I don't agree with OP points despite some logic and long arguments.
I don't care for simulation matches. Let's pretend it matters? What for? Players goal is to win tournaments, team goal is to make profit.
Corporate way of ''professionally growing eSports'' will work, of course leading to mass viewers, but much less human like personalities and passion - just work.
Yeah, because in basically every other sport there is no passion anymore because the players are not allowed to drop games in the most obvious way.
-.-
SERIOUSLY... Do you guys even think before posting?
I don't give a shit about the growth of ESports.. I was a happy Panda watching SC/BW but what Naniwa did was just wrong and got rightfully punished.
If some NBA team walked off the court after tip-off because their game didnt matter/they were too tired etc, that shit wouldn't go down too well with the NBA. Banhammers and fines would be thrown around, for sure.
Next time Naniwa, please play because its what professionals do.
On December 16 2011 01:12 figq wrote: I would rather watch an honest forfeit, than a dishonest simulation, but to each their own.
In Idra's case vs Nerchio, as also in Naniwa's and others; tilt may play a more serious role than considered here. If an athlete is injured, he can't play and has to go on the bench. In esports psychology is as important. While I personally never get on tilt enough to be unable to play, there are people who do, and I respect that.
Also, this is one game in a set of 10 (+ possible triple rounds of tiebreaks). It doesn't break significantly the flow of the daily broadcast, there's no need for tickets to be returned, the TV crew did not get set up with nothing to be televised etc. That's why the comparison to a fully forfeited match in most other sports is unfair. The fair comparison would be, if enough players in the SC2 event refused to play altogether, so that no games could be played.
This.
... and as totally not CEO of anything, I don't agree with OP points despite some logic and long arguments.
I don't care for simulation matches. Let's pretend it matters? What for? Players goal is to win tournaments, team goal is to make profit.
Corporate way of ''professionally growing eSports'' will work, of course leading to mass viewers, but much less human like personalities and passion - just work.
Yeah, because in basically every other sport there is no passion anymore because the players are not allowed to drop games in the most obvious way.
-.-
SERIOUSLY... Do you guys even think before posting?
I don't give a shit about the growth of ESports.. I was a happy Panda watching SC/BW but what Naniwa did was just wrong and got rightfully punished.
In unrelevant games? There is not. Or u know some?
On December 16 2011 01:10 Velr wrote: A broadcasted game is a game that fans will and can see. A not broadcasted game will never be seen and therefore the fans don't get "robbed" of a game?
So if the game is broadcasted it is bad sportsmanship and unprofessional but without the broadcast its not. Amazing way of living up to the principles and values everyone is praising and demanding.
You still seem to be missing the point. The main point isn't that it was unprofessional, which it was, but that what he did wasn't his decision to make. He had a responsibility to GOM and to the SC community to show games the were entertaining. Had he just done a simple all in such as a proxy 2 gate or a 4 gate it still would have been enjoyable to watch while having his desired effect of ending the game, and nothing more would have been said about it. However he chose to do something not enjoyably to watch, which also went against GOM's rule of no throwing games. When Idra forfeited to WhiteRa, yes maybe not entirely professional, but those games wouldn't have been streamed anyway, so he was only effecting himself and WhiteRa, not robbing IPL or the community such as NaNiwa did. They are two completely different scenarios that can not be compared. The game that Idra forfeited against Nerchio on stream, is compareable however, and that is why Alex stepped in and had words with Idra.
On December 16 2011 01:12 figq wrote: I would rather watch an honest forfeit, than a dishonest simulation, but to each their own.
In Idra's case vs Nerchio, as also in Naniwa's and others; tilt may play a more serious role than considered here. If an athlete is injured, he can't play and has to go on the bench. In esports psychology is as important. While I personally never get on tilt enough to be unable to play, there are people who do, and I respect that.
Also, this is one game in a set of 10 (+ possible triple rounds of tiebreaks). It doesn't break significantly the flow of the daily broadcast, there's no need for tickets to be returned, the TV crew did not get set up with nothing to be televised etc. That's why the comparison to a fully forfeited match in most other sports is unfair. The fair comparison would be, if enough players in the SC2 event refused to play altogether, so that no games could be played.
This.
... and as totally not CEO of anything, I don't agree with OP points despite some logic and long arguments.
I don't care for simulation matches. Let's pretend it matters? What for? Players goal is to win tournaments, team goal is to make profit.
Corporate way of ''professionally growing eSports'' will work, of course leading to mass viewers, but much less human like personalities and passion - just work.
Yeah, because in basically every other sport there is no passion anymore because the players are not allowed to drop games in the most obvious way.
-.-
SERIOUSLY... Do you guys even think before posting?
I don't give a shit about the growth of ESports.. I was a happy Panda watching SC/BW but what Naniwa did was just wrong and got rightfully punished.
In unrelevant games? There is not. Or u know some?
Ahm?
National football league.. Last round.
Team X has 20 points and no matter what a win/lose/draw will not change it's position. Team Y has 10 points and no matter what a win/lose/draw will not change it's position. Now they have to play against each other, what do you think will happen?
They will play. Probably not with their best possible team but the guys on the field will play and they will try to win.. For their fans, for themselves.. i don't care... All i care for is taht they will deliver a game..
On December 16 2011 00:37 Velr wrote: Brilliant post .
I don't get why people don't see the problem. You don't purposefully lose a game, it's the worst thing a progamer can do. He can not give is all to it. Thats fine (just cannonrush/4 gate... who cares, play something that could win). He can play some weird shit. Thats fine (even Bratok and Stephano, while obviously wanting to lose did this and i was actually entertained by that offensive Hatchery/Spinecrawler-Rush vs BC-Rush game). He can not just send his first probes in the direction of his opponent and remove his hand from the keyboard/stop playing.
You enjoy being fooled for your own amusement?
IFirst and foremost I enjoy being amused. If you have to fool me to amuse me, then i support you to fool me.
I don't expect the best game ever from two players being 0-3 in their group. BUT i expect a game. What Stephano and Bratok did was wrong too, but it was WAY better than what Naniwa did. Stephano/Bratok still delivered a game, Naniwa did not.
Ok. Just to make sure we are on the same page. As long your amused you don't care if you've just been tricked or deceived into that joy... doesn't matter how or why, so long as your being amused?
I guess ignorance really is bliss.
edit: nice ninja edit
Are you actually trying to be as daft as possible? I want to see the better player or my fav win when both playeres give their best.
Now this is unliekly in a case where the game does not matter or losing actually gives a later advantage, as it was in Stephano vs Bratok or the recent Naniwa/Nestea. Everyone has to accept this but the fact is simple: The gameis broadcasted to thousands of viewers which expect to see a game, if possible a good or at least entertaining one, but most of all a game. What NO ONE wants to see is a professional losing in the fastest way possible because he does not feel like playing. It does not matter if you or others do not care about tournament games that do not matter anymore. There are people that care about Nestea vs Naniwa, GOM cared (and paid) for Nestea vs Naniwa and did not get what they have paid for, therefore they punished Naniwa.
I agree 100% with the OP and i really don't see how anyone can disagree.
Btw: There is one thing i see diffrent. I thinkt he punishment is pretty mild.
I disagree, a lot of the people who cared about the Nestea vs. Naniwa match stopped caring once the game lost all meaning, just as plenty of people wanted to be ignorantly fooled by a fake four gate from Naniwa.
On December 16 2011 01:22 Pazuzu wrote: good write up - but the major league sports example was rather out of context....NFL coaches pull star players when the game no longer matters; baseball plays minor league guys when the game doesn't matter etc. I agree that what Naniwa did was unprofessional and objectively I can see why GOM TV had to do what they did (as you say its a part of the business model etc) but the general public is faulting him for a mistake that is VERY overblown simply because of the controversy surrounding Nestea and Naniwa. The trash talk at MLG providence made this a 'relevant' match even though from the standpoint of the tournament it was irrelevant
This is a great point. While I agree with Alex and GOM that action was required, I do feel like he's gotten too bad a wrap for this just like the MLG incident.
I think most people agree that Naniwa should have just 4-gated but honestly it's just a deception for fans who don't know any better. The solution for this issue is not playing matches that don't matter to anyone, or adding ranking points/prizemoney for every win in a tournament so all games matter.
Anyway, what he did isn't the biggest issue anymore imo. The biggest issue is that GOM have punished a player that didn't break any rule, they sentenced him without having broken any law and without a trial. GOM are also twisting words regarding Naniwa's code S spot, making it look like he never earned it in the first place.
Removing his code S spot for this, as a first time offender who hasn't broken any rule is rediculous. He should have received a warning or similar.
On December 16 2011 00:37 Velr wrote: Brilliant post .
I don't get why people don't see the problem. You don't purposefully lose a game, it's the worst thing a progamer can do. He can not give is all to it. Thats fine (just cannonrush/4 gate... who cares, play something that could win). He can play some weird shit. Thats fine (even Bratok and Stephano, while obviously wanting to lose did this and i was actually entertained by that offensive Hatchery/Spinecrawler-Rush vs BC-Rush game). He can not just send his first probes in the direction of his opponent and remove his hand from the keyboard/stop playing.
You enjoy being fooled for your own amusement?
IFirst and foremost I enjoy being amused. If you have to fool me to amuse me, then i support you to fool me.
I don't expect the best game ever from two players being 0-3 in their group. BUT i expect a game. What Stephano and Bratok did was wrong too, but it was WAY better than what Naniwa did. Stephano/Bratok still delivered a game, Naniwa did not.
Ok. Just to make sure we are on the same page. As long your amused you don't care if you've just been tricked or deceived into that joy... doesn't matter how or why, so long as your being amused?
I guess ignorance really is bliss.
edit: nice ninja edit
Are you actually trying to be as daft as possible? I want to see the better player or my fav win when both playeres give their best.
Now this is unliekly in a case where the game does not matter or losing actually gives a later advantage, as it was in Stephano vs Bratok or the recent Naniwa/Nestea. Everyone has to accept this but the fact is simple: The gameis broadcasted to thousands of viewers which expect to see a game, if possible a good or at least entertaining one, but most of all a game. What NO ONE wants to see is a professional losing in the fastest way possible because he does not feel like playing. It does not matter if you or others do not care about tournament games that do not matter anymore. There are people that care about Nestea vs Naniwa, GOM cared (and paid) for Nestea vs Naniwa and did not get what they have paid for, therefore they punished Naniwa.
I agree 100% with the OP and i really don't see how anyone can disagree.
Btw: There is one thing i see diffrent. I thinkt he punishment is pretty mild.
I disagree, a lot of the people who cared about the Nestea vs. Naniwa match stopped caring once the game lost all meaning, just as plenty of people wanted to be ignorantly fooled by a fake four gate from Naniwa.
Yes and its totally fine/normal that you stopped caring. No one is arguing that. I did not care about the game myself but there are plenty of peopel that do care. Obviously GOM cared and i'm sure plenty of people still wanted to see a nice Naniwa vs Nestea match, no matter if it was dead serious or not.
All Naniwa needed to do was delivering "some" game.
Thanks for the post Alex. That's what I've been trying to say (in a less elucidated manner) elsewhere on the forums. It's not a cultural problem. It's a problem with professionalism. Pro players are obligated to play out their matches for entertainment value. Obviously some don't agree, but getting paid comes with additional obligations to sponsors and fans (not just the ones who have the same disposition to meaningless games).
On December 16 2011 01:28 Supcraft.Rez wrote: The only difference is that NaNiwa is a player, not a team manager. For all we know, he might not give a rat's ass about the growth of eSports, or the sustainability of certain business models, and that's completely legitimate. Whether his team has a policy that says players should or shouldn't throw away games, that's their business. Not the broadcasters', and not the viewers'.
Yup, especially considering players are only looking out for themselves. SC2 is a game based on individual achievement.
I've said this many times. Players like Greg and Johan are only looking to win. That's all they care about. As soon as they see they're in no position to win. They bow out. They are only thinking about themselves and don't make the connection to the fans who came out to see them play. They're too busy being pissed off at themselves.
To them winning comes first. Whatever people get out of it (the entertainment factor) would only be the icing on the cake.
That's why we see certain players use certain strategies that they know will work. Might not be as entertaining, but they just want to win the stupid game because that's the first thing on their mind.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
The rematch of Naniwa vs. Nestea should not be casted? The highly expected revenge? Well, feel insulted by me, thank you.
On December 16 2011 01:12 figq wrote: I would rather watch an honest forfeit, than a dishonest simulation, but to each their own.
In Idra's case vs Nerchio, as also in Naniwa's and others; tilt may play a more serious role than considered here. If an athlete is injured, he can't play and has to go on the bench. In esports psychology is as important. While I personally never get on tilt enough to be unable to play, there are people who do, and I respect that.
Also, this is one game in a set of 10 (+ possible triple rounds of tiebreaks). It doesn't break significantly the flow of the daily broadcast, there's no need for tickets to be returned, the TV crew did not get set up with nothing to be televised etc. That's why the comparison to a fully forfeited match in most other sports is unfair. The fair comparison would be, if enough players in the SC2 event refused to play altogether, so that no games could be played.
This.
... and as totally not CEO of anything, I don't agree with OP points despite some logic and long arguments.
I don't care for simulation matches. Let's pretend it matters? What for? Players goal is to win tournaments, team goal is to make profit.
Corporate way of ''professionally growing eSports'' will work, of course leading to mass viewers, but much less human like personalities and passion - just work.
Yeah, because in basically every other sport there is no passion anymore because the players are not allowed to drop games in the most obvious way.
-.-
SERIOUSLY... Do you guys even think before posting?
I don't give a shit about the growth of ESports.. I was a happy Panda watching SC/BW but what Naniwa did was just wrong and got rightfully punished.
In unrelevant games? There is not. Or u know some?
Ahm?
National football league.. Last round.
Team X has 20 points and no matter what a win/lose/draw will not change it's position. Team Y has 10 points and no matter what a win/lose/draw will not change it's position. Now they have to play against each other, what do you think will happen?
They will play. Probably not with their best possible team but the guys on the field will play and they will try to win.. For their fans, for themselves.. i don't care... All i care for is taht they will deliver a game..
What a terrible comparison.
Its more like Naniwa prepared a month for the Superbowl and gets shut out hard, then expecting him to play a show match directly after against previous years champion who has nothing to gain either. Something like that would never happen in the NFL. Its completely different and that is why these are terrible grounds to back any argument on.
You say that the Idra vs White-Ra situation was different, because IPL was behind schedule already...but let me tell you...Idra vs White ra was one of the matches EVERYONE was excited about. They WOULD of broadcasted that match, and it would of drawn a huge crowd. Idra did excatly the same thing here. I was disappointed when I heard White Ra vs Idra was canceled, and I know many others were too.
This isn't the only time idras forfeitted a game vs an opponent either, MLG providence vs haypro? Yeah, it wasn't going to be broadcast...just played in the back, where hundreds of idra fans would of been standing, waiting for the game to be played.
On December 16 2011 00:45 Fjodorov wrote: The people who agree with GOMs decision obviously think that this was the right way to handle the "throwing game" issue. So this is a rule and a principle you agree should be used in a global event. I expect all of you to demand very harsh punishments for anyone who does anything similar in any global/international tournament after this. The main arguement seems to be the one of sportsmanship and professionalism. That means that whether the game is broadcasted or not shouldnt matter and the size of the tournamens is not important either. The principle you claim to stand for now you must defend after this, regardless of the player, team, nationality.
Uhm, ok?
And you are supporting everyone throwing their matches left and right because they don't feel like playing no matter the audience or anythign?...
Read the op about throwing matches. then read his response again. hope you understand his argument now.
On December 16 2011 00:37 Velr wrote: Brilliant post .
I don't get why people don't see the problem. You don't purposefully lose a game, it's the worst thing a progamer can do. He can not give is all to it. Thats fine (just cannonrush/4 gate... who cares, play something that could win). He can play some weird shit. Thats fine (even Bratok and Stephano, while obviously wanting to lose did this and i was actually entertained by that offensive Hatchery/Spinecrawler-Rush vs BC-Rush game). He can not just send his first probes in the direction of his opponent and remove his hand from the keyboard/stop playing.
You enjoy being fooled for your own amusement?
IFirst and foremost I enjoy being amused. If you have to fool me to amuse me, then i support you to fool me.
I don't expect the best game ever from two players being 0-3 in their group. BUT i expect a game. What Stephano and Bratok did was wrong too, but it was WAY better than what Naniwa did. Stephano/Bratok still delivered a game, Naniwa did not.
Ok. Just to make sure we are on the same page. As long your amused you don't care if you've just been tricked or deceived into that joy... doesn't matter how or why, so long as your being amused?
I guess ignorance really is bliss.
edit: nice ninja edit
Are you actually trying to be as daft as possible? I want to see the better player or my fav win when both playeres give their best.
Now this is unliekly in a case where the game does not matter or losing actually gives a later advantage, as it was in Stephano vs Bratok or the recent Naniwa/Nestea. Everyone has to accept this but the fact is simple: The gameis broadcasted to thousands of viewers which expect to see a game, if possible a good or at least entertaining one, but most of all a game. What NO ONE wants to see is a professional losing in the fastest way possible because he does not feel like playing. It does not matter if you or others do not care about tournament games that do not matter anymore. There are people that care about Nestea vs Naniwa, GOM cared (and paid) for Nestea vs Naniwa and did not get what they have paid for, therefore they punished Naniwa.
I agree 100% with the OP and i really don't see how anyone can disagree.
Btw: There is one thing i see diffrent. I thinkt he punishment is pretty mild.
I disagree, a lot of the people who cared about the Nestea vs. Naniwa match stopped caring once the game lost all meaning, just as plenty of people wanted to be ignorantly fooled by a fake four gate from Naniwa.
Yes and its totally fine/normal that you stopped caring. No one is arguing that. I did not care about the game myself but there are plenty of peopel that do care. Obviously GOM cared and i'm sure plenty of people still wanted to see a nice Naniwa vs Nestea match, no matter if it was dead serious or not.
All Naniwa needed to do was delivering "some" game.
Yeah I'm not saying Naniwa should have done what he did, just that for meaningless match I feel the punishment dished out by GOM for Naniwa not deceiving an ignorant group of people was too harsh, there are plenty of people who paid and wanted to see Naniwa in Code S... :/
On December 16 2011 00:25 kirdie wrote: I don't agree, I prefer him to not lie to people and pretend to want to win with a 4 gate but make it clear - does no one value honesty anymore?
I don't understand this logic. I go to a restaurant, and for some reason the waiter does not like me. I am paying for food and service, and expect a good service. If the waiter treats me like trash, would I be happy and say "I really appreciate you being honest, it would have hurt me if you would have given me a fake smile"? Fuck no, keep your honesty to yourself, I am here to enjoy myself. The waiter should give as much effort as possible!
I'm sorry but no. I'm sick about all that rumble for nothing. Naniwa did what a lot of progamers did before, in an extreme way yes, but still. The only thing that made people so angry about all that is that Naniwa robbed Nestea - a korean super star - from having his revenge. Koreans' ego is touched, period. If it were a korean who did that, nobody would have talked about it.
And all the shit about the vocation makes me sad, considering what naniwa did to play : he is one of the few players who only care about the game and not other aspect of esports...
I agree what NaNi did is unacceptable and it made me pretty mad and embarassed as foreigner however... what I find a bit hypocritical is EG's COE calling it unacceptable and yet did nothing but a strong talk to Idra after he was in similar situationS(!) (unless I've missed it)... I guess what I'm asking... what does unacceptable really means for alex?
On December 16 2011 01:50 Bleb wrote: I agree what NaNi did is unacceptable and it made me pretty mad and embarassed as foreigner however... what I find a bit hypocritical is EG's COE calling it unacceptable and yet did nothing but a strong talk to Idra after he was in similar situationS(!) (unless I've missed it)... I guess what I'm asking... what does unacceptable really means for alex?
Unacceptable means it should not occur again. How this is enforced is another discussion.
On December 16 2011 01:42 CinnaBuns wrote: Thanks for the post Alex. That's what I've been trying to say (in a less elucidated manner) elsewhere on the forums. It's not a cultural problem. It's a problem with professionalism. Pro players are obligated to play out their matches for entertainment value. Obviously some don't agree, but getting paid comes with additional obligations to sponsors and fans (not just the ones who have the same disposition to meaningless games).
Actually it very much has to do with the Korean culture as well. Or else, this wouldn't have blown up like it did. The Korean outrage was far worse than our community's take. Many of us know what to expect from players like Naniwa. We don't have the same level of sophistication when it comes to esports and it all started with BW and the forming of KeSPA.
In layman's terms. Many foreigners treat gaming as a hobby/part-time job whereas Koreans treat it like a career. We cannot neglect the cultural impact let alone how Koreans operate.
It's something that a lot of us haven't experienced including Alex.
On December 16 2011 01:50 Bleb wrote: I agree what NaNi did is unacceptable and it made me pretty mad and embarassed as foreigner however... what I find a bit hypocritical is EG's COE calling it unacceptable and yet did nothing but a strong talk to Idra after he was in similar situationS(!) (unless I've missed it)... I guess what I'm asking... what does unacceptable really means for alex?
In Alex's defense, it's not hypocritical, because he never mentions what kind of action towards Naniwa should be taken, and clarifies multiple times that he wants to leave that out of the discussion.
This is the first time I'm reading about the Naniwa drama, and my personal opinion is it's not right for them to take away his code S spot over a worker rush. If there was no rule against it at the time, he shouldn't be punished for it. Make the rule for the next season and move on. I also don't think there should be a rule against it. Every strat should be allowed, even if it doesn't work. It could have been meta gaming where Naniwa pulls surprises on July next season and goes on to win. No need to show your hand for a match that doesn't matter.
Sorry, Alex, but you gloss over IdrA's lesser moments and prop up Nani's singular mistake. IdrA does not even feel it appropriate to play games of no consequence to him, if he could be doing something more convenient.
Anyway, point is that Nani putting on an obvious cheese would not do the game justice and not satisfy anyone watching/paying to watch the matches. Everyone watching would know Nani was not into it and was cheesing for a quick out. He should not be harshly criticized for choosing a different, much quicker route to a gg than the proxy rushes/4gates/cheeses other progamers use regularly in competition when they feel "mentally exhausted" or have no motivation for a pointless match.
The reason Nani is being punished is supposedly due to his direspect/poor sportsmanship/etc. People feel it was a slap in the face. I find this hard to believe when Korea is the birthplace of ceremonies, something that is blatantly insulting and people in Korea actually applaud ceremonies. Granted, ceremonies take place after matches are played, but the point is that no one should state that Nani's actions were an insult to Nestea or Koreans when they themselves will trash-talk and insult like anyone else playing professionally. There can be no double-standard in my opinion.
C'mon, all this comparisons to meaningless games still played - how excited you are to watch that?! I mean, it your choice...
But really funny are those ''he should 4 gated, that would be fine'' Really, let's put it this way '' how many drones would be fine? Maybe if he made like 15 and send, that better? Or if he microed this ones?
I donno... this Idra BM talk... yes he did same things, but because of his focus to win (same as NaNi) he gets 10k instant viewers...
On December 16 2011 01:50 Bleb wrote: I agree what NaNi did is unacceptable and it made me pretty mad and embarassed as foreigner however... what I find a bit hypocritical is EG's COE calling it unacceptable and yet did nothing but a strong talk to Idra after he was in similar situationS(!) (unless I've missed it)... I guess what I'm asking... what does unacceptable really means for alex?
In Alex's defense, it's not hypocritical, because he never mentions what kind of action towards Naniwa should be taken, and clarifies that multiple times.
well... what nani did is for me unacceptable... so he kinda lost me a fan and he got sort of punished by gom alex mentioned idra also did something unacceptable... and I agree with him... I also don't like idra cuz of his behaviour... but what did EG do? I know this is discussion about nani's behaviour but I'd like to see more discusion about what unacceptable really means and how we should deal with it... as a fan I can't do anything more that stop being a fan and root/support other teams... but as CEO you could do more... so I'd like to hear more about alex' opinion on that
On December 16 2011 01:50 WhiteDog wrote: I'm sorry but no. I'm sick about all that rumble for nothing. Naniwa did what a lot of progamers did before, in an extreme way yes, but still. The only thing that made people so angry about all that is that Naniwa robbed Nestea - a korean super star - from having his revenge. Koreans' ego is touched, period. If it were a korean who did that, nobody would have talked about it.
And all the shit about the vocation makes me sad, considering what naniwa did to play : he is one of the few players who only care about the game and not other aspect of esports...
A korean doing that would have been kicked out on his B-team. And gom would have probably also punished him.
People were pissed because it was disrespectful for the opponent, organizers and Naniwa's own team plus to all the progamer who had liked to be invited to the tournament.
Even Naniwa genuinly recognized he did something wrong. The only point which is still unclear is about the GOM/MLG code S seed thing.
What Naniwa did was essentially the Starcraft 2 equivalent of this:
People reacted exactly the same way back then as they did now: it wasn't against the rules, but it was certainly against the spirit of the game and action needed to be taken to prevent it from happening again.
Ok now the big names in e-sports say Naniwa should have put effort in a meaningless match. Where were they during Blizzcon 2011 when some ice-cold nestea was throwing away the final match?
On December 15 2011 23:30 EGalex wrote: TL;DR if there's no entertainment within a pro player's job, then there are no pro players.
I have to disagree, the entertainment ARE the pro players, they dont make entertainment they ARE entertainment, just by playing the game they are entertaining, there is no need for them to "train" entertaining. because they already are entertaining.
You've got the car before the horse. Their job is entertainment. EG doesn't pay Idra to win tournaments. They pay him to get exposure for their sponsors. The way he does this (most of the time) is by doing well in tournaments. But his responsibilities don't end there. Look at literally ANY other professional sport where players/teams are sponsored. Same thing there. Bottom line, the player's job is to play the game and make what at least looks to the naked eye like a good-faith effort to win (or at least make the game worth watching). First and foremost, that's the job for a player being broadcast in any televised match.
On December 16 2011 02:04 Koloff wrote: Ok now the big names in e-sports say Naniwa should have put effort in a meaningless match. Where were they during Blizzcon 2011 when some ice-cold nestea was throwing away the final match?
How can you compare a probe suicide to a full hive tech game?
I wonder, if Naniwa had played standard, what kind of game we would've seen from Nestea. I think the situation was only exacerbated by the first three games they played, and that frustration boiled over--Nestea was probably grateful to Naniwa for doing what he did to put them both out of their misery.
People reacted exactly the same way back then as they did now: it wasn't against the rules, but it was certainly against the spirit of the game and action needed to be taken to prevent it from happening again.
Just some perspective.
To be honest, forbidding that in cricket is silly, you can get almost the exact same result by adjusting your throw. Wow I didn't know that rule existed, so silly...
On December 16 2011 01:47 Bonkarooni wrote: You say that the Idra vs White-Ra situation was different, because IPL was behind schedule already...but let me tell you...Idra vs White ra was one of the matches EVERYONE was excited about. They WOULD of broadcasted that match, and it would of drawn a huge crowd. Idra did excatly the same thing here. I was disappointed when I heard White Ra vs Idra was canceled, and I know many others were too.
This isn't the only time idras forfeitted a game vs an opponent either, MLG providence vs haypro? Yeah, it wasn't going to be broadcast...just played in the back, where hundreds of idra fans would of been standing, waiting for the game to be played.
Seems like a let down to me
IdrA was falling asleep in his booth before the WhiteRA game. It sucks that it was cancelled, you could say IdrA was "physically" unable to play his best, so he didn't try. Blame him for that if you want. You can bet EG told him "you better perform tomorrow" (and IIRC, he did win his match (against Thorzain I think?)) Another group at the very same tournament also decided to cancel a bunch of matches because of delays.
As for MLG Providence, you are talking about a consolation match. IdrA missed the game because he was watching Huk play. He got a forfeit loss, lost a few hundred dollars. Not the end of the world. Those games don't get broadcasted at all, and a lot of people just flip coins to determine the winner.
It's just... he makes no effort at all to understand korean philosophy behind this. Their opinion on manners are of a whole different nature considering the cultural aspects that flow in.
On December 16 2011 01:47 Bonkarooni wrote: You say that the Idra vs White-Ra situation was different, because IPL was behind schedule already...but let me tell you...Idra vs White ra was one of the matches EVERYONE was excited about. They WOULD of broadcasted that match, and it would of drawn a huge crowd. Idra did excatly the same thing here. I was disappointed when I heard White Ra vs Idra was canceled, and I know many others were too.
This isn't the only time idras forfeitted a game vs an opponent either, MLG providence vs haypro? Yeah, it wasn't going to be broadcast...just played in the back, where hundreds of idra fans would of been standing, waiting for the game to be played.
Seems like a let down to me
As for the WhiteRa game, read Thrax's post and you'll understand it was better overall for Idra to not play that game as he wouldn't have been able to perform and it would have hurt his next day play very likely. As for the Haypro game, take it from me as I was there. Idra missed the game cause he didn't hear it called when he was watching Huk play. I can tell you this isn't BS cause I was in the audiance watching Huk and not only did I see Idra watching, but I never heard his game with Haypro called either, I didn't even know they were going to play until after when I heard he missed it. And as for the people who were waitning to watch it and missed out, I promise you that is a total of about 15 people. Sure plenty of people would have like to know who had won, especially after Haypro's amazing performance against NesTea earlier that day, But due to the game being played in player only area, very few people would have been able to watch it looking over his shoulder, and that is only if it was played on one of the edges rather than in the middle where no one would have seen it. NaNiwa's game was much higher profile which is why i warrants such a different reaction.
Does anyone really feel like they were "robbed of a game"? I mean honestly, it was a throwaway game. To think either player would reveal and revolutionary playstyle is unreasonable. Coaches in the NBA often seat their star players when a game isn't important and throw in scrubs, that's pretty much the equivalent of a probe rush, and it's allowed.
I generally agree with the author's analysis of when are acceptable times to throw matches.
For an MLB example: suppose the Red Sox and Yankees were about to meet in the playoffs, and they met to play on the last game of the regular season. Everyone would expect, for that meaningless game, that both teams would not bring their "A" game, no team would use their top starting pitchers, etc.
Idra vs. White-Ra is the same thing. Both had nothing to gain, and were preparing themselves for the playoffs. So we shouldn't expect to see an epic game in that situation.
Yes, we would like all the players to go all-out and reveal clever new strats in every game we individually watch. But this is unrealistic, and makes the truly epic games, the finals where everything really is on the line, that much more epic.
On December 16 2011 01:50 WhiteDog wrote: I'm sorry but no. I'm sick about all that rumble for nothing. Naniwa did what a lot of progamers did before, in an extreme way yes, but still. The only thing that made people so angry about all that is that Naniwa robbed Nestea - a korean super star - from having his revenge. Koreans' ego is touched, period. If it were a korean who did that, nobody would have talked about it.
And all the shit about the vocation makes me sad, considering what naniwa did to play : he is one of the few players who only care about the game and not other aspect of esports...
A korean doing that would have been kicked out on his B-team. And gom would have probably also punished him.
People were pissed because it was disrespectful for the opponent, organizers and Naniwa's own team plus to all the progamer who had liked to be invited to the tournament.
Even Naniwa genuinly recognized he did something wrong. The only point which is still unclear is about the GOM/MLG code S seed thing.
Maybe a korean would have been kicked out, but he would not have been punished the way naniwa did (seriously Choya saying it's a bastard ? Not deserving to be a pro ? seriously ?). And Naniwa just recognized sure, normal since EVERYBODY is on the poor guy. What he did was extreme, but damn it's so ridiculous, no reason for all that drama.
Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Great response, my thought exactly on all this. Glad people like you are still voicing their opinion in the current "e-sport" atmosphere.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
So everyone in every other sport in the world is an idiot, be it fan or pro?
Intresting point... Don't you feel stupid when you post shit like this?
Naniwa just made the wrong decision on how to throw the match. If he had pushed a few more buttons to build a few buildings and did a stupid little all in push/timing a-move attack that he can do while blindfolded then none of this would have happened.
I agree that there is a difference in perception between a probe rush and what I described but there really isn't a difference. Its kindof sad that the community will blow up over one and just call the other a shitty game.
Whatever, I hope all progamers have now learnt how to properly throw a match. Do an all-in cheese, you dont even have to try, and people wont care.
At the end of the day, all professional gamers are in the entertainment industry. They are paid to be entertaining, when e-sports stops being entertaining, it'll go back to just being die-hards competing for title of being the best like it was in the early days. At this point it seems that it's primarily because of sponsors that these players can do what they do, and all decisions should reflect that they should make decisions in the best interest of those who are writing their paychecks. Winning is a good way to do that, but when that's not an option, you should do something entertaining to win over fans and appease your sponsors.
I think this whole incident has got ridiculously overblown.
I disagree that GOMTV fully fulfilled all their obligations. If they wanted players to show their best games against all of their opponents then it's they're responsibility to provide an environment which is conducive to this situation. They clearly didn't do this. It's important that tournament organisers use the right format to create the best possible product and i'd hope GOM and other organisations would learn from this and off better formats in the future. Unfortunately i fear the way thing are currently going the blame is going to be completely shifted onto Naniwas shoulders and an important lesson will be lost.
Of course i'd of preferred to see a true contest between Naniwa and Nestea but with Naniwa on tilt we were never going to get that. I find it truly insulting the stance some people have taken by saying that Naniwa should of tried and fooled the viewers into thinking the game was a genuine contest between two players at their best by using a four gate or another weak strategy. I don't understand how that's providing a better product to the viewers and i don't like the idea that we're too dumb to tell the difference either.
At the end of the day Naniwa did what he did because he was devestated at losing his previous matches. It wasn't out of disrespect or a lack of caring but because he had invested so much into the tournament and was so disappointed that he wasn't able to perform as he had hoped. This could of been turned into a positive with people pointing out the passion players have for this game and how much the matches can affect them emotionally. Instead some people have turned Naniwa into a Pariah and GOMTV have set a dangerous and silly precedence that players can be punished for not reaching some kind of arbitrary effort level or for failing to provide a completely subjective level of entertainment.
If e-sports can survive the 2010 match-fixing scandal created by the "honourable" and "professional" Korean e-sports culture then i'm sure the industry can survive this. Get over it.
one of my favorite parts of this thread is going over all the posts that clearly didn't read the OP or probably any comments in this thread.. just scanned and posted.
"What about IdrA vs WhiteRa? GOTCHA"
lol
It's a long OP but worth the read btw if anyone is checking for the last page of the thread.. please read it <3
People reacted exactly the same way back then as they did now: it wasn't against the rules, but it was certainly against the spirit of the game and action needed to be taken to prevent it from happening again.
Just some perspective.
To be honest, forbidding that in cricket is silly, you can get almost the exact same result by adjusting your throw. Wow I didn't know that rule existed, so silly...
And Naniwa could have prevented this by building a few buildings. All this talk of "trying" or "effort" is meaningless. There is negligible more effort for Naniwa to 2 gate all in than for him to a-move his probes.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
In 2012: MLG will rule it so that we'll get 37% more lazorz and explosions, and a terran player is not allowed to do the 1/1/1 more than once per event.
I say pick your format, set the rules to prevent players from taking unfair advantages in order to win and let the players duke it out in what fashion they choose to. So one guy didn't care to win? Well that's good for the other guy, I guess. C'est la vie.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
So everyone in every other sport in the world is an idiot, be it fan or pro?
Intresting point... Don't you feel stupid when you post shit like this?
You're telling me a sports team is going to try their hardest in a meaningless match? No, they aren't. A perfect example of this is the recent 2009 Colts. So yes, it does happen in other "real" sports. The difference here is that the Colts have a backup squad to throw in, Naniwa doesn't, and that is the only difference in my eyes.
Don't you feel stupid when you post something wrong?
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
Idra was watching another match and didn't hear the call.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
Idra was watching another match and didn't hear the call.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
So everyone in every other sport in the world is an idiot, be it fan or pro?
Intresting point... Don't you feel stupid when you post shit like this?
You're telling me a sports team is going to try their hardest in a meaningless match? No, they aren't. A perfect example of this is the recent 2009 Colts. So yes, it does happen in other "real" sports. The difference here is that the Colts have a backup squad to throw in, Naniwa doesn't, and that is the only difference in my eyes.
Don't you feel stupid when you post something wrong?
There is a giant diffrence between trying their hardest and lose a game on purpose as fast as you can. If you don't see that then no one can help you. In the OP your example is even used and it's just not working for your case.
I don't feel the analogy between a pro sports team playing out the rest of their losing season and Naniwa's incident connect. The main difference is that the pro sports players are contracted and paid for every game, the money comes from those in attendence and those watching. Naniwa is not paid for everything, he's paid if he does well and gets to a certain position.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
I guess it's a difference of outlook. In my eyes Naniwa was invited to do his best to reach the finals and win, not play 4 games. Once it became apparent (0-3) that this was not possible, Naniwa completed his obligations. In this case, it isn't about being paid to walk a dog and then not walking it. It's entering a tournament for frisbee catching, losing in the initial heats, and being forced to do a meaningless sideshow (which the dog trainer competes in and throws his frisbee an impossibly long distance)
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
Of course it wouldn't. Those games weren't even broadcasted. They weren't exactly meaningful.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
I guess it's a difference of outlook. In my eyes Naniwa was invited to do his best to reach the finals and win, not play 4 games. Once it became apparent (0-3) that this was not possible, Naniwa completed his obligations. In this case, it isn't about being paid to walk a dog and then not walking it. It's entering a tournament for frisbee catching, losing in the initial heats, and being forced to do a meaningless sideshow (which the dog trainer competes in and throws his frisbee an impossibly long distance)
That's not an opinion, it's an incorrect assumption. He was invited to play 4 games. I understand the emotions Naniwa went through and as such I think I can understand yours, but you can't make up your own reasons of why someone is invited in order to justify your opinion.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
So everyone in every other sport in the world is an idiot, be it fan or pro?
Intresting point... Don't you feel stupid when you post shit like this?
You're telling me a sports team is going to try their hardest in a meaningless match? No, they aren't. A perfect example of this is the recent 2009 Colts. So yes, it does happen in other "real" sports. The difference here is that the Colts have a backup squad to throw in, Naniwa doesn't, and that is the only difference in my eyes.
Don't you feel stupid when you post something wrong?
There is a giant diffrence between trying their hardest and lose a game on purpose as fast as you can. If you don't see that then no one can help you. In the OP your example is even used and it's just not working for your case.
There isn't a difference in my eyes. I don't pay to watch someone do a bronze level 4gate just so people can sleep well at night. That's exactly what you're asking for. "Well, if he had 4gated we wouldn't be having this discussion." Sweet, I enjoy paying to watch bronze level strategy and play too! Oh wait, no I don't.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Lets say the dogs owner pays you to walk the dog but does not state how long you have to walk it. You walk it for 1 min, techincally fulfilling your obligation. Should you be punished so hard it affects your whole career as a dog walker?
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
So everyone in every other sport in the world is an idiot, be it fan or pro?
Intresting point... Don't you feel stupid when you post shit like this?
You're telling me a sports team is going to try their hardest in a meaningless match? No, they aren't. A perfect example of this is the recent 2009 Colts. So yes, it does happen in other "real" sports. The difference here is that the Colts have a backup squad to throw in, Naniwa doesn't, and that is the only difference in my eyes.
Don't you feel stupid when you post something wrong?
There is a giant diffrence between trying their hardest and lose a game on purpose as fast as you can. If you don't see that then no one can help you. In the OP your example is even used and it's just not working for your case.
There is a difference for anyone who is simple-minded, you're right. I don't pay to watch someone do a bronze level 4gate just so people can sleep well at night. That's exactly what you're asking for. "Well, if he had 4gated we wouldn't be having this discussion." Sweet, I enjoy paying to watch bronze level strategy and play too! Oh wait, no I don't.
Most people would have then called it a "shitty" game instead of a "controversial" game and there wouldve been one thread of outrage and nothing done to Naniwa.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
Of course it wouldn't. Those games weren't even broadcasted. They weren't exactly meaningful.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
I guess it's a difference of outlook. In my eyes Naniwa was invited to do his best to reach the finals and win, not play 4 games. Once it became apparent (0-3) that this was not possible, Naniwa completed his obligations. In this case, it isn't about being paid to walk a dog and then not walking it. It's entering a tournament for frisbee catching, losing in the initial heats, and being forced to do a meaningless sideshow (which the dog trainer competes in and throws his frisbee an impossibly long distance)
That's not an opinion, it's an incorrect assumption. He was invited to play 4 games. I understand the emotions Naniwa went through and as such I think I can understand yours, but you can't make up your own reasons of why someone is invited in order to justify your opinion.
No Nazgul, it is your opinion that he was invited to play 4 games. It is my opinion that he was invited to make an attempt at winning the tournament. It is not an incorrect assumption on either of our parts.
On December 15 2011 23:13 Remb wrote: When I saw 7 probes rushing a hatchery, I knew that Naniwa (foolishly) chose to act honestly instead of doing what so many other pro gamers have done before. The esports world should not be parallel with athletic sports for many reasons, one being the seasonal and physical aspects of athletic sports, and I do believe his actions were unacceptable
But I think that a player can never play his best games when he knows there is nothing at stake, and it is the responsibility of the tournaments to host formats that create meaningful games.
Too often I see players feign motivation when they are put into those situations you described, and those games truly anger me. Watching a player perform a game where it is apparent he is not motivated to play his best is insulting to my intelligence. I am paying for honest competition, not a fake and empty showmatch that is supposed to entertain me. I pay these companies to create a tournament where the players are motivated because the games are important to them. The situation does occur quite often, but they are rarely ever pointed out.
It's quite laughable how you parallel these situations to athletic sports to justify their existence. Nobody cares about the last two teams playing their final match of the season, and the turnouts for those games are always abysmal. Because the fans are not stupid.
The fans know when a game is meaningless. They know when the players don't give a damn, but the players slug on and half-ass it because "it's their job". Well you are selling the fans short. Naniwa's game angered me. But if Naniwa chose the politically correct strategy of 2 base all in or 4 gate, I would have been equally angered. Both strategies are equally meaningless to me, because the situation itself was meaningless.
lol, Nani should have just refused to get in the booth to be honest then. If I see a player get into the booth, then I expect to see a game. Probe rushing is just as dishonest as a half assed 4 gate. If he wants to make a point, don't get in the booth. If he doesn't like the way the tournament is set up, don't show up. I fail to see how a probe rush is any better than any other half assed rush. Showmatches bring in tons of money. All-star games, pro bowls, none of it actually matters but try saying that to the ticket prices and ad prices for prime slots.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
How about the fact that most players literally flip a coin for their consolation matches which according to you are not meaningless?
On December 15 2011 23:13 Remb wrote: When I saw 7 probes rushing a hatchery, I knew that Naniwa (foolishly) chose to act honestly instead of doing what so many other pro gamers have done before. The esports world should not be parallel with athletic sports for many reasons, one being the seasonal and physical aspects of athletic sports, and I do believe his actions were unacceptable
But I think that a player can never play his best games when he knows there is nothing at stake, and it is the responsibility of the tournaments to host formats that create meaningful games.
Too often I see players feign motivation when they are put into those situations you described, and those games truly anger me. Watching a player perform a game where it is apparent he is not motivated to play his best is insulting to my intelligence. I am paying for honest competition, not a fake and empty showmatch that is supposed to entertain me. I pay these companies to create a tournament where the players are motivated because the games are important to them. The situation does occur quite often, but they are rarely ever pointed out.
It's quite laughable how you parallel these situations to athletic sports to justify their existence. Nobody cares about the last two teams playing their final match of the season, and the turnouts for those games are always abysmal. Because the fans are not stupid.
The fans know when a game is meaningless. They know when the players don't give a damn, but the players slug on and half-ass it because "it's their job". Well you are selling the fans short. Naniwa's game angered me. But if Naniwa chose the politically correct strategy of 2 base all in or 4 gate, I would have been equally angered. Both strategies are equally meaningless to me, because the situation itself was meaningless.
lol, Nani should have just refused to get in the booth to be honest then. If I see a player get into the booth, then I expect to see a game. Probe rushing is just as dishonest as a half assed 4 gate. If he wants to make a point, don't get in the booth. If he doesn't like the way the tournament is set up, don't show up. I fail to see how a probe rush is any better than any other half assed rush. Showmatches bring in tons of money. All-star games, pro bowls, none of it actually matters but try saying that to the ticket prices and ad prices for prime slots.
Those are specifically designated as "show matches" beforehand though. Not as part of some larger tournament.
Anyways I agree with you, Naniwa should have either just not showed up, or played a bronze league cheese game. Probe rushing makes even the out of touch people to realize hes throwing the game.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Lets say the dogs owner pays you to walk the dog but does not state how long you have to walk it. You walk it for 1 min, techincally fulfilling your obligation. Should you be punished so hard it affects your whole career as a dog walker?
The analogy was meant to show the difference between money and responsibility. It wasn't meant to function as an example to what technicality suffices as fulfilling your job. The two are entirely different when it comes to walking a dog and being an athlete. You don't have an audience and sponsor anticipating the dog walk and many other things are different that make your question useless.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Lets say the dogs owner pays you to walk the dog but does not state how long you have to walk it. You walk it for 1 min, techincally fulfilling your obligation. Should you be punished so hard it affects your whole career as a dog walker?
obviously that qualifies you as a shitty dog-walker so yeah, it should affect your whole career as a dog walker. the people who hired you should advise other people who have dogs not to use you your services. get it?
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
How about the fact that most players literally flip a coin for their consolation matches which according to you are not meaningless?
Well, they are pretty close to meaningless, but still the Nani vs. Nestea was more meaningless than Idra vs. Haypro, which actually had money involved (and I'm sure some kind of ranking points).
It continues to baffle me how this isn't the common sentiment for almost everyone. I guess a lot of gamers didn't ever play sports- never learned the principles behind respecting your opponent/team/self/fans and showing it through your play. If you know your team didn't make the playoffs, you still finish out your season, holding your head high and putting forth your best effort, savoring every last moment, and trying to show something that people supporting you can be proud of.
In highschool, one of our star players was suspended for drinking at prom, even though he was only hanging around people who were doing so. Did we rant and rave that it was unfair? Did he? No. He knew that he shouldn't have even put himself in an ambiguous situation that could possibly cause him to let his team and the people who support him down, and so did we. Regardless of the situation, you have to be harsher on yourself and your own than the onlookers, because you owe yourself the self-respect of being held to a higher standard.
The idea of making excuses and redirecting blame in such a situation for a competitor you both respect and support, is just plain foreign to me, and makes me sick to my stomach. The values GOM talked about in their official statement is what I grew up with; it's not a clash of cultures in the sense of east vs west. Maybe, despite all the talk, we just don't want starcraft to be held to the same standards as other competition.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
Of course it wouldn't. Those games weren't even broadcasted. They weren't exactly meaningful.
This has to be a trolling argument.
Sorry but, can you please enlighten me a bit here. What i'm understanding wrong and thus "trolling" you? Or are you even talking to me.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Lets say the dogs owner pays you to walk the dog but does not state how long you have to walk it. You walk it for 1 min, techincally fulfilling your obligation. Should you be punished so hard it affects your whole career as a dog walker?
obviously that qualifies you as a shitty dog-walker so yeah, it should affect your whole career as a dog walker. the people who hired you should advise other people who have dogs not to use you your services. get it?
So throwing away a meaningless game makes you a shitty player?
On December 15 2011 23:13 Remb wrote: When I saw 7 probes rushing a hatchery, I knew that Naniwa (foolishly) chose to act honestly instead of doing what so many other pro gamers have done before. The esports world should not be parallel with athletic sports for many reasons, one being the seasonal and physical aspects of athletic sports, and I do believe his actions were unacceptable
But I think that a player can never play his best games when he knows there is nothing at stake, and it is the responsibility of the tournaments to host formats that create meaningful games.
Too often I see players feign motivation when they are put into those situations you described, and those games truly anger me. Watching a player perform a game where it is apparent he is not motivated to play his best is insulting to my intelligence. I am paying for honest competition, not a fake and empty showmatch that is supposed to entertain me. I pay these companies to create a tournament where the players are motivated because the games are important to them. The situation does occur quite often, but they are rarely ever pointed out.
It's quite laughable how you parallel these situations to athletic sports to justify their existence. Nobody cares about the last two teams playing their final match of the season, and the turnouts for those games are always abysmal. Because the fans are not stupid.
The fans know when a game is meaningless. They know when the players don't give a damn, but the players slug on and half-ass it because "it's their job". Well you are selling the fans short. Naniwa's game angered me. But if Naniwa chose the politically correct strategy of 2 base all in or 4 gate, I would have been equally angered. Both strategies are equally meaningless to me, because the situation itself was meaningless.
lol, Nani should have just refused to get in the booth to be honest then. If I see a player get into the booth, then I expect to see a game. Probe rushing is just as dishonest as a half assed 4 gate. If he wants to make a point, don't get in the booth. If he doesn't like the way the tournament is set up, don't show up. I fail to see how a probe rush is any better than any other half assed rush. Showmatches bring in tons of money. All-star games, pro bowls, none of it actually matters but try saying that to the ticket prices and ad prices for prime slots.
Those are specifically designated as "show matches" beforehand though. Not as part of some larger tournament.
Anyways I agree with you, Naniwa should have either just not showed up, or played a bronze league cheese game. Probe rushing makes even the out of touch people to realize hes throwing the game.
I don't understand this argument. So Nani has to cater to the "out of touch" people and execute some idiotic cheese in order to avoid being kicked out? In my mind, that's absurd, but I respect your right to hold that opinion.
By your logic, anyone who does an unworkable cheese should be banned. If this had been written in the rules, I'd fully support the banning. It wasn't, and instead there was some arbitrarily defined nonsense. Let's all ban people based on our "feelings" from now on. That's going to work out.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Lets say the dogs owner pays you to walk the dog but does not state how long you have to walk it. You walk it for 1 min, techincally fulfilling your obligation. Should you be punished so hard it affects your whole career as a dog walker?
The analogy was meant to show the difference between money and responsibility. It wasn't meant to function as an example to what technicality suffices as fulfilling your job. The two are entirely different when it comes to walking a dog and being an athlete. You don't have an audience and sponsor anticipating the dog walk and many other things are different that make your question useless.
Sure, but I'd like to see someone questioning the GOMTV rules. They need to clarify them in some way that it forces you to "play your best".
On December 15 2011 23:13 Remb wrote: When I saw 7 probes rushing a hatchery, I knew that Naniwa (foolishly) chose to act honestly instead of doing what so many other pro gamers have done before. The esports world should not be parallel with athletic sports for many reasons, one being the seasonal and physical aspects of athletic sports, and I do believe his actions were unacceptable
But I think that a player can never play his best games when he knows there is nothing at stake, and it is the responsibility of the tournaments to host formats that create meaningful games.
Too often I see players feign motivation when they are put into those situations you described, and those games truly anger me. Watching a player perform a game where it is apparent he is not motivated to play his best is insulting to my intelligence. I am paying for honest competition, not a fake and empty showmatch that is supposed to entertain me. I pay these companies to create a tournament where the players are motivated because the games are important to them. The situation does occur quite often, but they are rarely ever pointed out.
It's quite laughable how you parallel these situations to athletic sports to justify their existence. Nobody cares about the last two teams playing their final match of the season, and the turnouts for those games are always abysmal. Because the fans are not stupid.
The fans know when a game is meaningless. They know when the players don't give a damn, but the players slug on and half-ass it because "it's their job". Well you are selling the fans short. Naniwa's game angered me. But if Naniwa chose the politically correct strategy of 2 base all in or 4 gate, I would have been equally angered. Both strategies are equally meaningless to me, because the situation itself was meaningless.
lol, Nani should have just refused to get in the booth to be honest then. If I see a player get into the booth, then I expect to see a game. Probe rushing is just as dishonest as a half assed 4 gate. If he wants to make a point, don't get in the booth. If he doesn't like the way the tournament is set up, don't show up. I fail to see how a probe rush is any better than any other half assed rush. Showmatches bring in tons of money. All-star games, pro bowls, none of it actually matters but try saying that to the ticket prices and ad prices for prime slots.
Those are specifically designated as "show matches" beforehand though. Not as part of some larger tournament.
Anyways I agree with you, Naniwa should have either just not showed up, or played a bronze league cheese game. Probe rushing makes even the out of touch people to realize hes throwing the game.
I don't understand this argument. So Nani has to cater to the "out of touch" people and execute some idiotic cheese in order to avoid being kicked out? In my mind, that's absurd, but I respect your right to hold that opinion.
By your logic, anyone who does an unworkable cheese should be banned. If this had been written in the rules, I'd fully support the banning. It wasn't, and instead there was some arbitrarily defined nonsense. Let's all ban people based on our "feelings" from now on. That's going to work out.
Im specifically equating a probe rush with those other cheeses and pointing out that one gets your banned and the other doesn't. I highly doubt that if Naniwa had done a 2 gate all-in or a cannon rush that we'd have this controversy.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
I guess it's a difference of outlook. In my eyes Naniwa was invited to do his best to reach the finals and win, not play 4 games. Once it became apparent (0-3) that this was not possible, Naniwa completed his obligations. In this case, it isn't about being paid to walk a dog and then not walking it. It's entering a tournament for frisbee catching, losing in the initial heats, and being forced to do a meaningless sideshow (which the dog trainer competes in and throws his frisbee an impossibly long distance)
That's not an opinion, it's an incorrect assumption. He was invited to play 4 games. I understand the emotions Naniwa went through and as such I think I can understand yours, but you can't make up your own reasons of why someone is invited in order to justify your opinion.
Well i'm pretty sure he wasn't invited to play 4 games because if he'd got through to the next round he would of had to play more than 4 games. Semantics aside he played all the games he had to, he just played the last one very poorly. I don't think that's a punishable offence.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
Of course it wouldn't. Those games weren't even broadcasted. They weren't exactly meaningful.
This has to be a trolling argument.
Sorry but, can you please enlighten me. What i'm understanding wrong and thus trolling you?
I apologize if you were serious. To someone who has followed the situation the statement seemed trollish. I'll explain why I feel that way.
This whole situation has arisen from Naniwa's (and the majority's) view that this was a meaningless game with regards to the tournament. The disagreement comes when people say, well it isn't meaningless because Naniwa v. Nestea was supposed to be a grudge match with their PRIDE on the line! I'm sorry, I didn't know the game was about player pride all of a sudden. To me, my pride as a player would prevent me from doing something like what Naniwa did, but I will not pretend to judge a pro for his values like GOM has.
GOM's decision was based upon an ambiguous principal decision, not one of ruling.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Lets say the dogs owner pays you to walk the dog but does not state how long you have to walk it. You walk it for 1 min, techincally fulfilling your obligation. Should you be punished so hard it affects your whole career as a dog walker?
obviously that qualifies you as a shitty dog-walker so yeah, it should affect your whole career as a dog walker. the people who hired you should advise other people who have dogs not to use you your services. get it?
So throwing away a meaningless game makes you a shitty player?
shitty player in terms of talent? no. shitty player in the context of a competitor? yeah it does ...
and wait meaningless game? playing against the #2 GSL ranked player in a televised map casted by half a dozen casters in two different languages for a live studio audience and 100k+ viewers on live streams and future vods all enhanced by a rivalry factor that the you created by your words and actions in the previous meeting of a major tournament.
this game has no meaning? oh wait, i forgot, there was no money or seeding implications involved. that must be it right?
Grettin, the match was for 7th and 8th place at MLG which determines seeding etc they were very meaningful from a players perspective. Since Idra forfeited, in terms of professionalism its equally in poor taste to what Nani did
On December 15 2011 23:13 Remb wrote: When I saw 7 probes rushing a hatchery, I knew that Naniwa (foolishly) chose to act honestly instead of doing what so many other pro gamers have done before. The esports world should not be parallel with athletic sports for many reasons, one being the seasonal and physical aspects of athletic sports, and I do believe his actions were unacceptable
But I think that a player can never play his best games when he knows there is nothing at stake, and it is the responsibility of the tournaments to host formats that create meaningful games.
Too often I see players feign motivation when they are put into those situations you described, and those games truly anger me. Watching a player perform a game where it is apparent he is not motivated to play his best is insulting to my intelligence. I am paying for honest competition, not a fake and empty showmatch that is supposed to entertain me. I pay these companies to create a tournament where the players are motivated because the games are important to them. The situation does occur quite often, but they are rarely ever pointed out.
It's quite laughable how you parallel these situations to athletic sports to justify their existence. Nobody cares about the last two teams playing their final match of the season, and the turnouts for those games are always abysmal. Because the fans are not stupid.
The fans know when a game is meaningless. They know when the players don't give a damn, but the players slug on and half-ass it because "it's their job". Well you are selling the fans short. Naniwa's game angered me. But if Naniwa chose the politically correct strategy of 2 base all in or 4 gate, I would have been equally angered. Both strategies are equally meaningless to me, because the situation itself was meaningless.
lol, Nani should have just refused to get in the booth to be honest then. If I see a player get into the booth, then I expect to see a game. Probe rushing is just as dishonest as a half assed 4 gate. If he wants to make a point, don't get in the booth. If he doesn't like the way the tournament is set up, don't show up. I fail to see how a probe rush is any better than any other half assed rush. Showmatches bring in tons of money. All-star games, pro bowls, none of it actually matters but try saying that to the ticket prices and ad prices for prime slots.
Those are specifically designated as "show matches" beforehand though. Not as part of some larger tournament.
Anyways I agree with you, Naniwa should have either just not showed up, or played a bronze league cheese game. Probe rushing makes even the out of touch people to realize hes throwing the game.
I don't understand this argument. So Nani has to cater to the "out of touch" people and execute some idiotic cheese in order to avoid being kicked out? In my mind, that's absurd, but I respect your right to hold that opinion.
By your logic, anyone who does an unworkable cheese should be banned. If this had been written in the rules, I'd fully support the banning. It wasn't, and instead there was some arbitrarily defined nonsense. Let's all ban people based on our "feelings" from now on. That's going to work out.
Im specifically equating a probe rush with those other cheeses and pointing out that one gets your banned and the other doesn't. I highly doubt that if Naniwa had done a 2 gate all-in or a cannon rush that we'd have this controversy.
Oh I see. I'm sorry I didn't see that.
On December 16 2011 03:25 Whyzguy wrote: I dig how this situation was compared to other sports. Really put it into different perspective for me (as per the title).
I'm confused as to your stance in this post. Do you mean to say that other sports wouldn't do this? Because I'm pretty sure I've already pointed out one high profile case of it actually happening.
On December 15 2011 23:13 Remb wrote: When I saw 7 probes rushing a hatchery, I knew that Naniwa (foolishly) chose to act honestly instead of doing what so many other pro gamers have done before. The esports world should not be parallel with athletic sports for many reasons, one being the seasonal and physical aspects of athletic sports, and I do believe his actions were unacceptable
But I think that a player can never play his best games when he knows there is nothing at stake, and it is the responsibility of the tournaments to host formats that create meaningful games.
Too often I see players feign motivation when they are put into those situations you described, and those games truly anger me. Watching a player perform a game where it is apparent he is not motivated to play his best is insulting to my intelligence. I am paying for honest competition, not a fake and empty showmatch that is supposed to entertain me. I pay these companies to create a tournament where the players are motivated because the games are important to them. The situation does occur quite often, but they are rarely ever pointed out.
It's quite laughable how you parallel these situations to athletic sports to justify their existence. Nobody cares about the last two teams playing their final match of the season, and the turnouts for those games are always abysmal. Because the fans are not stupid.
The fans know when a game is meaningless. They know when the players don't give a damn, but the players slug on and half-ass it because "it's their job". Well you are selling the fans short. Naniwa's game angered me. But if Naniwa chose the politically correct strategy of 2 base all in or 4 gate, I would have been equally angered. Both strategies are equally meaningless to me, because the situation itself was meaningless.
lol, Nani should have just refused to get in the booth to be honest then. If I see a player get into the booth, then I expect to see a game. Probe rushing is just as dishonest as a half assed 4 gate. If he wants to make a point, don't get in the booth. If he doesn't like the way the tournament is set up, don't show up. I fail to see how a probe rush is any better than any other half assed rush. Showmatches bring in tons of money. All-star games, pro bowls, none of it actually matters but try saying that to the ticket prices and ad prices for prime slots.
Those are specifically designated as "show matches" beforehand though. Not as part of some larger tournament.
Anyways I agree with you, Naniwa should have either just not showed up, or played a bronze league cheese game. Probe rushing makes even the out of touch people to realize hes throwing the game.
I don't understand this argument. So Nani has to cater to the "out of touch" people and execute some idiotic cheese in order to avoid being kicked out? In my mind, that's absurd, but I respect your right to hold that opinion.
By your logic, anyone who does an unworkable cheese should be banned. If this had been written in the rules, I'd fully support the banning. It wasn't, and instead there was some arbitrarily defined nonsense. Let's all ban people based on our "feelings" from now on. That's going to work out.
Addressing this point, I don't feel that Nani should have executed some idiotic cheese with the intent to lose either. I was only pointing out that there's not much difference in "honesty" or "honor" in doing that vs probe rushing because either way, you're not going into that booth with the intent of winning or of even putting on a show. And I could care less if it was Nani vs Nestea on ladder, at MLG, Dreamhack, Up/Downs, showmatch, or even goofing off at barcraft (please come to IEM NY next year Nani and Nestea :D ), I would love to watch them play a real game.
I see your point but the game shouldn't even have been played. A same kind of format is used in the up/down matches and if the 2 players advancing are decided no more matches are played, exactly to prevent stuff like this happening. And Naniwa had even more reasons to not play because he was facing Nestea, who you don't really want to give more info and reads on your playstyle if you're gonna face him again later.
On December 15 2011 23:13 Remb wrote: When I saw 7 probes rushing a hatchery, I knew that Naniwa (foolishly) chose to act honestly instead of doing what so many other pro gamers have done before. The esports world should not be parallel with athletic sports for many reasons, one being the seasonal and physical aspects of athletic sports, and I do believe his actions were unacceptable
But I think that a player can never play his best games when he knows there is nothing at stake, and it is the responsibility of the tournaments to host formats that create meaningful games.
Too often I see players feign motivation when they are put into those situations you described, and those games truly anger me. Watching a player perform a game where it is apparent he is not motivated to play his best is insulting to my intelligence. I am paying for honest competition, not a fake and empty showmatch that is supposed to entertain me. I pay these companies to create a tournament where the players are motivated because the games are important to them. The situation does occur quite often, but they are rarely ever pointed out.
It's quite laughable how you parallel these situations to athletic sports to justify their existence. Nobody cares about the last two teams playing their final match of the season, and the turnouts for those games are always abysmal. Because the fans are not stupid.
The fans know when a game is meaningless. They know when the players don't give a damn, but the players slug on and half-ass it because "it's their job". Well you are selling the fans short. Naniwa's game angered me. But if Naniwa chose the politically correct strategy of 2 base all in or 4 gate, I would have been equally angered. Both strategies are equally meaningless to me, because the situation itself was meaningless.
lol, Nani should have just refused to get in the booth to be honest then. If I see a player get into the booth, then I expect to see a game. Probe rushing is just as dishonest as a half assed 4 gate. If he wants to make a point, don't get in the booth. If he doesn't like the way the tournament is set up, don't show up. I fail to see how a probe rush is any better than any other half assed rush. Showmatches bring in tons of money. All-star games, pro bowls, none of it actually matters but try saying that to the ticket prices and ad prices for prime slots.
Those are specifically designated as "show matches" beforehand though. Not as part of some larger tournament.
Anyways I agree with you, Naniwa should have either just not showed up, or played a bronze league cheese game. Probe rushing makes even the out of touch people to realize hes throwing the game.
I don't understand this argument. So Nani has to cater to the "out of touch" people and execute some idiotic cheese in order to avoid being kicked out? In my mind, that's absurd, but I respect your right to hold that opinion.
By your logic, anyone who does an unworkable cheese should be banned. If this had been written in the rules, I'd fully support the banning. It wasn't, and instead there was some arbitrarily defined nonsense. Let's all ban people based on our "feelings" from now on. That's going to work out.
Addressing this point, I don't feel that Nani should have executed some idiotic cheese with the intent to lose either. I was only pointing out that there's not much difference in "honesty" or "honor" in doing that vs probe rushing because either way, you're not going into that booth with the intent of winning or of even putting on a show. And I could care less if it was Nani vs Nestea on ladder, at MLG, Dreamhack, Up/Downs, showmatch, or even goofing off at barcraft (please come to IEM NY next year Nani and Nestea :D ), I would love to watch them play a real game.
I understand. I just think it's disingenuous to expect two pros to go out and show their "tech" in a meaningless match. (If you want two pros to try their hardest you have to expect them to also show their tech, which is a poor long-term strategic decision)
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
Did you actually read the OP?
He mentioned that, Idra didn't purposely forfeit that. He was with Huk watching his games and missed the start of the round.
I don't agree completely however, cuz u know, some may even see a 4-gate as an offense, or an 8-gate, or whatever, so you just can't keep everyone happy.
Related Sports Story on the FIFA World Cup there was a game between 2 teams that MAY qualify to the next round if they ended up in a tie. roughly 35 mins before they finished their game, they already knew for certain that if they ended up 1-1 (or 0-0) as the score was, they will both advance, and if any of them score a goal, one would advance while the other wouldn't. So the thing is both coaches decided to not play at all, both theams split on their own halves of the court, one team keep passing the ball between defensive players from side to side, and the other team just watching from the distance, not even attempting to steal the ball because they may end up losing. All those players were Proffesional Footbal Players in the Biggest World Event, and well, I won't say it's a good thing to do, but even they did something 'shameful' and no sort of punishment was even tried.
TLDR: In a FIFA World Cup two teams didn't even cross their half of the court because they knew they would advance if the score ended up in a tie, and none of the coaches/players was slightly punished.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
Did you actually read the OP?
He mentioned that, Idra didn't purposely forfeit that. He was with Huk watching his games and missed the start of the round.
Oh how convenient! All conspiracy theories aside, I actually don't care that he forfeited the 7th/8th place match. If he doesn't care about the match enough to be paying attention, why should I?
You've completely missed the major point. If the match itself was the issue they could've gone backstage and told Naniwa that he MUST play a rematch immediately and he must try - or they'd take away his CodeS spot.
The huge problem I have with GOM is the massive punishment with no warning. Literally they couldn't have done anything worse. If Mr Chae had gone onstage and punched Naniwa in the face that would've less awful than what they did.
Naniwa had no idea his actions would lead to that response.
I love that as a community we can always get everyone's perspective on an issue. If this was anything else, an editorial like this from a CEO would be unheard of. So thanks for your insight.
I don't agree with a lot of your points though. I think that Naniwa's actions were definitely unacceptable in Korean culture. In every interview with a Korean pro they always say that their aim is to "show good games." As someone who got into SC2 in the beta and had no experience with BW, this was a awkward phrase to me for a very long time. Eventually, I just learned to accept that maybe something was lost in translation. Now, especially after listening to Nani on Lo3, I am coming to realize that professionalism in esports for Koreans means literally showing good games or entertaining the fans despite the circumstance.
In the west though, I feel that the emphasis has always been on winning. In interviews, western players always say that they want to win or place at a certain level of performance. They don't say that they want to show good games, and they don't perceive themselves as entertainers. They are competitors. Their goal is to win and make money. And as a large part of how our scene has evolved, they haven't had to be entertaining. Casters and organizations like MLG/IPL/NASL have made the games entertaining by cultivating the drama and player personalities etc. From what I have seen, games are made entertaining by the players doing their best to win and by the tournaments doing their best to heighten the tension and the entertainment value of the game. In our system, the best players have been incited to put up their best matches as a result of potential winnings and prestige. "Showing good games" has always been a direct result of prize pool and prestige associated with a tournament. We have left it up to our tournament organizers to facilitate entertaining matches by creating tight and meaningful tournament systems. MLG comes to mind with this. Its a credit to their system that I am sweating bullets on the latter half of championship Sunday.
So I don't think that GSL failed, and I don't think we have the right to tell them they did. This is a cultural difference where Korean players are always expect to play their hearts our for honor and in the name of being a progamer. By that standard their system works for their players.
I also don't think Naniwa should be punished for something he didn't do maliciously. This is just his interpretation (dare I say western?) of what it means to be a pro gamer clashing with Korea's. He thought he was just supposed to win, and that if he couldn't what would the point be. Obviously GSL and Korean pros feel differently. This is just a cultural misunderstanding.
On December 15 2011 23:13 Remb wrote: When I saw 7 probes rushing a hatchery, I knew that Naniwa (foolishly) chose to act honestly instead of doing what so many other pro gamers have done before. The esports world should not be parallel with athletic sports for many reasons, one being the seasonal and physical aspects of athletic sports, and I do believe his actions were unacceptable
But I think that a player can never play his best games when he knows there is nothing at stake, and it is the responsibility of the tournaments to host formats that create meaningful games.
Too often I see players feign motivation when they are put into those situations you described, and those games truly anger me. Watching a player perform a game where it is apparent he is not motivated to play his best is insulting to my intelligence. I am paying for honest competition, not a fake and empty showmatch that is supposed to entertain me. I pay these companies to create a tournament where the players are motivated because the games are important to them. The situation does occur quite often, but they are rarely ever pointed out.
It's quite laughable how you parallel these situations to athletic sports to justify their existence. Nobody cares about the last two teams playing their final match of the season, and the turnouts for those games are always abysmal. Because the fans are not stupid.
The fans know when a game is meaningless. They know when the players don't give a damn, but the players slug on and half-ass it because "it's their job". Well you are selling the fans short. Naniwa's game angered me. But if Naniwa chose the politically correct strategy of 2 base all in or 4 gate, I would have been equally angered. Both strategies are equally meaningless to me, because the situation itself was meaningless.
lol, Nani should have just refused to get in the booth to be honest then. If I see a player get into the booth, then I expect to see a game. Probe rushing is just as dishonest as a half assed 4 gate. If he wants to make a point, don't get in the booth. If he doesn't like the way the tournament is set up, don't show up. I fail to see how a probe rush is any better than any other half assed rush. Showmatches bring in tons of money. All-star games, pro bowls, none of it actually matters but try saying that to the ticket prices and ad prices for prime slots.
Those are specifically designated as "show matches" beforehand though. Not as part of some larger tournament.
Anyways I agree with you, Naniwa should have either just not showed up, or played a bronze league cheese game. Probe rushing makes even the out of touch people to realize hes throwing the game.
I don't understand this argument. So Nani has to cater to the "out of touch" people and execute some idiotic cheese in order to avoid being kicked out? In my mind, that's absurd, but I respect your right to hold that opinion.
By your logic, anyone who does an unworkable cheese should be banned. If this had been written in the rules, I'd fully support the banning. It wasn't, and instead there was some arbitrarily defined nonsense. Let's all ban people based on our "feelings" from now on. That's going to work out.
Addressing this point, I don't feel that Nani should have executed some idiotic cheese with the intent to lose either. I was only pointing out that there's not much difference in "honesty" or "honor" in doing that vs probe rushing because either way, you're not going into that booth with the intent of winning or of even putting on a show. And I could care less if it was Nani vs Nestea on ladder, at MLG, Dreamhack, Up/Downs, showmatch, or even goofing off at barcraft (please come to IEM NY next year Nani and Nestea :D ), I would love to watch them play a real game.
I understand. I just think it's disingenuous to expect two pros to go out and show their "tech" in a meaningless match. (If you want two pros to try their hardest you have to expect them to also show their tech, which is a poor long-term strategic decision)
I don't expect them to show their latest build or specifically tailored anti-whoever strategy, I would just rather they you know...actually play. Like maybe put in as much effort as if they were streaming for fans.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
Did you actually read the OP?
He mentioned that, Idra didn't purposely forfeit that. He was with Huk watching his games and missed the start of the round.
I get the feeling that people are just trolling at this point.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Lets say the dogs owner pays you to walk the dog but does not state how long you have to walk it. You walk it for 1 min, techincally fulfilling your obligation. Should you be punished so hard it affects your whole career as a dog walker?
obviously that qualifies you as a shitty dog-walker so yeah, it should affect your whole career as a dog walker. the people who hired you should advise other people who have dogs not to use you your services. get it?
So throwing away a meaningless game makes you a shitty player?
shitty player in terms of talent? no. shitty player in the context of a competitor? yeah it does ...
and wait meaningless game? playing against the #2 GSL ranked player in a televised map casted by half a dozen casters in two different languages for a live studio audience and 100k+ viewers on live streams and future vods all enhanced by a rivalry factor that the you created by your words and actions in the previous meeting of a major tournament.
this game has no meaning? oh wait, i forgot, there was no money or seeding implications involved. that must be it right?
By "meaning" this is exactly what I'm referring to; money and seeding. Of course it was televised, but if a tournament has this kind of format, it's kind of the organizer's problem, isn't it? NaNiwa, after all, is not "working" for Gom. Imagine you're working for absolutely no money and no ability to get an advancement, but the whole world get to see your work. How's that important to anyone but the sponsors? (which the player could decide to honor with a good game, or not)
You can do what ever you want as a player when your unsigned, and on your own time. However once you are sponsored and playing for money you now have obligations.
A couple of points that people are making saying what Nani did was okay are pretty ridiculous. One of them is this "the game didn't matter/ I DIDN'T think the game mattered" Now you might not have thought the game mattered, but as you can tell many people did. And because he is sponsored by a team, and playing in a league that makes its money off of advertising he needed to play that game. If he felt he could not be bothered to play every game in the format, he should have declined his spot.
Also it would be completely different if Nani had talked to the admins, and they had agreed that he did not need to play his game( IE Idra vs White-ra). It would have even been differed if he had decided not to go into the booth at all, but he went in and blatantly threw a televised game.
GomTV has every right to pull his code S spot, in the deal with MLG he gets a chance to play in Code S not the right. Gom can dish out what ever punishment they like in regards to actions taken at their own tournaments.
On December 16 2011 03:36 sashamunguia wrote: great blog Alex
I don't agree completely however, cuz u know, some may even see a 4-gate as an offense, or an 8-gate, or whatever, so you just can't keep everyone happy.
Related Sports Story on the FIFA World Cup there was a game between 2 teams that MAY qualify to the next round if they ended up in a tie. roughly 35 mins before they finished their game, they already knew for certain that if they ended up 1-1 (or 0-0) as the score was, they will both advance, and if any of them score a goal, one would advance while the other wouldn't. So the thing is both coaches decided to not play at all, both theams split on their own halves of the court, one team keep passing the ball between defensive players from side to side, and the other team just watching from the distance, not even attempting to steal the ball because they may end up losing. All those players were Proffesional Footbal Players in the Biggest World Event, and well, I won't say it's a good thing to do, but even they did something 'shameful' and no sort of punishment was even tried.
TLDR: In a FIFA World Cup two teams didn't even cross their half of the court because they knew they would advance if the score ended up in a tie, and none of the coaches/players was slightly punished.
Different issue because it was in their best interests to do what they did. They actually had something stake. While I in no way approve of this, it wasn't a case of "Ugh, why am I here, probe rush gg"
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
Did you actually read the OP?
He mentioned that, Idra didn't purposely forfeit that. He was with Huk watching his games and missed the start of the round.
Oh how convenient! All conspiracy theories aside, I actually don't care that he forfeited the 7th/8th place match. If he doesn't care about the match enough to be paying attention, why should I?
Getting caught up watching a competitor you have close ties with on a different stage and not making it back to your own match in time isn't exactly the same as knowingly going into a booth and then sitting there with your hands off your keyboard as you try to get out of the booth as fast as you can.
I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers. What NaNiwa did was basically akin to a last-place MLB team, during its final game of the season, intentionally striking out in every at bat. Just imagine what would happen in that situation: fans would ask for their money back; advertising contracts would be violated; and the league would certainly take action against the team and its players - just like GOM did with NaNi - in order to protect its product.
For those of you who, after reading this, agree that NaNi's actions were unacceptable, but still blame GOM for utilizing a format which allows for inconsequential matches, I would ask you to consider holding players to higher standards of professionalism; and to also consider the fact that it's not GOM's responsibility to cater their format solely to suit players. GOM's job (as is the case with any professional sports league) is to provide a quality product to its viewers, while providing its competitors with fair, reasonable playing conditions, and the Blizzard Cup's format balanced these factors acceptably. Additionally, I would also point out the fact that, as illustrated above, every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist.
I agree with most of your thoughts, except some of the metaphors you draw on in these two paragraphs. You compare the Naniwa/Nestea game to a MLB game in which one team completely puts in no effort into the game, and how that is an insult to the fans. That would be more true if the Naniwa/Nestea game was a stand-alone event. Instead, it was part of a bigger event and customers aren't paying to watch that match in particular, they're paying to watch a whole tournament or season.
Also, you mention the All-Star game in baseball as a comparison for a meaningless game. (The all-star game is actually not completely meaningless, it decides home field advantage in the world-series.) But I don't think this comparison is very strong either, because players who are voted in to the all-start game don't have to attend if they don't want to. Most do chose to attend for obvious reasons, but there have been times when players have skipped it to do other things like go home to visit their family. So I guess if Naniwa had the choice to attend his match, and then performed in such a manner it would be comparable. Otherwise you're comparing something voluntary to something mandatory.
While I can follow all your arguments I see a small flow in your comparisons. So you compared Naniwa's last match against NesTea with a meaningless NBA game at the end of the regular season which I don't think is quite the same. Naniwa lost the 3 games in a row just half an hour before the NesTea game was scheduled. He had to enter the last game with shattered feelings. NBA (or any other) teams hower have many days/weeks to process their drop out of the tournament and arent driven by emotions at the last game. While I don't approve of his actions I think that his feelings should also be understood.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Lets say the dogs owner pays you to walk the dog but does not state how long you have to walk it. You walk it for 1 min, techincally fulfilling your obligation. Should you be punished so hard it affects your whole career as a dog walker?
obviously that qualifies you as a shitty dog-walker so yeah, it should affect your whole career as a dog walker. the people who hired you should advise other people who have dogs not to use you your services. get it?
So throwing away a meaningless game makes you a shitty player?
shitty player in terms of talent? no. shitty player in the context of a competitor? yeah it does ...
and wait meaningless game? playing against the #2 GSL ranked player in a televised map casted by half a dozen casters in two different languages for a live studio audience and 100k+ viewers on live streams and future vods all enhanced by a rivalry factor that the you created by your words and actions in the previous meeting of a major tournament.
this game has no meaning? oh wait, i forgot, there was no money or seeding implications involved. that must be it right?
By "meaning" this is exactly what I'm referring to; money and seeding. Of course it was televised, but if a tournament has this kind of format, it's kind of the organizer's problem, isn't it? NaNiwa, after all, is not "working" for Gom. Imagine you're working for absolutely no money and no ability to get an advancement, but the whole world get to see your work. How's that important to anyone but the sponsors? (which the player could decide to honor with a good game, or not)
Naniwa is working for Quantic who thought that the game mattered. Does that settle this argument?
On December 16 2011 03:48 Gin-san wrote: While I can follow all your arguments I see a small flow in your comparisons. So you compared Naniwa's last match against NesTea with a meaningless NBA game at the end of the regular season which I don't think is quite the same. Naniwa lost the 3 games in a row just half an hour before the NesTea game was scheduled. He had to enter the last game with shattered feelings. NBA (or any other) teams hower have many days/weeks to process their drop out of the tournament and arent driven by emotions at the last game. While I don't approve of his actions I think that his feelings should also be understood.
Not true, the race for playoff spots often go down to the final day or hours of the season especially when multiple teams are chasing the final few spots. Frequently, teams don't even know if they've been mathematically eliminated until they actually start playing.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Nazgul, you make a lot of great points in this thread, but this analogy is just terrible. I mean your analogy could be looked at as saying you were paid by the owner of a dog to walk it 4 times in one day. The first 3 walks are long, exciting and pee and poop filled walks enjoyed greatly by the dog (and would be enjoyed by the owner if they could watch/hear about). After a long day of walking the 4th walk consists of you just letting the dog out back really quickly, fulfilling the dogs "bathroom" needs but the dog is already tired so it becomes meaningless to exercise again.
I said this is a different thread but comparing this situation to any professional sport (especially team sports) is just plain stupid. SC2 players are paid and recruited by talent, results, and popularity. Naniwa playing a half-assed game that noone enjoys and has no bearing on his results is not the same as a team starting its b-team. When a pro-sports team starts their b-team they are often scouting them and deciding on who to keep and who to drop based on stats accumulated in these games, performance in front of a large audience, and leadership and effort in a time where results of the actual game dont matter. Let's say Naniwa gives 100% and beats the shit outta Nestea. Noone is going to walk away from a meaningless game saying Naniwa JUST PWND Nestea, they will say Nestea didn't try. This does literally nothing for Naniwa's record as player and nothing to shine brightly on Naniwa's team.
Can you find me one example of where a professional tennis/golf/MMA fighter/boxer ever had a meaningless match in a tournament?
By blaming and hating on Naniwa we are basically arresting the drug user while letting the dealer walk free.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Lets say the dogs owner pays you to walk the dog but does not state how long you have to walk it. You walk it for 1 min, techincally fulfilling your obligation. Should you be punished so hard it affects your whole career as a dog walker?
obviously that qualifies you as a shitty dog-walker so yeah, it should affect your whole career as a dog walker. the people who hired you should advise other people who have dogs not to use you your services. get it?
So throwing away a meaningless game makes you a shitty player?
shitty player in terms of talent? no. shitty player in the context of a competitor? yeah it does ...
and wait meaningless game? playing against the #2 GSL ranked player in a televised map casted by half a dozen casters in two different languages for a live studio audience and 100k+ viewers on live streams and future vods all enhanced by a rivalry factor that the you created by your words and actions in the previous meeting of a major tournament.
this game has no meaning? oh wait, i forgot, there was no money or seeding implications involved. that must be it right?
By "meaning" this is exactly what I'm referring to; money and seeding. Of course it was televised, but if a tournament has this kind of format, it's kind of the organizer's problem, isn't it? NaNiwa, after all, is not "working" for Gom. Imagine you're working for absolutely no money and no ability to get an advancement, but the whole world get to see your work. How's that important to anyone but the sponsors? (which the player could decide to honor with a good game, or not)
Naniwa is working for Quantic who thought that the game mattered. Does that settle this argument?
Then Quantic should be the one punishing him, not GOM.
On December 16 2011 03:38 Klive5ive wrote: You've completely missed the major point. If the match itself was the issue they could've gone backstage and told Naniwa that he MUST play a rematch immediately and he must try - or they'd take away his CodeS spot.
The huge problem I have with GOM is the massive punishment with no warning. Literally they couldn't have done anything worse. If Mr Chae had gone onstage and punched Naniwa in the face that would've less awful than what they did.
Naniwa had no idea his actions would lead to that response.
What? No, sorry, that's not how the real world works. You don't rematch because he decided to Probe rush. That was an official game, and he decided to throw it. Match over. He should be aware that throwing a televised game in front of thousands of fans in a grudge match people were excited to see would cause a backlash.
Why should they have to give him a warning? If anything, Nani should be on his best behavior after all the random stunts he's pulled in the past and how the Koreans have been receiving him already (i.e. not well).
He's had a million warnings and still conducts himself this way. GOM can punish him however they like (aside from the punching him in the face on stage example).
People need to separate a player's actions from whether the tournament's format/rules are flawed. Just because certain rules make a game pointless from some people's perspective does not excuse a professional from behaving poorly in his profession.
If anyone is so naive to think that a professional [insert any competitive sport]'s job is to win and not entertain, then he/she needs a reality check on how you can call something a profession. Is it possible to be a professional at something that does not pay money? People pay money to watch the games, not to see who wins/who loses in a giant summary table.
so well written very well said. I don't have a blizzcup ticket atm (waiting for pay day to watch vods and then finals) but hearing about this does sour my willingness to pay for the ticket.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Lets say the dogs owner pays you to walk the dog but does not state how long you have to walk it. You walk it for 1 min, techincally fulfilling your obligation. Should you be punished so hard it affects your whole career as a dog walker?
obviously that qualifies you as a shitty dog-walker so yeah, it should affect your whole career as a dog walker. the people who hired you should advise other people who have dogs not to use you your services. get it?
So throwing away a meaningless game makes you a shitty player?
shitty player in terms of talent? no. shitty player in the context of a competitor? yeah it does ...
and wait meaningless game? playing against the #2 GSL ranked player in a televised map casted by half a dozen casters in two different languages for a live studio audience and 100k+ viewers on live streams and future vods all enhanced by a rivalry factor that the you created by your words and actions in the previous meeting of a major tournament.
this game has no meaning? oh wait, i forgot, there was no money or seeding implications involved. that must be it right?
By "meaning" this is exactly what I'm referring to; money and seeding. Of course it was televised, but if a tournament has this kind of format, it's kind of the organizer's problem, isn't it? NaNiwa, after all, is not "working" for Gom. Imagine you're working for absolutely no money and no ability to get an advancement, but the whole world get to see your work. How's that important to anyone but the sponsors? (which the player could decide to honor with a good game, or not)
first of all, it kind of sounds like you're downplaying the role of sponsors which provide the means for a player to live and pursue their passion. should a player "deciding to honor with a good game" even be considered anything other than a given for a professional player?
second, the whole world getting to see you play is ridiculous exposure. it's a privilege to be in that position.there are hunders of progamers busting their ass for a single code A spot for a glimmer of that type of exposure. do you think they would have done what he did being down 0-3? i don't think so
On December 16 2011 04:05 Glacierz wrote: People need to separate a player's actions from whether the tournament's format/rules are flawed. Just because certain rules make a game pointless from some people's perspective does not excuse a professional from behaving poorly in his profession.
If anyone is so naive to think that a professional [insert any competitive sport]'s job is to win and not entertain, then he/she needs a reality check on how you can call something a profession. Is it possible to be a professional at something that does not pay money? People pay money to watch the games, not to see who wins/who loses in a giant summary table.
But the question is, is anyone so naive to think that a professional gets into the game so they can entertain others and not win? Maybe ultimately that's what you're getting paid for, but that's never the motivation behind it. Of course, it's very easy with the world revolving around you and such to proclaim that other people exist to entertain you, rather than benefit themselves and fulfill their own goals.
when naniwa beat nestea in the MLG invitational, my jaw dropped. i couldn't believe it (especially after beating mvp earlier). but then i thought, its just a fluke, nestea will realize that he was playing a foreigner and just roflstomp him the next time they meet (ala idra vs mc where idra beat mc 2-0 then mc went 4-0 against him in extended series).
then, naniwa met nestea at MLG providence, and beat him again!! i was exasperated. who was this swedish dude beating the best zerg in the world, and how is he doing it?
so, when i saw that naniwa was going up against nestea again in the blizzcup, i was like, fuck yeah! this is going to be great (although a bo1, its still a "grudge match").
then, naniwa probe rushed. what a fucking letdown.
to naniwa, you don't know me, you don't owe me anything and you do not have to make decisions based on what i think. however, i lost a little respect for you that day because i had looked forward to a good game (well, at least, a game), but you gave me shit. i will still root for you, but i am one sadly disappointed fan. i am glad you have owned up to it recently in interviews, etc., so i am not going to be one of those dramatic dudes ("you lost a fan") and will hope for continued greatness in the future. you are still one of the only foreigner hopes left.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Lets say the dogs owner pays you to walk the dog but does not state how long you have to walk it. You walk it for 1 min, techincally fulfilling your obligation. Should you be punished so hard it affects your whole career as a dog walker?
obviously that qualifies you as a shitty dog-walker so yeah, it should affect your whole career as a dog walker. the people who hired you should advise other people who have dogs not to use you your services. get it?
So throwing away a meaningless game makes you a shitty player?
shitty player in terms of talent? no. shitty player in the context of a competitor? yeah it does ...
and wait meaningless game? playing against the #2 GSL ranked player in a televised map casted by half a dozen casters in two different languages for a live studio audience and 100k+ viewers on live streams and future vods all enhanced by a rivalry factor that the you created by your words and actions in the previous meeting of a major tournament.
this game has no meaning? oh wait, i forgot, there was no money or seeding implications involved. that must be it right?
By "meaning" this is exactly what I'm referring to; money and seeding. Of course it was televised, but if a tournament has this kind of format, it's kind of the organizer's problem, isn't it? NaNiwa, after all, is not "working" for Gom. Imagine you're working for absolutely no money and no ability to get an advancement, but the whole world get to see your work. How's that important to anyone but the sponsors? (which the player could decide to honor with a good game, or not)
Naniwa is working for Quantic who thought that the game mattered. Does that settle this argument?
Then Quantic should be the one punishing him, not GOM.
GOM can take action against players that they feel are hurting their company and product. Their house, their rules. I was only talking about the perceived "meaning" the game held. It might not have meant anything to Nani or some of his fans but it sure did to his employers. What does this tell you?
On December 16 2011 03:36 sashamunguia wrote: great blog Alex
I don't agree completely however, cuz u know, some may even see a 4-gate as an offense, or an 8-gate, or whatever, so you just can't keep everyone happy.
Related Sports Story on the FIFA World Cup there was a game between 2 teams that MAY qualify to the next round if they ended up in a tie. roughly 35 mins before they finished their game, they already knew for certain that if they ended up 1-1 (or 0-0) as the score was, they will both advance, and if any of them score a goal, one would advance while the other wouldn't. So the thing is both coaches decided to not play at all, both theams split on their own halves of the court, one team keep passing the ball between defensive players from side to side, and the other team just watching from the distance, not even attempting to steal the ball because they may end up losing. All those players were Proffesional Footbal Players in the Biggest World Event, and well, I won't say it's a good thing to do, but even they did something 'shameful' and no sort of punishment was even tried.
TLDR: In a FIFA World Cup two teams didn't even cross their half of the court because they knew they would advance if the score ended up in a tie, and none of the coaches/players was slightly punished.
yea, i was actually thinking about some similar soccer stories, i don't know if it's just the soccer sport that actually is just a bunch of scumbags (i don't think so), but there are many situations where the teams are clearly just not making the effort, from just clearly not trying, to throwing in the B-teamers, and actually there's even matches where the commentators are already stating that will happen before the game starts, and the public knows that the game doesn't matter so the attendance is much much smaller, the main diference here is that this sports we are trying to draw examples from having to play the game for X amount of time where in Sc2 that doesn't happen and the game can end at any moment.
Now it seems, instead of just ranting and dropping all blame on the Naniwa case (wich was basically a symptom) we should try to find the underlying disease and try to find what should be a solution to it, because hoping all players will simply uphold the suposed honor code (that WILL be different from person to person), is putting the decision power on the hands of the wrong persons, teams and leagues should be the ones looking into this and building the standard rules to control the players in a constructive way rather then destructive and leaving the players to do their job without all the drama.
On December 16 2011 02:48 Risen wrote: Meh, I read the whole thing this is what I got. It's not about the game, it's about the money. Seems pretty lame to me. Your argument seems to center on the fact that this hurts the potential ability of the players to make money. You're allowed to have that opinion. You see that as advancing ESPORTS or something. In your eyes, and feel free to let me know if I'm wrong here I hate putting words in other people's mouths when it isn't true, ESPORTS success is measured in how much money it makes. You're a CEO, I'm not surprised by this. In my eyes, and many other people's eyes, it's not about the money. I think his probe rush was hilarious, I was laughing my damn ass off. It's probably the most entertaining moment I've had in SC2 since the NASL finals. Entertainment achieved.
Naniwa channeled his inner Gheed, and I think anyone who's all "this hurts esports wahhhh". Who gives a shit about the money, I don't. I care about the game and the players. I guess this is why the FGC has had a tough time adapting to your "ESPORTS" vision. Too much weaksauce moneygrubbing bullshit.
Oh you wanted Naniwa to go out and pretend to do his best in a match that meant nothing? Sorry pal, the illusion of grandeur may be important to you, but anyone with half a brain would have known it was two players playing sub-optimally. I can't stand people who want some stupid illusion to keep themselves happy.
This seems a bit harsh to me, but I have to walk my dog. I don't mean to offend, I apologize if I have done so.
Honestly this is not really fair as an argument. Let's say someone pays you to walk their dog, you say yes and accept the money. However you end up not doing it for whatever reason. The person who paid you is upset because they paid you. Is this problem about the money, or is it about irresponsible choices and the moral values you attached to being a professional?
Before you point it out; the situation is of course not entirely the same.
However what is the same is that you're trying to make an argument solely about money, when it should essentially be about responsibilities instead. They may originate from the same source (money), but that doesn't mean a simplified answer such as this is justified as a rebuttal.
Nazgul, you make a lot of great points in this thread, but this analogy is just terrible. I mean your analogy could be looked at as saying you were paid by the owner of a dog to walk it 4 times in one day. The first 3 walks are long, exciting and pee and poop filled walks enjoyed greatly by the dog (and would be enjoyed by the owner if they could watch/hear about). After a long day of walking the 4th walk consists of you just letting the dog out back really quickly, fulfilling the dogs "bathroom" needs but the dog is already tired so it becomes meaningless to exercise again.
This is always the problem with analogies. They are usually clearly meant to illustrate one thing for which it works, yet people pick on them from all sides to prove a point of some sorts. It was meant to illustrate the difference between a money based argument and a responsibility based argument. That's what it should be used for, that's what I implied it should be used for.
I said this is a different thread but comparing this situation to any professional sport (especially team sports) is just plain stupid. SC2 players are paid and recruited by talent, results, and popularity. Naniwa playing a half-assed game that noone enjoys and has no bearing on his results is not the same as a team starting its b-team. When a pro-sports team starts their b-team they are often scouting them and deciding on who to keep and who to drop based on stats accumulated in these games, performance in front of a large audience, and leadership and effort in a time where results of the actual game dont matter. Let's say Naniwa gives 100% and beats the shit outta Nestea. Noone is going to walk away from a meaningless game saying Naniwa JUST PWND Nestea, they will say Nestea didn't try. This does literally nothing for Naniwa's record as player and nothing to shine brightly on Naniwa's team.
I don't agree that nobody will be impressed with a win. It won't be as highly regarded as a win in the finals, but it won't be brushed aside as being nothing either. Plenty of people tuned in for the showmatches GOM had a while ago, and even though none of them resembled any sort of prestige close to an actual tournament, they did resemble prestige. We received plenty of compliments for the play our players showed in them.
You can also reverse your own argument. You mention a player looks bad from playing half-assed. This has an effect on his value and by your own argument that's another reason why he could be playing for prestige. Not to gain it, but to make sure not to lose any.
Can you find me one example of where a professional tennis/golf/MMA fighter/boxer ever had a meaningless match in a tournament?
Including MMA and boxing like they are relevant is almost like a trick question. If you say team sports are not a good comparison you need to come up with reasons why. You can't just say because they're not individual sports, because there are always things you can compare such as tournament format, fan reaction, etc.
However if you look at the nature of MMA and boxing you will quickly notice that a) tournament format is almost never used and b) group play could never function in either of those sports. This means that they are not consciously making a choice between group play and non-group play. It just can't exist by default. MMA exists out of separated showmatches that add or take away from your ranking so that you can climb up the ladder and play a bigger name. It would be like removing tournament format from SC2 altogether and arbitrarily ranking players to match them up the week after.
Golf is not a one on one sport. It's a point based sport in which each participant needs to be as fast as possible. It's more like speed-skating, and other time trial based sports. The format these sports are forced into is again hard to compare. However little I may know of golf I think that after one day of playing there are players who have no chance at winning the tournament anymore. Yet they still continue to play for one reason or another.
As for tennis the ATP World Finals actually use a group stage that creates as many opportunities for meaningless matches as the GSL system does. Overall tennis is played almost solely with a bracket system, which I think suits SC2 very well as well. But that's not to say that groups don't exist in tennis because they do and they work. First of all I like a bracket system for SC2 a lot as can be seen from the TSL. Tournaments who have issues with their format creating meaningless matches are MLG, IEM, DH, Assembly, IPL, but our own tournament does a fine job through a bracket system. Right now it's unique but possibly other tournaments will follow suit.
So the conclusion can be that there are indeed meaningless matches in any sport that is remotely similar to ours. I do understand the complaints about the tournament systems however as can be seen from TSL. I believe it is good to minimize meaningless matches.
I'm touching on subjects of the blog I have written down (but not released), but my suggestion to tournaments that want to use group stages is to start with rewarding each spot in the group in some way. If GSL awarded their 4th spot with $200 that may have given Naniwa a feel of responsibility to play for, a clear sign of what is expected of you. The tennis ATP world finals reward every match played in round robin. This is also a stage of development for SC2 that we need some time for, because these rewards are basically money that needs to be pumped into the scene with no obvious value such as a first prize that draws attention.
That said I firmly believe that no matter the format; a player agrees to play a tournament by his own will. If the format has meaningless matches then I think that is unfortunate and should be avoided. However this does happen in a lot of sports, and in no sport do athletes react to it by giving a zero percent effort. I'll quote myself from earlier in this topic to illustrate what I mean by zero percent effort.
On December 15 2011 22:10 thopol wrote: What makes what happened "certainly insufficient"? To say that something has clearly crossed that line, you must have some idea where it is.
If your point is that it is a subjective issue, what is it subject to? That might give us a clearer perspective of the circumstances. If we are going to come down on someone for crossing a boundary, lets work together to find out what that boundary is.
I've given this a lot of thought but I don't think you can ever define the line. You can't find the boundary. You can however spot outliers. A lot of people come up with gray area examples as a counter to outliers - they're not the same. We are able to tell when we're sure someone is giving it their earnest and we are able to tell when someone doesn't try at all. It's not possible to determine where the line is and effectively use it for any sort of policy. As such the policies need to be directed at the outliers where everyone can agree no effort was made to win.
In most tournaments this game would never have been played since it had no impact whatsoever on the results and I find it outright disrespectful to the players to demand them to play after their huge loss just minutes ago. You say you're surprised to not see more customers disappointed that they didn't get to see this match? That's because anyone with a brain realized that the game was going to be terrible, they are both players who expected to win so they're in shock/tilt at that point (see hero the day before in his 0-4 game). No one intelligent would have taken the result of that game seriously.
The Idra situation you bring up is so much more serious, he gave up in the middle of a semifinal... That's actually a game that probably every single viewer felt was exciting and important. So if you think Naniwas punishment was justified Idra deserves a far more severe one.
The sports you're comparing this to works completely differently, if the teams don't play their games the league will fall apart. It's simply not a valid comparison to this Naniwa situation because blizzcup would've been absolutely fine without this game, in fact it would've been better off without it.
He should have played it because it pissed people off when he didn't, especially GOM.
If my favorite hockeyteam was out of the playoffs and had nothing to play for, I would still be pissed off and boo at them if they didn't try to win the last games. That's reason for them to atleast try, because it pisses people off if they don't show some pride etc. There was a MMA-fighter that didn't try one match and just ran away from his opponent, he lost his contract with the UFC and got kicked out!
On December 16 2011 04:13 FSUmaru wrote: A 100% brilliant write up of a situation that was blown up beyond belief. Very nice work Alex
I totally agree. This topic has been blown way out of proportion and this well-worded write up really was completely unnecessary. Alex, as true as his post may be, is just beating a dead horse with a different kind of stick.
On December 16 2011 04:05 Glacierz wrote: People need to separate a player's actions from whether the tournament's format/rules are flawed. Just because certain rules make a game pointless from some people's perspective does not excuse a professional from behaving poorly in his profession.
If anyone is so naive to think that a professional [insert any competitive sport]'s job is to win and not entertain, then he/she needs a reality check on how you can call something a profession. Is it possible to be a professional at something that does not pay money? People pay money to watch the games, not to see who wins/who loses in a giant summary table.
But the question is, is anyone so naive to think that a professional gets into the game so they can entertain others and not win? Maybe ultimately that's what you're getting paid for, but that's never the motivation behind it. Of course, it's very easy with the world revolving around you and such to proclaim that other people exist to entertain you, rather than benefit themselves and fulfill their own goals.
You can do it to benefit yourself and fulfill your own goals no problem, but don't call it a profession. With the word professional comes the responsibility you owe to the people compensating you for what you do.
On December 16 2011 04:39 sib-pelle wrote: He should have played it because it pissed people off when he didn't, especially GOM.
If my favorite hockeyteam was out of the playoffs and had nothing to play for, I would still be pissed off and boo at them if they didn't try to win the last games. That's reason for them to atleast try, because it pisses people off if they don't show some pride etc. There was a MMA-fighter that didn't try one match and just ran away from his opponent, he lost his contract with the UFC and got kicked out!
The players still has to perform because that's their only venue of showcasing their skills, if they stop caring they'll get fired because no one will go to see their games. While in Naniwas situation everyone still knows he's a good player that will play well when it matters, and even without the nestea vs naniwa game GOMTV still had an entire day of good games.
This kind of stuff happens all the time in real sports. Has anyone watched an NBA game between two of the bottom teams at the end of a season? It looks like a scrimmage. There is no defense being played and very minimal effort from the players. No one cries about it hurting the NBA though. It's just the nature of having to play meaningless games.
On December 16 2011 04:49 DEN1ED wrote: This kind of stuff happens all the time in real sports. Has anyone watched an NBA game between two of the bottom teams at the end of a season? It looks like a scrimmage. There is no defense being played and very minimal effort from the players. No one cries about it hurting the NBA though. It's just the nature of having to play meaningless games.
You're making me wonder if you actually read the OP. It explains to you in very few words how it is not the same.
On December 16 2011 04:49 DEN1ED wrote: This kind of stuff happens all the time in real sports. Has anyone watched an NBA game between two of the bottom teams at the end of a season? It looks like a scrimmage. There is no defense being played and very minimal effort from the players. No one cries about it hurting the NBA though. It's just the nature of having to play meaningless games.
It doesn't happen in the NBA.
If Naniwa played a game, any sort of game, with limited effort, then that would be the same as what happens in the NBA. The NBA equivalent of this would be throwing the ball in your own basket all game long, which would lead to public outrage. It would not be accepted under the argument that players would have played with minimal effort anyways.
On December 16 2011 01:47 Bonkarooni wrote: You say that the Idra vs White-Ra situation was different, because IPL was behind schedule already...but let me tell you...Idra vs White ra was one of the matches EVERYONE was excited about. They WOULD of broadcasted that match, and it would of drawn a huge crowd. Idra did excatly the same thing here. I was disappointed when I heard White Ra vs Idra was canceled, and I know many others were too.
This isn't the only time idras forfeitted a game vs an opponent either, MLG providence vs haypro? Yeah, it wasn't going to be broadcast...just played in the back, where hundreds of idra fans would of been standing, waiting for the game to be played.
Seems like a let down to me
As for the WhiteRa game, read Thrax's post and you'll understand it was better overall for Idra to not play that game as he wouldn't have been able to perform and it would have hurt his next day play very likely. As for the Haypro game, take it from me as I was there. Idra missed the game cause he didn't hear it called when he was watching Huk play. I can tell you this isn't BS cause I was in the audiance watching Huk and not only did I see Idra watching, but I never heard his game with Haypro called either, I didn't even know they were going to play until after when I heard he missed it. And as for the people who were waitning to watch it and missed out, I promise you that is a total of about 15 people. Sure plenty of people would have like to know who had won, especially after Haypro's amazing performance against NesTea earlier that day, But due to the game being played in player only area, very few people would have been able to watch it looking over his shoulder, and that is only if it was played on one of the edges rather than in the middle where no one would have seen it. NaNiwa's game was much higher profile which is why i warrants such a different reaction.
Yeah, Idra was tired. Naniwa was tired...so how isnt it the same excat thing? Except idras match meant something to other people in the tournament, because him winning/losing could of changed seedings for everyone. So arguably, Idra's was worse.
On December 16 2011 04:49 DEN1ED wrote: This kind of stuff happens all the time in real sports. Has anyone watched an NBA game between two of the bottom teams at the end of a season? It looks like a scrimmage. There is no defense being played and very minimal effort from the players. No one cries about it hurting the NBA though. It's just the nature of having to play meaningless games.
It doesn't happen in the NBA.
If Naniwa played a game, any sort of game, with limited effort, then that would be the same as what happens in the NBA. The NBA equivalent of this would be throwing the ball in your own basket all game long, which would lead to public outrage. It would not be accepted under the argument that players would have played with minimal effort anyways.
This is a good point, sort of. I think part of the reason people are so mad is because...He Mocked the game, he didn't just forefit. I think it would of been just fine if he had actually forefitted/refused to play the match. Instead though, he does something that OBVIOUSLY isn't trying, and insulting to his hosts. Thats why people (or at least, I) am upset by it.
Its like..."Here go ahead and hype this game up, let my team tweet about it and get excited, and then ruin it for everyone" instead of just "Sorry, I can't mentally focus for this game, give nestea the win"
On December 16 2011 04:49 DEN1ED wrote: This kind of stuff happens all the time in real sports. Has anyone watched an NBA game between two of the bottom teams at the end of a season? It looks like a scrimmage. There is no defense being played and very minimal effort from the players. No one cries about it hurting the NBA though. It's just the nature of having to play meaningless games.
It doesn't happen in the NBA.
If Naniwa played a game, any sort of game, with limited effort, then that would be the same as what happens in the NBA. The NBA equivalent of this would be throwing the ball in your own basket all game long, which would lead to public outrage. It would not be accepted under the argument that players would have played with minimal effort anyways.
Throwing to your own basket is more like a-moving your own Nexus though...
I think giving up mentally before the game even started is not sportsmanlike, though it may not be a violation of rules. Whether you make it obvious or not only serve to hide the fact that you gave up and stopped caring. These pros are suppose to represent an inspiration for millions of amateurs who cheer them on. Boxer gets it, most Korean players get it, but many foreigners don't. They only think of it as a competition to win, they don't get what a huge difference it is to play in front of thousands of people.
I think you're assuming that all spectators are the same, and that what we want is a show, in order to make the point that, really, don't put too much attention on the tournament or tournament-format. I completely disagree. As a viewer of a tournament, I'm not primarily looking for a show. I'm looking for competition, for players fighting to decide who is the best. In the case of Naniwa and Nestea that part was over, and what was left was a show for the sake of the show.
Not that there's anything wrong with a show, but that wasn't why I was watching. What matters in a tournament is trying to win. In a show-match, that is no longer the main priority. To conflate the two simply produces bland content. The players don't care if they're winning, and their mindset is not on producing a show. The result is meaningless, bloodless and often plain bad, and, for that reason alone, tournament organizers should try their utmost to avoid the situation.
And really, I think the important thing to take from this whole debacle is not about the players (or about the individual). While I don't think what happened is a big deal, I recognize that others have a very different perspective. That many people feel offended by naniwa throwing the match. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a player not to offend (part of) the audience in this setting. That GOM should have thought of a way to rectify the situation without offending part of their customers is another point.
More importantly, I don't think your angle of attack on the problem leads to the best solution. You prefer to focus on the player, on 'professionalism'. But players, in a stressful and emotional situation, will keep acting rashly, without thought and keep on making mistakes. It's simply part of being human. It may not be Idra or naniwa the next time, but then it will be someone else. If you want to pragmatically change behavior, the far more efficient way is to design a better system in which the behavior takes place.
This is why the lesson from this episode should be for tournament organizers to put more effort and care into designing their tournament format. Having followed eports for many years, it is mind-boggling how often the format of competition seems to be an afterthought that was hashed out in the last minutes of the production. Bad formats produce perverse incentives for the players, and from that flows thrown matches and 'bad' behavior.
Really, it comes down to one single rule:
Avoid matches in which one or both players have no meaningful incentive to win.
This includes matches where one or more players are already out of the tournament or situations where a player can predict and influence his future opponent by the result of an upcoming match (if I lose this, I get the easier opponent).
If we could bring this rule forward, I think this whole situation may have been worth the trouble.
Why is it the responsibility of the player, and not of the tournament, to provide quality matches? The very best players have no intrinsic responsibility to practice long hours, travel to tournaments, or put forth maximum effort every game. They do these things because of the rewards involved. NaNiwa judged the rewards of playing hard not worth the cost, and correspondingly put forth the minimum required effort. The rewards aren't always monetary - reputation, prestige, and likeability are certainly important - but I think it's a gross overstatement to say that he violated some moral or 'professional' obligation to eSports or its fans. At most, he assessed the costs wrongly and made a bad decision.
NaNiwa has said that if he had to do it over again, he would just 4gate. Putting forth the marginal amount of additional effort wouldn't have made the game meaningful; all it would do is give him plausible deniability, which would have avoided this entire situation. As a viewer and a fan, I don't find plausible deniability particularly compelling, which is why I think that any changes in the future need to come from the organizations involved - the tournament and the team. We're already seeing those organizations exert their influence in the form of statements and (from GOM) punishment, but it seems heavy-handed at best. I think there's a much happier medium to be found in terms of tournament design, and perhaps in the team-player relationship as well.
On December 16 2011 04:49 DEN1ED wrote: This kind of stuff happens all the time in real sports. Has anyone watched an NBA game between two of the bottom teams at the end of a season? It looks like a scrimmage. There is no defense being played and very minimal effort from the players. No one cries about it hurting the NBA though. It's just the nature of having to play meaningless games.
It doesn't happen in the NBA.
If Naniwa played a game, any sort of game, with limited effort, then that would be the same as what happens in the NBA. The NBA equivalent of this would be throwing the ball in your own basket all game long, which would lead to public outrage. It would not be accepted under the argument that players would have played with minimal effort anyways.
They cannot do that in the NBA because the team only has one league to play in and the players has to perform every game because that's how they get a higher salary. Blizzcup was fine without this game and everyone knows Naniwa will perform in games that matter.
On December 15 2011 19:45 tar wrote: When Idra played Mana in the IPL he called the game a "fucking joke" but more importantly Mana a " fucking idiot"
Up to today I cannot believe that this did not have a larger impact on the scene. Why wasn't Idra tapped on the shoulder for that one? Why wasn't there a public apology? This is not meant to be some kind of idra-bashing but rather an expression of my utter bafflement how this could be acceptable on a pro level.
Professionalism in the context of your obligation to entertain your fans (by playing the game to a reasonable standard) and what not does not necessarily entail manners regarding opponents.
To draw the parallel to regular sports once again, some of the best sports players talk copious amounts of trashing during games. While they may put on a different face for the media, do you think Michael Jordan ever honestly mean any of backhanded praise he give in interviews after the game? He may not have said "They fucking suck" in an interview afterwards, but he was certainly thinking it. Only concerns about image and subsequent effects on sponsorship prevent him from doing more. And once his legacy was cemented, you saw it all come out. The man spent his HoF speech shaming people from 20 years ago.
Part of IdrA's appeal is that he's going to pretend to be someone he's not just because someone's recording him. And part of EG's appeal is that they let players be who they are. And I think it is a good part of the eSports community vs. regular sports fans that players are still marketable without having to put on a foolish nice guy front.
IdrA backs up his talk with consistently high performance, and many fans respect him precisely because he doesn't put on false pretenses.
On December 15 2011 22:21 LaoShuAiDaMi wrote: what about EG.dota refusing to play at SMM loser bracket
To be fair boycotting is completely different from throwing; the DOTA team was protesting a terrible decision by the tournament management. And this was on top of the fact that MiTH admitted the error and offered to take the loss or rematch.
It wasn't about not caring/not playing.
If Nani had hypothetically destroyed all of Nestea's army and taken out some crucial tech structures, was about to go in for the kill when Nestea's computer crashed, and they made Naniwa rematch after Nestea admitted he probably would have lost... THEN probe rushed in protest, I imagine people would feel a bit differently.
On December 16 2011 01:47 Bonkarooni wrote: They WOULD of broadcasted that match, and it would of drawn a huge crowd. Idra did excatly the same thing here. I was disappointed when I heard White Ra vs Idra was canceled, and I know many others were too.
On December 16 2011 05:01 Bonkarooni wrote:
Yeah, Idra was tired. Naniwa was tired...so how isnt it the same excat thing? Except idras match meant something to other people in the tournament, because him winning/losing could of changed seedings for everyone. So arguably, Idra's was worse.
Haypro thing you're right on though, my bad.
Just like above, it's important to take the context of the forfeit. Alex already explained that IdrA forfeited that match because he wanted to get some rest in. Naniwa just felt it was meaningless.
Also the tournament permitted IdrA to forfeit. If he drone rushed after they told him that no he couldn't forfeit, then the situation would be more comparable. And if Naniwa felt ill or had a reason to not play besides "It's meaningless."
On December 16 2011 03:01 iNcontroL wrote: one of my favorite parts of this thread is going over all the posts that clearly didn't read the OP or probably any comments in this thread.. just scanned and posted.
"What about IdrA vs WhiteRa? GOTCHA"
lol
It's a long OP but worth the read btw if anyone is checking for the last page of the thread.. please read it <3
Not really. He left out a lot of things as I pointed out. If you gloss over it you'll be sure to miss it.
On December 16 2011 05:13 Aro wrote: Why is it the responsibility of the player, and not of the tournament, to provide quality matches? The very best players have no intrinsic responsibility to practice long hours, travel to tournaments, or put forth maximum effort every game. They do these things because of the rewards involved. NaNiwa judged the rewards of playing hard not worth the cost, and correspondingly put forth the minimum required effort. The rewards aren't always monetary - reputation, prestige, and likeability are certainly important - but I think it's a gross overstatement to say that he violated some moral or 'professional' obligation to eSports or its fans. At most, he assessed the costs wrongly and made a bad decision.
NaNiwa has said that if he had to do it over again, he would just 4gate. Putting forth the marginal amount of additional effort wouldn't have made the game meaningful; all it would do is give him plausible deniability, which would have avoided this entire situation. As a viewer and a fan, I don't find plausible deniability particularly compelling, which is why I think that any changes in the future need to come from the organizations involved - the tournament and the team. We're already seeing those organizations exert their influence in the form of statements and (from GOM) punishment, but it seems heavy-handed at best. I think there's a much happier medium to be found in terms of tournament design, and perhaps in the team-player relationship as well.
EDIT: m0ck and I are on hivemind tech.
You can't be more wrong on the first point. Have you forgotten that they are salaried players? The tournament prizes are just a bonus to what the teams (sponsors, fans) are paying them. It is your job, and yes it is the your responsibility. When you get hired to be a professional at anything, you can't decide not to show up for work arbitrarily just because you didn't feel like it.
Even on the 4 gate vs probe rush thing, I don't think Naniwa gets it. There are probably thousands of people who would love to give it their all to play on the main stage even if the match has no consequence whatsoever (which is still debatable). The very basic fact that he said he would 4 gate the next time tells you he's not interested in proving his skills his fans / opponents. Just look at the twitter responses posted here from the Korean players. IMHO if a player does not appreciate the spotlight he's been given, then he does not deserve it.
I agree that spotlighting a match that does not affect the final outcome of the tournament is a flawed design, but it has nothing to do with how a professional player should behave under these circumstances.
I find that I agree with this thread even though my previous opinion was that it wasn't a big deal and was within Naniwa's rights to basically forfeit that game. However, I think your statistics may be off. You say it seems that 70 percent believe it was unacceptable and 30 percent believe that it was acceptable. However, in the poll on the TL home page it says:
What do you think of Naniwa vs Nestea? Disappointing but no big deal (4425) 40% Completely unacceptable (2683) 24% Understandable (2602) 24% Completely justified (1260) 11% So I think that it might be closer to even in opinion. This one poll isn't indicative of the whole of the starcraft community, but I think you overestimate how many people found this unacceptable. Still a great thread, obviously a lot of research and effort went into it.
Avoid matches in which one or both players have no meaningful incentive to win.
This then begs the question: What is a meaningful incentive to win?
To some of us, the answer may be to please the fans; to show good games. To some of us, the answer may be to win tournaments. To some of us, the answer may be to keep rivalries alive.
I feel that if NaNiwa and NesTea were to play each other at any other time (with or without a tournament on the line), winning would have been of paramount importance to both players. There is already a "rivalry" brewing between the two. NaNiwa vz. NesTea is currently a hot match-up.
However in this particular situation, both players *felt* that they were playing for nothing. I sincerely feel that if these players were given any reasonable amount of time to mentally overcome their prior defeats and focus on the approaching match, we would have seen something completely different.
The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money. As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did. I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.)
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
How about that time Idra forfeited 7/8th place match vs. Haypro, a game what wasn't meaningless at all? Would it be appropriate to ban him from next MLG?
IdrA to be banned from the next MLG? Are you serious? Is forfeiting illegal now? Missing a match to be punished more strongly than by losing said match? Instead of dropping to the losers bracket, I guess WhiteRa should have been banned from the event for missing his matches at MLG?
I'd like to open up first of all that I agree very much so with all of EGAlex’s points.
The sports entertainment industry, like many other things, are ultimately businesses. I pay money to watch SC2. Sponsors pay money because there are people who are willing to play SC2. Ad revenue comes in because people are watching SC2. This is a job, yes for the players too.
In an ideal world, all competitive sports environments (including ones where people are paid) would be as pure as possible, allowing for meaningful and heartfelt competition where everyone gives their best at all times. This, however, does not translate into reality. Professionals of all stripes, not just in sports, are paid to do a job. It is a wonderful thing when your passions and personal goals can coincide with what you do professional but when push comes to shove as a professional, you are obligated to do the job you are paid for. This is the core of any work ethic.
That is not to say that I believe Naniwa should be ‘turned into some corporate zombie’. I understand Naniwa was very upset, and I understand that he would not have been able to play the game. At that point, if the game was played or not did not matter, since he physically and emotionally could not do it. I did not want a fake game nor I did not want a probe rush.
Other professional players in his situation would have played the game, and they would not have faked it. They may not have played their best, and understandably so, but they would have played the game with the intent of winning. The fact that the perceived choice for Naniwa either faking it or not playing at all is part of the problem. Remember: people paid to see SC2 games, sponsors paid to have Naniwa give them exposure, Gom offered prize money for players to play SC2 games. Naniwa needed to fulfill his obligations as a professional to deliver those games. If he cannot, he simply should not be a professional SC2 player.
Esports is still growing and trying to find itself. It is clear that what people, sponsors, leagues and tournaments expect and are willing to pay for is different for each individual and organization. Ultimately, the industry as a whole will move over to whatever pays the most, or if the pie is large enough, provide different products for different customer segments. In a sense this is what is happening already with the GSL being very different from MLG/IPL/etc. Ultimately at the end of the day, viewers and sponsors vote with their wallets. If the GSL suffers significantly from lost ticket sales and sponsorships, you can bet that they will change their tournament formats.
What do I pay for? I pay to see SC2 games played. That is what I expect, and that is what I expect to see from professional players. What I saw between Naniwa and Nestea was not a game of SC2. If all Naniwa wants to do is play games to win titles then that is his prerogative, but he cannot do so as a professional player, and especially not at a GSL-sponsored event. I don’t want a game where he can claim plausible deniability. If that is the stance he takes, my stance is rather simple: he should not be playing professionally.
I think Naniwa’s apology shows he now understands that being a professional means more than just playing to win. I understand why Naniwa did what he did, and sympathized with his situation during the tournament. I think the tournament format can be improved and organizers should strive as much as possible to avoid such situations in the future. I don’t think Naniwa deserved the specific punishment he received, but I also understand that he needed to be chastised in some way. Regardless of any of the above, none of this excuses him for not performing as a professional in a professional capacity.
I do think Naniwa is on the right track now, and I do look forward to seeing more great SC2 from him.
Thank you Alex! I made a Twitter rant discussing the exact same thing the morning of the whole Naniwa incident. I basically summed it down to: ESPORTS is an entertainment industry, and bad entertainment is bad for business. CP of my Twitter posts:
stormfoxSC: Weird to see people defend Johan's decision to probe rush Jae Duk in the Blizzard Cup. More than a game; it's a paid job for him. (permalink)
stormfoxSC: Basically said "I don't want to do my job anymore today". This is the entertainment business, bad entertainment is bad for business. (permalink)
stormfoxSC: What's bad for business is bad, period. GOMTV production has to convince people to watch their show; how do they when games are like that? (permalink)
stormfoxSC: If I were a decision maker over at GOM, I would seriously consider banning Johan; he's not good for ROI, and doesn't produce results anyway. (permalink)
NOTE: To clarify the previous tweet, I'm referring specifically to his tournament results in the GSL. He's now something like 0-10?
stormfoxSC: Might seem harsh from a people perspective, but from a business perspective it's not entirely unreasonable. (permalink)
stormfoxSC: If I were running a business that had direct customer contact, and an employee caused customers to leave, I would tell him to take a hike. (permalink)
stormfoxSC: All in all, just very unprofessional by Johan, and that is why Koreans are in an uproar over his probe rush. He's affecting THEIR industry. (permalink)
On December 15 2011 18:25 chadissilent wrote: NaNiwa enters game, forfeits. IdrA doesn't enter game, forfeits. How about his forfeits at MLG Providence against Haypro? I fail to see the difference.
User was temp banned for this post.
Thanks for that Drone. please read before you don't need to always criticize peopls posts to prove them wrong grow up man
On December 16 2011 05:34 mvhtnb wrote: The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money. As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did. I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.)
Hey, first off, i want to say good job on not showing bias in every single sentence of your post. it must've been hard.
second, that's exactly what he's being called out for. not being a "sportsman". its a matter of responsibility as a progamer. but not all responsibility is quantified and labeled under the category of that dirty disgusting (and American right?) financial incentive.
I completly support Naniwas decision not to play out the game against Nestea. No matter the sports I always think its extremly painfull to watch teams play out games that doesent matter,.and im supprised that tournaments dont have the option to forfeit meaningless games beforehand. Its just anoying to see a half assed 4gate in a game u know the players dont realy care about. And i dont think u can do the comparisson with a none e-sports team playing out a meaningless match. in teamsport they usualy use the match to give unexperienced player the chance to play in front of a crowd while letting the best players sitt on the bench to not risk injury. And for Naniwa not doing his part for the tournament and esport, this insident probobly gave more publicity to gom Naniwa and his team then any "real" game would have.
On December 16 2011 05:34 mvhtnb wrote: The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money. As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did. I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.)
Hey, first off, i want to say good job on not showing bias in every single sentence of your post. it must've been hard.
second, that's exactly what he's being called out for. not being a "sportsman". its a matter of responsibility as a progamer. but not all responsibility is quantified and labeled under the category of that dirty disgusting (and American right?) financial incentive.
I did start out with underlining the "me" part. .
But I beg to differ.
He did not get called out due to bad sportsmanship, bad sportsmanship hurts the sport not the industry. He was called out for being bad for business.
What was bad for the sport was the bad tournament format.
This is where the terminology gets messed up due to different cultural backgrounds.
On December 16 2011 05:34 mvhtnb wrote: The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money. As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did. I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.)
Hey, first off, i want to say good job on not showing bias in every single sentence of your post. it must've been hard.
second, that's exactly what he's being called out for. not being a "sportsman". its a matter of responsibility as a progamer. but not all responsibility is quantified and labeled under the category of that dirty disgusting (and American right?) financial incentive.
Wow you really got mad He is just trying to put out a possible explanation to naniwas obvious lack of knowledge of how esports is nothing more than a business and industry to some ppl.
On December 16 2011 05:34 mvhtnb wrote: The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money. As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did. I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.)
Hey, first off, i want to say good job on not showing bias in every single sentence of your post. it must've been hard.
second, that's exactly what he's being called out for. not being a "sportsman". its a matter of responsibility as a progamer. but not all responsibility is quantified and labeled under the category of that dirty disgusting (and American right?) financial incentive.
Wow you really got mad He is just trying to put out a possible explanation to naniwas obvious lack of knowledge of how esports is nothing more than a business and industry to some ppl.
On December 16 2011 05:34 mvhtnb wrote: The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money. As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did. I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.)
If the focus is on the games, and the sports, and competition then Naniwa should have had no problems simply playing the game even though there was no money or prestige incentive to do so. There was a competition between him and Nestea. If that was all that mattered, then he would have played the game to the best of his ability. He chose not to.
I feel that overall this stance is very idealistic. If pure sportsmanship was sustainable from an industry sense, then that would be wonderful. I think it is much more likely that there would simply be no industry, which means no televised games, no leagues and no tournaments; or at least not ones where people could play for a living or have easy access to viewing. It is impossible to avoid the business aspects of sports when discussing them in the capacity of being professionals.
On December 16 2011 05:34 mvhtnb wrote: The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money. As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did. I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.)
If the focus is on the games, and the sports, and competition then Naniwa should have had no problems simply playing the game even though there was no money or prestige incentive to do so. There was a competition between him and Nestea. If that was all that mattered, then he would have played the game to the best of his ability. He chose not to.
I feel that overall this stance is very idealistic. If pure sportsmanship was sustainable from an industry sense, then that would be wonderful. I think it is much more likely that there would simply be no industry, which means no televised games, no leagues and no tournaments; or at least not ones where people could play for a living or have easy access to viewing.
Full agreement. On all points.
I dont understand why he didnt just play the game.
Im just theorizing over why he did not expect the relegation (I think, had he known, he would have played it).
This post made me, as a paying customer and huge fan, happy. To see that the reasoning of one of the persons inside the industry was reasoning the same way as I did is reassuring. Just this post from a man "inside" rekindles my trust in this wave of esports that now floods the world. Thank you!
On December 16 2011 06:00 GuvenorBrown wrote: I completly support Naniwas decision not to play out the game against Nestea. No matter the sports I always think its extremly painfull to watch teams play out games that doesent matter,.and im supprised that tournaments dont have the option to forfeit meaningless games beforehand. Its just anoying to see a half assed 4gate in a game u know the players dont realy care about. And i dont think u can do the comparisson with a none e-sports team playing out a meaningless match. in teamsport they usualy use the match to give unexperienced player the chance to play in front of a crowd while letting the best players sitt on the bench to not risk injury. And for Naniwa not doing his part for the tournament and esport, this insident probobly gave more publicity to gom Naniwa and his team then any "real" game would have.
First off I question whether you actually support E-Sports, because if you did, you would understand that great games are always appreciated, and that a match against two high level players like that, a grudge match as well, would have been incredibly fun to watch.
Second, you debunk your own argument in your writing. You say "it's just annoying to see a half assed 4 gate in a game you know the players don't really care about." The definition of what NaNi did was half assed. It was rude, unentertaining, and probably lost Nani a lot of Fans.
Finally, This incident garnered a huge amount of negative press for E-Sports, and GOM. Whether it gains publicity or not, looking bad is never good. Things like this are never forgotten, and instead of being the player that defeated the(at the time) best zerg in the world, winning the MLG invitational, and coming second to the new best zerg in the world, he'll be remembered as the guy that does probe rushes.
EDIT: An example of the dissapointment (from Nestea's perspective): Xerxes' entering athens after the battle of Thermopylae
Don't entirely agree with you though. I agree Naniwa shouldn't have just probe rushed and done some quick cheesy build so this whole explosion didn't happen. But the problem here isn't that he "threw the game", it's that he didn't give fans an illusion of a game. Personally I don't see the difference of throwing the game with a probe rush or a poor 2 base timing push - sure in the latter cause I got to watch a game, but it's not the game I want to see. I want to see the game where both players are playing their absolute hardest because there's tournament life on the line. If you don't want players to throw useless games - do your best not to have useless games. I feel like people are complaining because Naniwa didn't trick them into thinking he played his best. Also, you used sports analogies which were apt to a degree (I feel the fact sports event are generally single game events as opposed to sets of matches kind of weakens your point though) but no one really cares about games where both teams are out of the playoffs, viewership falls off because teams play with less intensity and they aren't showing their best games. In the sports world they have to play these matches out, but what's the point in Starcraft?
That being said, I don't blame GOM for being angry (though the Code S revoke was quite harsh in my opinion, especially given there was no specific rule disallowing this) and I think Nani could've handled the situation much better (4gate and then complain to GOM about the format, or something of the like). I just think this is silly because even if Naniwa had played out a weak strategy it wouldn't be the epic game everyone wanted anyway.
This was a fantastic post and I have to agree with it 100%. It summarizes all that I've been thinking of, except one thing...
Where was NesTea in this entire post? The guy deserves a personal apology too. He probably was on tilt 0-3 down too, but everyone just whines that Naniwa was probably feeling bad. What about NesTea, who is supposed to be the world's best Zerg, but just got demolished in 3 straight games? He was game, and probably really wanted a win to end the day for both himself and his fans, and I bet he walked out feeling shamed and wronged.
Let's not forget that there are always 2 players who show up to a game to play. Not just one.
Yes circumstances could be better (as in better format etc) but that's for the future. Right then someone is hyped to see a game between Nani and Nestea and get's nothing and I agree that it's not acceptable to throw it.
However I strongly feel that we can draw other conclusions as well. For one, formats that produce those scenarios needs to be improved.
Off the top of my head I can think of a shitload of ways on how to make that one game count and I don't understand why it was not taken care off.
For example have a challenge tournament were the winner of nestea and nani get's in. In fact, as a hardcore fan I hate games like that I don't expect players to spoil good builds for nothing etc and I don't really pay attention to games like that so I expect tournaments to have better formats.
BUT we all have to try our best here leagues will not be perfect and neither will players or viewers... We all need to do our best to work for the big picture!
It would be interesting to see how much of the audience could actually tell the difference between a game that was played for huge stakes in which both players were going all out to win and a game where the players were not really motivated.
You'd need a ton of money for motivation and you'd need to release the games with the names of the players disguised and you'd need to then release the VoDs in random order ^^
On December 15 2011 06:33 GOMTV wrote: NaNiWa has been considered as one of the players to receive a Code S seed for the 2012 GSL Season 1 as a part of the this new seeding system due to his recent impressive results. Other players under consideration were IdrA (MLG Orlando 4th, IEM Guangzhou) and Sen (Blizzcon Battle.net Invitational 3rd) among others. During this phase of consideration aforementioned incident happened, which led us to the decision to remove NaNiWa from the top of the list of considered players. This is not to be seen as a direct punishment resulting from the incident, the incident did however understandably have an influence on NaNiWa's position on the list of candidates.
From Evil Geniuses Website (http://myeg.net/team/prepare-yourselves-idra-is-back-in-code-s/): Now EG is excited to announce that IdrA will in fact be entering directly into Code S. Though we don’t yet have details on who or why, the GSL has informed us that a current Code S player has dropped out of the league, and IdrA has been invited to fill that space.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: 2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa.
Something doesn't fit here. Was IdrA guaranteed a spot or was he "under consideration"?
Hypothetically, if IdrA or Sen received NaNiwa's spot, there isn't any issue. It'd be nice to have a clear understanding of events.
On December 15 2011 06:33 GOMTV wrote: NaNiWa has been considered as one of the players to receive a Code S seed for the 2012 GSL Season 1 as a part of the this new seeding system due to his recent impressive results. Other players under consideration were IdrA (MLG Orlando 4th, IEM Guangzhou) and Sen (Blizzcon Battle.net Invitational 3rd) among others. During this phase of consideration aforementioned incident happened, which led us to the decision to remove NaNiWa from the top of the list of considered players. This is not to be seen as a direct punishment resulting from the incident, the incident did however understandably have an influence on NaNiWa's position on the list of candidates.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: 2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa.
Something doesn't fit here. Was IdrA guaranteed a spot or was he "under consideration"?
Hypothetically, if IdrA or Sen received NaNiwa's spot, there isn't any issue. It'd be nice to have a clear understanding of events.
I believe idra would have received his Code S spot regardless, but that Sen was the one who was "under consideration".
On December 15 2011 06:33 GOMTV wrote: NaNiWa has been considered as one of the players to receive a Code S seed for the 2012 GSL Season 1 as a part of the this new seeding system due to his recent impressive results. Other players under consideration were IdrA (MLG Orlando 4th, IEM Guangzhou) and Sen (Blizzcon Battle.net Invitational 3rd) among others. During this phase of consideration aforementioned incident happened, which led us to the decision to remove NaNiWa from the top of the list of considered players. This is not to be seen as a direct punishment resulting from the incident, the incident did however understandably have an influence on NaNiWa's position on the list of candidates.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: 2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa.
Something doesn't fit here. Was IdrA guaranteed a spot or was he "under consideration"?
Hypothetically, if IdrA or Sen received NaNiwa's spot, there isn't any issue. It'd be nice to have a clear understanding of events.
I believe idra would have received his Code S spot regardless, but that Sen was the one who was "under consideration".
On December 15 2011 06:33 GOMTV wrote: NaNiWa has been considered as one of the players to receive a Code S seed for the 2012 GSL Season 1 as a part of the this new seeding system due to his recent impressive results. Other players under consideration were IdrA (MLG Orlando 4th, IEM Guangzhou) and Sen (Blizzcon Battle.net Invitational 3rd) among others. During this phase of consideration aforementioned incident happened, which led us to the decision to remove NaNiWa from the top of the list of considered players. This is not to be seen as a direct punishment resulting from the incident, the incident did however understandably have an influence on NaNiWa's position on the list of candidates.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: 2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa.
Something doesn't fit here. Was IdrA guaranteed a spot or was he "under consideration"?
Hypothetically, if IdrA or Sen received NaNiwa's spot, there isn't any issue. It'd be nice to have a clear understanding of events.
I believe idra would have received his Code S spot regardless, but that Sen was the one who was "under consideration".
Sen was in because of his 3rd place at Blizzcon
No he wasn't.
Sen got the spot that they took from Naniwa, it seems even he was told that his spot materialized (in the past few days, as he's been told) right when Naniwa's was taken.
On December 15 2011 06:33 GOMTV wrote: NaNiWa has been considered as one of the players to receive a Code S seed for the 2012 GSL Season 1 as a part of the this new seeding system due to his recent impressive results. Other players under consideration were IdrA (MLG Orlando 4th, IEM Guangzhou) and Sen (Blizzcon Battle.net Invitational 3rd) among others. During this phase of consideration aforementioned incident happened, which led us to the decision to remove NaNiWa from the top of the list of considered players. This is not to be seen as a direct punishment resulting from the incident, the incident did however understandably have an influence on NaNiWa's position on the list of candidates.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: 2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa.
Something doesn't fit here. Was IdrA guaranteed a spot or was he "under consideration"?
Hypothetically, if IdrA or Sen received NaNiwa's spot, there isn't any issue. It'd be nice to have a clear understanding of events.
I believe idra would have received his Code S spot regardless, but that Sen was the one who was "under consideration".
Sen was in because of his 3rd place at Blizzcon
No he wasn't.
Sen got the spot that they took from Naniwa, it seems even he was told that his spot materialized (in the past few days, as he's been told) right when Naniwa's was taken.
you misunderstood me. i meant that Sen was the next highest ranked foreigner in GSL points in large part because of his Blizzcon showing, so he was given the green light when the Naniwa incident occurred.
I did read the whole article, just saying where is the play to win part? I don't see much difference between this and Boxer's famous (not infamous) worker rushes.
People (*cough* players) that blame GOM for putting Naniwa in that situation really have to grow up and realize that ultimately, a league's obligation is not to the players, but to its viewers.
Just look at a league like NASL. They have gone out of it's way to try to accommodate players -- they've been 'fair' to the point of hurting themselves' -- and they're struggling to put together a marketable product.
Also the argument that Idra was invited in a different time is really weird. In my opinion it doesen't matter who got the specific spot for Code S... the interesting thing here is that they choose to demote Naniwa in the list of potential Code S invites because he behaved unprofessional in an situation.... now i find it hard to belive their idea of Idra to be that much more professional to not give his maximum in some games incase he goes into a loosing streak. Sorry, but i still feel this decision made by GOM was purely based on populism.
Finally a post that is very insightful, knowledgeable and reasonable that outlines all the key problem areas in this situation. I agree 100% with you Alex. Thank you for the post.
I hope to see Alex Garfield make a statement regarding the gom/mlg issue regarding prizes given and then revoked, with organisations in parnership not communicating and pretty much playing with ppls lifes. If you care about your players you realise that this issue is not about naniwa, it could have been an EG player winning providence. I hope you will voice your opinion about players rights and integrity regarding the mlg/gom debacle.
On December 15 2011 18:25 chadissilent wrote: NaNiwa enters game, forfeits. IdrA doesn't enter game, forfeits. How about his forfeits at MLG Providence against Haypro? I fail to see the difference.
Dear Alex, I agree with you 100%, and I was a bit shocked to see so much nonchalant support of Naniwa's actions when I raised the issue on GOM's forums. Some, it seems, do not have any desire to hold Esports players to the same degree of professionalism expected in other competitions.
For reference, the thread which I started and commented in numerous times (as well as covering a number of points Alex also comments on):
On December 15 2011 18:25 chadissilent wrote: NaNiwa enters game, forfeits. IdrA doesn't enter game, forfeits. How about his forfeits at MLG Providence against Haypro? I fail to see the difference.
User was temp banned for this post.
The mods are out of their minds. Disgusting.
Out of their minds for stopping someone from spreading false information? don't think so.
On December 16 2011 05:34 mvhtnb wrote: The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money. As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did. I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.)
Hey, first off, i want to say good job on not showing bias in every single sentence of your post. it must've been hard.
second, that's exactly what he's being called out for. not being a "sportsman". its a matter of responsibility as a progamer. but not all responsibility is quantified and labeled under the category of that dirty disgusting (and American right?) financial incentive.
Wow you really got mad He is just trying to put out a possible explanation to naniwas obvious lack of knowledge of how esports is nothing more than a business and industry to some ppl.
LOL you don't get it at all do you? If someone cared about the game and competition, they would compete to the best of their ability regardless of monetary or fame incentives from the business side of esports. If you're basically doing it for the money and fame, then you're not much of a "sportsman."
On December 16 2011 08:03 Perfect Assassin wrote: I did read the whole article, just saying where is the play to win part? I don't see much difference between this and Boxer's famous (not infamous) worker rushes.
Boxer does marine scv rushes to win games in sets. Naniwa A moves his probes towards Nestea's hatch and takes his hands off his keyboard to display his displeasure of having to play what is to him, a meaningless game. When has Boxer just boxed his SCVs and sent them at an opponents base then taken his hands off the keyboard as if to say, "To hell with this."
On December 16 2011 08:32 Mementoss wrote: Didn't mention anything about the rules not being clear with no punishment even being mentioned... Formal warning woulda been fine
Thank you Alex, everybody needs to pull their own weight and hold each other accountable. We are the checks and balances in this ecosystem. Higher standards hwaiting!
On December 15 2011 06:33 GOMTV wrote: NaNiWa has been considered as one of the players to receive a Code S seed for the 2012 GSL Season 1 as a part of the this new seeding system due to his recent impressive results. Other players under consideration were IdrA (MLG Orlando 4th, IEM Guangzhou) and Sen (Blizzcon Battle.net Invitational 3rd) among others. During this phase of consideration aforementioned incident happened, which led us to the decision to remove NaNiWa from the top of the list of considered players. This is not to be seen as a direct punishment resulting from the incident, the incident did however understandably have an influence on NaNiWa's position on the list of candidates.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: 2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa.
Something doesn't fit here. Was IdrA guaranteed a spot or was he "under consideration"?
Hypothetically, if IdrA or Sen received NaNiwa's spot, there isn't any issue. It'd be nice to have a clear understanding of events.
I believe idra would have received his Code S spot regardless, but that Sen was the one who was "under consideration".
Sen was in because of his 3rd place at Blizzcon
No he wasn't.
Sen got the spot that they took from Naniwa, it seems even he was told that his spot materialized (in the past few days, as he's been told) right when Naniwa's was taken.
you misunderstood me. i meant that Sen was the next highest ranked foreigner in GSL points in large part because of his Blizzcon showing, so he was given the green light when the Naniwa incident occurred.
No I think you misunderstood both of us. We all know Sen was the next in line because of his showings regardless of what they were. What we were talking about was the possibility that Naniwa's spot was directly given to Sen, as compared to IdrA who had a spot regardless.
On December 15 2011 18:25 chadissilent wrote: NaNiwa enters game, forfeits. IdrA doesn't enter game, forfeits. How about his forfeits at MLG Providence against Haypro? I fail to see the difference.
User was temp banned for this post.
The mods are out of their minds. Disgusting.
Indeed they are, however youll get banned for saying that. And ill get banned for saying this
OT: Put simply, he didnt break any rules. He shouldnt be punished. I dont care if what he did was ethically wrong or not, he did not technically do anything wrong. The fact that GOM had to find the rule which most closely relates something he did, in the vaguest possible sense is a travesty.
Im pretty sure any lawyer could take their rulebook and show how most players have broken it in some way or other.
All this talk of being 'sports-manly isnt even relevant in any way. Its about did he break a rule, yes or no.
Its down right offensive that they can effectively make up a rule to punish some guy they dont like.
GOM, the Soviet Russia of Esports
EDIT: Also you say that in other sports it would provoke outrage. Imagine in football your 2-0 down with 30 seconds to go. If your just kinda walking about not trying, noone will ask for their money back at all.
[LOL you don't get it at all do you? If someone cared about the game and competition, they would compete to the best of their ability regardless of monetary or fame incentives from the business side of esports. If you're basically doing it for the money and fame, then you're not much of a "sportsman."
I think you are wrong. If you only cared about money and fame then you would think about the consequences and your future career more carefully in terms of money lost if you get punished and bad publicity etc. Naniwa, on the contrary, invests all that he is and all his emotions in his competetive games and when its over and he has lost ( 0 - 3) he is completely drained. You may think that fake, half hearted, sloppy games, where both players morale is rock bottom, are good for esports. I disagree
On December 15 2011 18:25 chadissilent wrote: NaNiwa enters game, forfeits. IdrA doesn't enter game, forfeits. How about his forfeits at MLG Providence against Haypro? I fail to see the difference.
User was temp banned for this post.
The mods are out of their minds. Disgusting.
Indeed they are, however youll get banned for saying that. And ill get banned for saying this
OT: Put simply, he didnt break any rules. He shouldnt be punished. I dont care if what he did was ethically wrong or not, he did not technically do anything wrong. The fact that GOM had to find the rule which most closely relates something he did, in the vaguest possible sense is a travesty.
Im pretty sure any lawyer could take their rulebook and show how most players have broken it in some way or other.
All this talk of being 'sports-manly isnt even relevant in any way. Its about did he break a rule, yes or no.
Its down right offensive that they can effectively make up a rule to punish some guy they dont like.
GOM, the Soviet Russia of Esports
EDIT: Also you say that in other sports it would provoke outrage. Imagine in football your 2-0 down with 30 seconds to go. If your just kinda walking about not trying, noone will ask for their money back at all.
You'll get banned for martyring, the other guy got banned because what he said isn't true.
OP has some good points (about Naniwa) and terrible points (about Idra). Saying that Idra had his code S spot "for weeks" for instance. I know GOM gave you a very nice gift by giving Idra a code S spot without previous notice, so you feel you have to lie about it to make them look good, but the fact that Idra was in the up and downs and that Naniwa was in code S is well documented (including by Idra himself who said it in a show. In fact he said he first thought he was in code A, and was happily surprised to be placed in the und and have a chance to qualify directly for code S).
In this story, Naniwa thought he was in code S, Idra thought he was in the und, the whole world and esports covering sites also thought that, but it seems neither you nor GOM, who knew it was false "for weeks", decided to correct them. Which is pretty surprising, as they already started to sell 2012 tickets, and I guess Idra in code S would have been a pretty good announcement toi make for GOM or EG.
Please don't take that as "defending naniwa". What he did was wrong, but that doesn't excuse all the wrongs that followed, including some disinformation contained in the OP. It seems you wanted to basically say "Don't hate Idra for taking Naniwa's code S spot" (which you're right to, Idra has no blame obviously, unless EG pressured GOM to ban Naniwa and place their star player in code S, but it's a little conspiratorial, and not Idra's responsability). But you should have told that directly and frankly (imo)
I nitpick a small part of your article, but as I said, I agree with most other things you wrote.
On December 16 2011 09:03 MrCon wrote: OP has some good points (about Naniwa) and terrible points (about Idra). Saying that Idra had his code S spot "for months" for instance. I know GOM gave you a very nice gift by giving Idra a code S spot without previous notice, so you feel you have to lie about it to make them look good, but the fact that Idra was in the up and downs and that Naniwa was in code S is well documented (including by Idra himself who said it in a show. In fact he said he first thought he was in code A, and was happily surprised to be placed in the und and have a chance to qualify directly for code S).
In this story, Naniwa thought he was in code S, Idra thought he was in the und, the whole world and esports covering sites also thought that, but it seems neither you nor GOM, who knew it was false "for months", decided to correct them. Which is pretty surprising, as they already started to sell 2012 tickets, and I guess Idra in code S would have been a pretty good announcement toi make for GOM or EG.
Please don't take that as "defending naniwa". What he did was wrong, but that doesn't excuse all the wrongs that followed, including some disinformation contained in the OP. It seems you wanted to basically say "Don't hate Idra for taking Naniwa's code S spot" (which you're right to, Idra has no blame obviously, unless EG pressured GOM to ban Naniwa and place their star player in code S, but it's a little conspiratorial, and not Idra's responsability). But you should have told that directly and frankly (imo)
I nitpick a small part of your article, but as I said, I agree with most other things you wrote.
I think technically Sen replaced Naniwa's spot, not IdrA. If Idra had known for "months" (even though Alex says "weeks") then it should have been Naniwa and IdrA both getting the spot and Nani later dropping out and opening up a spot for someone else.
Your right that Gom shouldnt have waited to announce IdrAs code S spot, cause it would have done wonders for their ticket sales. Which means its no unreasonable to expect that this was a relatively recent progression.
[LOL you don't get it at all do you? If someone cared about the game and competition, they would compete to the best of their ability regardless of monetary or fame incentives from the business side of esports. If you're basically doing it for the money and fame, then you're not much of a "sportsman."
I think you are wrong. If you only cared about money and fame then you would think about the consequences and your future career more carefully in terms of money lost if you get punished and bad publicity etc. Naniwa, on the contrary, invests all that he is and all his emotions in his competetive games and when its over and he has lost ( 0 - 3) he is completely drained. You may think that fake, half hearted, sloppy games, where both players morale is rock bottom, are good for esports. I disagree
I disagree completely. As a competitor and a sportsman, he should be giving effort regardless of whether or not he gets good or bad publicity, or is rewarded financially. You may think that probe rushing when there's no more money or fame on the line is good for esports but I disagree.
You know what doesn't happen in professional sports? When an incident occurs, and after all parties involved have made public statements/apologies, a figure head from another team who has absolutely nothing to do with it, writes a several page essay detailing his or her own thoughts on the matter.
Thank god you posted this writeup as I was preparing to write the exact same thing with the exact same examples. This is a professional league - and the pro players have a job. If you go to work and refuse to work, you get fired. Naniwa is payed, has paying customers, and refused to do his job. There is a huge difference between withdrawing from a tournament and intentionally tanking - it's the difference between going home early and just standing around, yelling at customers.
[LOL you don't get it at all do you? If someone cared about the game and competition, they would compete to the best of their ability regardless of monetary or fame incentives from the business side of esports. If you're basically doing it for the money and fame, then you're not much of a "sportsman."
I think you are wrong. If you only cared about money and fame then you would think about the consequences and your future career more carefully in terms of money lost if you get punished and bad publicity etc. Naniwa, on the contrary, invests all that he is and all his emotions in his competetive games and when its over and he has lost ( 0 - 3) he is completely drained. You may think that fake, half hearted, sloppy games, where both players morale is rock bottom, are good for esports. I disagree
I disagree completely. As a competitor and a sportsman, he should be giving effort regardless of whether or not he gets good or bad publicity, or is rewarded financially. You may think that probe rushing when there's no more money or fame on the line is good for esports but I disagree.
To further expand on your point, hes only hurting his own brand by probe rushing. If he wants to be the best there ever was, hes going to need help - from his fans, his team, and his fellow peers. Huk always talks about how hes happy that he can just focus on gaming and not cooking or chores but this is only possible because he has a dedicated team behind his back. If Naniwa wants to be the best possible gamer hes going to need help and support (that hes currently getting.) If he continues to shit on them, eventually it'll lead to his own demise.
Thankfully naniwa has seemingly learned from this, and more power to him, because he'll be better from this. As fans of naniwa I think we should support him and encourage him to learn and become a better gamer and a better person. The true anti-fans are the ones that are still excusing his behavior because they aren't doing naniwa any favors.
I have the strong opinion, that actually putting up a show just for the sake of having a match to show of would have been the worst thing naniwa could have done. I feel that especially in a grude match its important for the viewers to know, that both player WANT to win the match. If players are denied the oppertunety to forfit, there from now on forth every other match loses a littel of its meaning to me as a viewer, because i cannot know whether the player actually wants to win that game or not. I dont and dont want to expect from players to '"want" to win always.
Edit: I'm no Naniwa fan. In fact i dislike him, but the honesty of his proberush action made me reconsider and have a littel respect for him.
On December 16 2011 09:03 MrCon wrote: OP has some good points (about Naniwa) and terrible points (about Idra). Saying that Idra had his code S spot "for months" for instance. I know GOM gave you a very nice gift by giving Idra a code S spot without previous notice, so you feel you have to lie about it to make them look good, but the fact that Idra was in the up and downs and that Naniwa was in code S is well documented (including by Idra himself who said it in a show. In fact he said he first thought he was in code A, and was happily surprised to be placed in the und and have a chance to qualify directly for code S).
In this story, Naniwa thought he was in code S, Idra thought he was in the und, the whole world and esports covering sites also thought that, but it seems neither you nor GOM, who knew it was false "for months", decided to correct them. Which is pretty surprising, as they already started to sell 2012 tickets, and I guess Idra in code S would have been a pretty good announcement toi make for GOM or EG.
Please don't take that as "defending naniwa". What he did was wrong, but that doesn't excuse all the wrongs that followed, including some disinformation contained in the OP. It seems you wanted to basically say "Don't hate Idra for taking Naniwa's code S spot" (which you're right to, Idra has no blame obviously, unless EG pressured GOM to ban Naniwa and place their star player in code S, but it's a little conspiratorial, and not Idra's responsability). But you should have told that directly and frankly (imo)
I nitpick a small part of your article, but as I said, I agree with most other things you wrote.
I think technically Sen replaced Naniwa's spot, not IdrA. If Idra had known for "months" (even though Alex says "weeks") then it should have been Naniwa and IdrA both getting the spot and Nani later dropping out and opening up a spot for someone else.
Your right that Gom shouldnt have waited to announce IdrAs code S spot, cause it would have done wonders for their ticket sales. Which means its no unreasonable to expect that this was a relatively recent progression.
On December 16 2011 09:29 Desirous wrote: You know what doesn't happen in professional sports? When an incident occurs, and after all parties involved have made public statements/apologies, a figure head from another team who has absolutely nothing to do with it, writes a several page essay detailing his or her own thoughts on the matter.
On December 16 2011 09:35 Nahema wrote: I have the strong opinion, that actually putting up a show just for the sake of having a match to show of would have been the worst thing naniwa could have done. I feel that especially in a grude match its important for the viewers to know, that both player WANT to win the match. If players are denied the oppertunety to forfit, there from now on forth every other match loses a littel of its meaning to me as a viewer, because i cannot know whether the player actually wants to win that game or not. I dont and dont want to expect from players to '"want" to win always.
Edit: I'm no Naniwa fan. In fact i dislike him, but the honesty of his proberush action made me reconsider and have a littel respect for him.
Or he could actually you know, go into the game and play relatively standard, micro and macro his behind off to the best of his abilities and let the chips fall where they may. Barring that, I see no difference in probe rush, half baked proxy cheese, or anything else of the sort. Heck even if he tried to micro his probes to win the worker rush, that would've been awesome. But as for myself, I feel that if he really wanted to make a statement or anything, he should have just not gotten into the booth. Probe rushing is no more being honest than a half assed 4 gate. If he doesn't care about winning against one of the greatest zergs in the game, one that he has a bit of history with, then what does he care about?
On December 16 2011 06:22 blinken wrote: This is essentially a rehash of all the intelligent posts on this subject from yesterday, hardly a revelation.
Exactly. It contributes nothing, merely perpetuates the controversy. Adding analogies to professional sports doesn't change anything. Then you get guys like this:
On December 16 2011 07:40 AsnSensation wrote: Great Writeup ! I completely agree maybe if the butthurt fanboys take their time and read ths they change their opinion on the whole matter.
--who think that it not only brings a new perspective to the matter, but that it's such a convincing argument that Naniwa fans are going to change their minds. I'm getting the feeling certain people, including AsnSensation here, didn't actually read the OP. They're just blindly congratulating EGalex for rewording what has already been said.
Such arrogance calling it a "different perspective"...
I completely agree. In fact, when i found this controversy, the first thing i thought of was the NFL where bad teams play really hard throughout the year knowing that they aren't going to make it to the playoffs.
On December 16 2011 09:35 Nahema wrote: I have the strong opinion, that actually putting up a show just for the sake of having a match to show of would have been the worst thing naniwa could have done. I feel that especially in a grude match its important for the viewers to know, that both player WANT to win the match. If players are denied the oppertunety to forfit, there from now on forth every other match loses a littel of its meaning to me as a viewer, because i cannot know whether the player actually wants to win that game or not. I dont and dont want to expect from players to '"want" to win always.
Edit: I'm no Naniwa fan. In fact i dislike him, but the honesty of his proberush action made me reconsider and have a littel respect for him.
Why the hell would a professional not want to ALWAYS win. I find it ironic Naniwa says he's ultra competitive yet he doesnt even attempt to compete against a world class player like Nestea. You would think just the prestige of competing and possibly beating Nestea and entertaining fans would be enough. This just shows how selfish and self centered Naniwa is. Does not care about fulfilling his obligations to the tournament and the fans. Saying that Naniwa only cares about winning tournaments is not an excuse. Jordan was the best basketball player ever and he was egotistical, hyper competitve, and an angry man. Didnt stop him from playing in meaningless All Star games and ball out. Nor did it stop him from competing in even more pointless Slam Dunk contests purely for the enjoyment of fans. Naniwa was man enough to come out and apologize, now the fanboys need to stop blaming GOM and stop making lame excuses because its pretty pathetic.
Now I hope these threads can die down and that the organizations, managers, tournaments and players can all come to an agreement and no longer throw games or allow systems to have meaningless games.
On December 16 2011 09:35 Nahema wrote: I have the strong opinion, that actually putting up a show just for the sake of having a match to show of would have been the worst thing naniwa could have done. I feel that especially in a grude match its important for the viewers to know, that both player WANT to win the match. If players are denied the oppertunety to forfit, there from now on forth every other match loses a littel of its meaning to me as a viewer, because i cannot know whether the player actually wants to win that game or not. I dont and dont want to expect from players to '"want" to win always.
Edit: I'm no Naniwa fan. In fact i dislike him, but the honesty of his proberush action made me reconsider and have a littel respect for him.
Why the hell would a professional not want to ALWAYS win. I find it ironic Naniwa says he's ultra competitive yet he doesnt even attempt to compete against a world class player like Nestea. You would think just the prestige of competing and possibly beating Nestea and entertaining fans would be enough. This just shows how selfish and self centered Naniwa is. Does not care about fulfilling his obligations to the tournament and the fans. Saying that Naniwa only cares about winning tournaments is not an excuse. Jordan was the best basketball player ever and he was egotistical, hyper competitve, and an angry man. Didnt stop him from playing in meaningless All Star games and ball out. Nor did it stop him from competing in even more pointless Slam Dunk contests purely for the enjoyment of fans. Naniwa was man enough to come out and apologize, now the fanboys need to stop blaming GOM and stop making lame excuses because its pretty pathetic.
I think the difference is that jordan gets paid for every piece of shit job he had to do. Did nani get paid for this? if he didn't then I understand nani's point even more. Sorry but money drives the passion a lot more than you'd think.
On December 16 2011 09:35 Nahema wrote: I have the strong opinion, that actually putting up a show just for the sake of having a match to show of would have been the worst thing naniwa could have done. I feel that especially in a grude match its important for the viewers to know, that both player WANT to win the match. If players are denied the oppertunety to forfit, there from now on forth every other match loses a littel of its meaning to me as a viewer, because i cannot know whether the player actually wants to win that game or not. I dont and dont want to expect from players to '"want" to win always.
Edit: I'm no Naniwa fan. In fact i dislike him, but the honesty of his proberush action made me reconsider and have a littel respect for him.
Why the hell would a professional not want to ALWAYS win. I find it ironic Naniwa says he's ultra competitive yet he doesnt even attempt to compete against a world class player like Nestea. You would think just the prestige of competing and possibly beating Nestea and entertaining fans would be enough. This just shows how selfish and self centered Naniwa is. Does not care about fulfilling his obligations to the tournament and the fans. Saying that Naniwa only cares about winning tournaments is not an excuse. Jordan was the best basketball player ever and he was egotistical, hyper competitve, and an angry man. Didnt stop him from playing in meaningless All Star games and ball out. Nor did it stop him from competing in even more pointless Slam Dunk contests purely for the enjoyment of fans. Naniwa was man enough to come out and apologize, now the fanboys need to stop blaming GOM and stop making lame excuses because its pretty pathetic.
I think the difference is that jordan gets paid for every piece of shit job he had to do. Did nani get paid for this? if he didn't then I understand nani's point even more. Sorry but money drives the passion a lot more than you'd think.
Yes he does. He gets paid by Quantic to go out and represent their team with performance and results.
edit: have to add
That's one of the reasons why I have a problem with the hands off probe rush. It's basically saying, I don't want to lose my sponsors or get fired from my team for refusing to play but I don't care enough to actually play once I get into the booth. It's just as much a cop out as any half assed rush or cheese that everyone says is bad because it's dishonest or whatever. A probe rush isn't any more honest. If he wants to make a point, either play it out and complain to GOM or don't go play. Don't get into the booth and figuratively point the finger at GOM because you're frustrated about being in a bad situation.
On December 16 2011 06:22 blinken wrote: This is essentially a rehash of all the intelligent posts on this subject from yesterday, hardly a revelation.
Exactly. It contributes nothing, merely perpetuates the controversy. Adding analogies to professional sports doesn't change anything. Then you get guys like this:
On December 16 2011 07:40 AsnSensation wrote: Great Writeup ! I completely agree maybe if the butthurt fanboys take their time and read ths they change their opinion on the whole matter.
--who think that it not only brings a new perspective to the matter, but that it's such a convincing argument that Naniwa fans are going to change their minds. I'm getting the feeling certain people, including AsnSensation here, didn't actually read the OP. They're just blindly congratulating EGalex for rewording what has already been said.
Such arrogance calling it a "different perspective"...
Just because it's EGalex doesn't mean you have to demean his post.
On that topic, personally I agree with those that say they liked this move because at least he was honest about it. Being taken for an idiot thinking he was giving it his best is not something I like either.
People these days expect everything to be given to them and always want everything to be politically correct, or at least seeming like it was "proper".
And then before all this drama, I simply did not give a fuck. He was broken after the close losses, didn't feel like playing the game, probe rushed, ended it quickly, some people were angry, I thought it was funny and I didn't really see the difference between this and Idra getting angry at the game and leaving (there is, but one just stays in the game longer).
Anyway, in my opinion, much ado about nothing, and people expect so much from everything.
On December 16 2011 06:22 blinken wrote: This is essentially a rehash of all the intelligent posts on this subject from yesterday, hardly a revelation.
Exactly. It contributes nothing, merely perpetuates the controversy. Adding analogies to professional sports doesn't change anything. Then you get guys like this:
On December 16 2011 07:40 AsnSensation wrote: Great Writeup ! I completely agree maybe if the butthurt fanboys take their time and read ths they change their opinion on the whole matter.
--who think that it not only brings a new perspective to the matter, but that it's such a convincing argument that Naniwa fans are going to change their minds. I'm getting the feeling certain people, including AsnSensation here, didn't actually read the OP. They're just blindly congratulating EGalex for rewording what has already been said.
Such arrogance calling it a "different perspective"...
Just because it's EGalex doesn't mean you have to demean his post.
On that topic, personally I agree with those that say they liked this move because at least he was honest about it. Being taken for an idiot thinking he was giving it his best is not something I like either.
People these days expect everything to be given to them and always want everything to be politically correct, or at least seeming like it was "proper".
And then before all this drama, I simply did not give a fuck. He was broken after the close losses, didn't feel like playing the game, probe rushed, ended it quickly, some people were angry, I thought it was funny and I didn't really see the difference between this and Idra getting angry at the game and leaving (there is, but one just stays in the game longer).
Anyway, in my opinion, much ado about nothing, and people expect so much from everything.
It's not honest. If you don't want to play, forfeit and refuse to play. If you get in the booth, conduct yourself as a professional and suck it up and play. Not half assed either. No one is asking him to pull out all the stops and show off his latest anti-nestea build either.
On December 15 2011 23:39 HyperLethality wrote: I don't know if you're ever going to see this Alex, but I just want to let you know that I have new-found respect for you. This is an absolutely necessary write-up for everyone within the e-Sports community. To be frank, I've been very irritated by the amount of people who have spoken of boycotting Gom and attempting to justify NaNiwa's actions. I feel that once you reach a certain level of maturity, you must realize that just because the rules don't say not to do it, doesn't mean it's okay to do it. Anyway, I want to keep this short, so all I will say is that I absolutely agree with everything you've said within this write-up. And also hats off to you for doing this, despite not being directly involved in any way. Community figures stepping up is an admirable and necessary step for e-Sports. Thank you.
Why? because they took naniwa's code S spot with rules that barely even apply? because they denie awarding him a code S spot even tho MLG confirmed it on over 10 occasions? People are all jumping on the naniwa thing, but there are more things than the naniwa thing that made people boycot Gom. I suggest you educate yourself with peoples thoughts and don't write thing that you don't have a clue of.
People are boycotting Gom because of their punishment to NaNiWa, simple as that. Before anything else was clarified, as soon as the threads about NaNiWa's punishment, people were already saying they want to boycott Gom. I am very knowledgeable about this situation mind you, I've been following it very closely. I suggest you check yourself.
Honestly, I am shocked by the amount of people who are trying to "boycott" Gom, and to be even more frank, I find it ridiculously absurd and stupid of what people are saying to defend NaNiwa. First of all, if you don't want to watch the GSL anymore because of this, boohoo, get out then. Nobody cares, and if you condone NaNiwa's behavior then Gom doesn't need people like you anyway. Second of all, "NaNiwa didn't break any rules" is the most childish argument you could throw at this situation. When you become an "adult" and "mature", you start realizing that your behavior shouldn't be guided by "rules". There's absolutely no excuse for NaNiwa's disrespect. It's not just what he did, but how he did it, understanding the weight of the match even. You guys really want to defend a guy who would do that to his fans? Have some self-respect, damn.
There's a level of respect that you have to show, when you enter someone else's turf. Also, whether or not you're a NesTea fan, he is one of the best players in the world, and when you face someone of that caliber, you bring your best as an acknowledgement of their skill. This was disrespectful. AND EVEN THOUGH, I don't entirely agree that a punishment this severe is necessary, if Gom sees FIT, then so be it. They have every right. NaNiwa shouldn't be babied for any reason whatsoever, and let this be an example and set a standard for all players and a level of professionalism.
TL;DR: NaNiwa represented the foreign community and messed up embarrassingly on someone else's turf, they have every right to punish him. It's not even what he did, but how he did it.
P.S And for many of you who are defending and crying for NaNiwa, at least hide your country or something for crying out loud.
Here is why all analogies with professional sports are bad:
Sports teams make money directly from ticket sales so they have direct incentive to play their games. The prize money for winning the regular season is either miniscule or non-existent, so essentially they are rewarded based of entertainment rather than results.
Sc2 players make money based on how well they perform in a tournament, i.e. prize money. If there is no prize money to be won, they have no direct incentive to play the game. It can even be detrimental to their earnings if they play, as it may reveal their play-style or their strategies for upcoming tournaments.
On December 16 2011 10:47 VoirDire wrote: Here is why all analogies with professional sports are bad:
Sports teams make money directly from ticket sales so they have direct incentive to play their games. The prize money for winning the regular season is either miniscule or non-existent, so essentially they are rewarded based of entertainment rather than results.
Sc2 players make money based on how well they perform in a tournament, i.e. prize money. If there is no prize money to be won, they have no direct incentive to play the game. It can even be detrimental to their earnings if they play, as it may reveal their play-style or their strategies for upcoming tournaments.
The majority of name foreign SC2 pros are salaried just like their sports counterparts. Maybe not compensated to the same extent but salaried all the same.
On December 16 2011 10:47 VoirDire wrote: Here is why all analogies with professional sports are bad:
Sports teams make money directly from ticket sales so they have direct incentive to play their games. The prize money for winning the regular season is either miniscule or non-existent, so essentially they are rewarded based of entertainment rather than results.
Sc2 players make money based on how well they perform in a tournament, i.e. prize money. If there is no prize money to be won, they have no direct incentive to play the game. It can even be detrimental to their earnings if they play, as it may reveal their play-style or their strategies for upcoming tournaments.
The majority of name foreign SC2 pros are salaried just like their sports counterparts. Maybe not compensated to the same extent but salaried all the same.
Teams typically doesn't receive salaries. Teams give their players salaries, but that's beside the point.
On December 16 2011 10:47 VoirDire wrote: Here is why all analogies with professional sports are bad:
Sports teams make money directly from ticket sales so they have direct incentive to play their games. The prize money for winning the regular season is either miniscule or non-existent, so essentially they are rewarded based of entertainment rather than results.
Sc2 players make money based on how well they perform in a tournament, i.e. prize money. If there is no prize money to be won, they have no direct incentive to play the game. It can even be detrimental to their earnings if they play, as it may reveal their play-style or their strategies for upcoming tournaments.
The majority of name foreign SC2 pros are salaried just like their sports counterparts. Maybe not compensated to the same extent but salaried all the same.
Teams typically doesn't receive salaries. Teams give their players salaries, but that's beside the point.
We're talking about Naniwa the player, not Quantic the team. The players earn a salary to represent their team at tournies to not only win but to put on a good show and more importantly, to not damage the name of their team and sponsors.
On December 16 2011 10:47 VoirDire wrote: Here is why all analogies with professional sports are bad:
Sports teams make money directly from ticket sales so they have direct incentive to play their games. The prize money for winning the regular season is either miniscule or non-existent, so essentially they are rewarded based of entertainment rather than results.
Sc2 players make money based on how well they perform in a tournament, i.e. prize money. If there is no prize money to be won, they have no direct incentive to play the game. It can even be detrimental to their earnings if they play, as it may reveal their play-style or their strategies for upcoming tournaments.
The majority of name foreign SC2 pros are salaried just like their sports counterparts. Maybe not compensated to the same extent but salaried all the same.
Teams typically doesn't receive salaries. Teams give their players salaries, but that's beside the point.
We're talking about Naniwa the player, not Quantic the team. The players earn a salary to represent their team at tournies to not only win but to put on a good show and more importantly, to not damage the name of their team and sponsors.
Yes. That was my original point.
Sports teams earn their money by providing entertainment to a ticket buying audience. They employ players to provide that entertainment. The players don't receive any prize money and thus they have no direct incentive to effect the results of the game.
Starcraft 2 players also receive salaries from teams/sponsors, essentially to be entertaining. But that salary is separate from their tournament income which is only affected by results.
On December 16 2011 06:22 blinken wrote: This is essentially a rehash of all the intelligent posts on this subject from yesterday, hardly a revelation.
Exactly. It contributes nothing, merely perpetuates the controversy. Adding analogies to professional sports doesn't change anything. Then you get guys like this:
On December 16 2011 07:40 AsnSensation wrote: Great Writeup ! I completely agree maybe if the butthurt fanboys take their time and read ths they change their opinion on the whole matter.
--who think that it not only brings a new perspective to the matter, but that it's such a convincing argument that Naniwa fans are going to change their minds. I'm getting the feeling certain people, including AsnSensation here, didn't actually read the OP. They're just blindly congratulating EGalex for rewording what has already been said.
Such arrogance calling it a "different perspective"...
Just because it's EGalex doesn't mean you have to demean his post.
On that topic, personally I agree with those that say they liked this move because at least he was honest about it. Being taken for an idiot thinking he was giving it his best is not something I like either.
People these days expect everything to be given to them and always want everything to be politically correct, or at least seeming like it was "proper".
And then before all this drama, I simply did not give a fuck. He was broken after the close losses, didn't feel like playing the game, probe rushed, ended it quickly, some people were angry, I thought it was funny and I didn't really see the difference between this and Idra getting angry at the game and leaving (there is, but one just stays in the game longer).
Anyway, in my opinion, much ado about nothing, and people expect so much from everything.
As a Huk fan (see my profile), I love EG and I'm fine with EGalex. All I was saying is that he shouldn't have written this. It's unnecessary as it doesn't bring anything new to the table and I think it's arrogant to title the post as if it does.
On December 16 2011 10:47 VoirDire wrote: Here is why all analogies with professional sports are bad:
Sports teams make money directly from ticket sales so they have direct incentive to play their games. The prize money for winning the regular season is either miniscule or non-existent, so essentially they are rewarded based of entertainment rather than results.
Sc2 players make money based on how well they perform in a tournament, i.e. prize money. If there is no prize money to be won, they have no direct incentive to play the game. It can even be detrimental to their earnings if they play, as it may reveal their play-style or their strategies for upcoming tournaments.
The majority of name foreign SC2 pros are salaried just like their sports counterparts. Maybe not compensated to the same extent but salaried all the same.
Teams typically doesn't receive salaries. Teams give their players salaries, but that's beside the point.
We're talking about Naniwa the player, not Quantic the team. The players earn a salary to represent their team at tournies to not only win but to put on a good show and more importantly, to not damage the name of their team and sponsors.
Yes. That was my original point.
Sports teams earn their money by providing entertainment to a ticket buying audience. They employ players to provide that entertainment. The players don't receive any prize money and thus they have no direct incentive to effect the results of the game.
Starcraft 2 players also receive salaries from teams/sponsors, essentially to be entertaining. But that salary is separate from their tournament income which is only affected by results.
And my point is that hes being paid to represent and to do it well. Which is basically what happens with pro players.
I have seen alot of "real" sports comparisons in the Nainwa situation. Lots of sports leagues have meaningless regular season games but can you compare that with SC2, I would say no due to the fact that the formats of most SC2 tournaments are so short and intense that they compare better to playoffs in the sports world. Naniwa had heartbreaking losses to be out of the tournament and was required to within the hour play a game of no importance, I have a hard time seeing professional sports players playing allstar games whitin the hour of a loss in a game 7 of the playoffs. I know in sports physical exaustion prevents this but this is a emotional state I think is more comparable.
This post does not hold any judgement for any part of the situation, just highlighting my opinion to not having meaniless games.
Alex, with all due respect, you're wrong. No matter how many damn pretty words you use, your blog simply reeks of a "company like GOM" point of view. You see only profit in there, which trying to cover your thoughts with something else on the surface.
Players are players. They are individual people. They _HAVE_ the right to screw up. ESPECIALLY when we talk about such a young entity as esports. You just cannot treat players of SC2, Q3, CS or whatever else as other sports athletes. You have to let some things go, not entirely of course, while working with them, setting a GOOD example to the others.
What GOM did was unacceptable...
...because companies are companies. They are professionals. They DON'T HAVE the right to screw up, which they exactly did, by lying, inventing vague reasons, changing statements. I don't see why in the world they have to have the right to rule esports with an iron hand, and that's what GOM is trying to tell everyone with their action.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: For those of you who, after reading this, agree that NaNi's actions were unacceptable, but still blame GOM for utilizing a format which allows for inconsequential matches, I would ask you to consider holding players to higher standards of professionalism; and to also consider the fact that it's not GOM's responsibility to cater their format solely to suit players. GOM's job (as is the case with any professional sports league) is to provide a quality product to its viewers, while providing its competitors with fair, reasonable playing conditions, and the Blizzard Cup's format balanced these factors acceptably. Additionally, I would also point out the fact that, as illustrated above, every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist.
"What Naniwa did was wrong, but you should blame GOM's format instead of him!" is a bad position, granted. It's also a strawman. It is possible to both hold Naniwa to a standard of professionalism and still believe the Blizzard Cup had a poor format. "What Naniwa did was wrong. He shouldn't have done it. he deserves to be punished for it. Nonetheless, if this tournament had a better format, this wouldn't have happened. I wish Blizzard Cup had a better format."
The rest of the paragraph is, in essence, an almost derisive dismissal of the idea that the Blizzard Cup would benefit from looking into a different format that wouldn't facilitate the development of these sorts of problems. No, Naniwa's actions aren't GOM's fault, but saying "Stop complaining about the format, it doesn't need to be any better" just reeks of business-oriented bias.
Irrespective of what Naniwa did, the quality of the format of the Blizzard Cup is a legitimate grievance. Not an enormously important one, but not a petty or ridiculous one either. Even in situations where players don't make stupid decisions, meaningless games will typically be of lower quality than games that matter because players are less motivated and less focused, and nothing is going to change that. Yes, the end result may be "acceptably balanced," as far as the producers are concerned, in terms of quality, but why shouldn't the tournament organizer take pride in their product and strive to delver the best content possible? Producing better games isn't catering only to the players, it's better for everybody. And telling viewers to stop offering constructive criticism on how to improve a product is just plain silly.
Every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. This doesn't make meaningless games cease to be a negative thing, nor is it at all a reason for eSports to automatically copy that behavior. Admittedly, these formats aren't really bad. Indeed, the NASL makes a pretty solid product, in my opinion, using a form of the league-playoff structure. However, that's no reason not to try to do something that's better suited for Starcraft, or maybe just better period. In particular, most SCII competitions resolve over days instead of months, in large part because of travel costs. (Travel costs also generate one of the weaknesses of the NASL - namely, that most of its games must be played online). This compressed timeline exacerbates some of the problems that cause players to half-ass meaningless pool games - tiredness and frustration/disappointment at their (more recent) losses. While a minor consideration, it's another incentive to try to set up your tournament to provide the audience with games that are important to the people playing them. Look at MLG, for example, as an idea of how to make every pool game count. No, it's not a perfect format, but it's pretty good, and, perhaps most importantly, MLG is continually working to improve it, and deliver the best Starcraft tournament they can.
To top it off, you end with a ludicrous and insulting parallel. Yes, by strawman logic, disliking meaningless pool games and the way they hurt tournaments means All-star games shouldn't exist. The rest of the world, on the other hand, can understand that there's a huge difference between
a) A player participating in an all-star game that they've been expecting to play in, knowing exactly what purpose the game is meant to serve and what's at stake,
and
b) a player who's burnt out after three very disappointing losses in an actual tournament over a span of hours and can't bring himself to care about a game that doesn't affect anything.
The way the players will approach and play the games, and what fans will expect of these events are nothing alike. Trying to create a unique sporting experience in a fun, less serious environment isn't the same thing as trying to improve the quality of the games being generated in a completely competitive environment, and you're not helping productive discussion of the issues involved here by pretending it is.
I posted this comment on a different thread a couple days ago. It's kind of a TLDR of the OP.
"This is how I see it: 1. No monetary value existed at that point, that was completely acceptable. 2. This is the one of the biggest tournaments of the year with only a select few players invited. He shamed the competition of the sport and threw away a chance to show his skill when many other players would have loved to be in his position. Not acceptable. 3. The viewers deserved more. Some people actually payed to watch these games in high quality. Giving up at any point is unacceptable. 4. GOMTV deserved more. Bad games will result in less viewers. Less viewers means less money for the company. The only reason the prize pool exists is because of the quality of the show. The only reason that monetary value is there is because viewers enjoy watching players actually take games seriously. This is unacceptable.
Strictly looking at the business side from Naniwa's perspective he acted completely acceptable. Yet...
The money given at the end of the tournament doesn't just appear out of no where, it comes from high quality games. Yes I know, there was no way he could have made it through, but AT LEAST give us a show of something. Try a wonky strategy. Give a little effort. Give back to the community that provides you to make a living off of playing a video game."
Naniwa's decision was pretty poor. He didn't know how many eyes he had on him. People are too concerned with a reason for his actions that are extremely obvious. If you have ever competed in competitions then you understand the drive to win and succeed, and when you lack that drive, you simply can't compete. If you can't win, you can't compete. I support Naniwa's decision personally, but for the "greater good" as so many people talk about, I wish he had played his beaten heart out to win a game that didn't matter to him. I don't think this issue is subject to discussion of format or anything else. As a fan of watching Starcraft 2 I'm a bit dissapointed, but I don't for a second think I would have behaved much differently. Without a winning scenario there's no way to win. If you can't win, why are you playing?
TL;DR - What Naniwa did was not only acceptable, it was the only proper thing to do. It would have been far worse for him to play that game out.
The following paragraphs will detail this argument.
First, it's very difficult to demand that someone play hard and win when he isn't motivated to do so. What minimum threshold of effort would GomTV and the viewing public have found acceptable? A 4-gate? What if he cut Probes at 18? 17? 16? 15? At what point is GomTV willing to say "We aren't OK with this performance" and punish him? Is it OK if Naniwa gives 80% effort? 60%? 40%? It's difficult to even measure his effort, let alone pick an acceptable level. (And far more upsetting than watching a game in which Naniwa wasn't trying his hardest would be to watch a game in which I know Naniwa, broken and deflated, is still trying only because he knows if he doesn't try hard enough GomTV will punish him. That's almost sinister.)
I understand why regular season games (in professional sports) are played after a team is eliminated from contention, but I would never personally watch a game between two teams with nothing at stake. I don't think I'd be getting a quality product, and I don't see why the two teams / players / etc. should have to do it if they don't want to. (What's worse is that teams are often incentivized to lose in professional sports, due to gaining better draft picks.) Nor would I watch an All-Star game. It's a farce, and shows the fans nothing of any substance. All-Star games exist to make money for the sports organization, not for the fans to enjoy something worthwhile. People may disagree on whether it's enjoyable to watch an All-Star game, but the fact remains that an All-Star game is meant as an exhibition. No one tries hard in the slightest, and apparently that's A-OK. Blizzard Cup is not an exhibition. If you're eliminated, why should you have to keep playing?
Likewise, sometimes I watch monobattles or Funday Monday, but I go into that knowing perfectly well that it's not a professional game. It's when games that shouldn't count as professional games masquerade as professional ones that my sensibilities are bothered.
For argument's sake, let's say that Naniwa (who gave 0% effort) could have given, in his shattered mental state, at best 70% of his ordinary effort. And let's say that Nestea was capable of giving 90%. People will see that Naniwa isn't playing his best, but they will say "Oh maybe Naniwa isn't that good anymore" rather than "Naniwa must be bothered by today's events." They will judge the quality of his game vs. Nestea as if he were playing his best. Not everyone will, but some people will. And that isn't fair. This isn't some fun sc2 show match. A loss would be humiliating for Naniwa, and feeling like he hadn't been able to give it his best...that would drive any self-respecting player to insanity. Much better to say "I don't feel like I can offer a good game right now" and just concede the match. Rushing all your probes...I don't know if that's the best way to do it, but I don't think "not walking into the booth at all" was an option.
Additionally, GSL's punishment and subsequent backtracking / hedging / "the rules were different before this happened; we didn't change the rules" (this is not true, according to MLG's official statement) is very sketchy.
The point here is that many people are criticizing Naniwa for letting down his fans and for letting down paying GomTV customers. I'm a paying GomTV customer, and I don't feel let down. It's unfortunate that Naniwa doesn't have the mental toughness to offer a great game after what happened, and maybe that means he isn't as "professional" a gamer as some others, but I don't really buy that argument. He was justifiably crushed and drained. I know I don't speak for everyone, but I think watching a longer, equally meaningless game where I know he isn't trying would be pointless. Watching a meaningless game where I know he IS trying but only because GomTV is making him is borderline outrageous.
On December 16 2011 10:47 VoirDire wrote: Here is why all analogies with professional sports are bad:
Sports teams make money directly from ticket sales so they have direct incentive to play their games. The prize money for winning the regular season is either miniscule or non-existent, so essentially they are rewarded based of entertainment rather than results.
Sc2 players make money based on how well they perform in a tournament, i.e. prize money. If there is no prize money to be won, they have no direct incentive to play the game. It can even be detrimental to their earnings if they play, as it may reveal their play-style or their strategies for upcoming tournaments.
The majority of name foreign SC2 pros are salaried just like their sports counterparts. Maybe not compensated to the same extent but salaried all the same.
Teams typically doesn't receive salaries. Teams give their players salaries, but that's beside the point.
We're talking about Naniwa the player, not Quantic the team. The players earn a salary to represent their team at tournies to not only win but to put on a good show and more importantly, to not damage the name of their team and sponsors.
Yes. That was my original point.
Sports teams earn their money by providing entertainment to a ticket buying audience. They employ players to provide that entertainment. The players don't receive any prize money and thus they have no direct incentive to effect the results of the game.
Starcraft 2 players also receive salaries from teams/sponsors, essentially to be entertaining. But that salary is separate from their tournament income which is only affected by results.
But... "ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED!?"
I mean, no one is talking bad about Quantic, their rep is not hurting. Regarding Nani's rep, I doubt less people will tune in next time he plays, on the contrary I suspect more will do so.
Quantic is getting a lot of publicity and I dont see anyone being negative towards them.
On December 16 2011 10:47 VoirDire wrote: Here is why all analogies with professional sports are bad:
Sports teams make money directly from ticket sales so they have direct incentive to play their games. The prize money for winning the regular season is either miniscule or non-existent, so essentially they are rewarded based of entertainment rather than results.
Sc2 players make money based on how well they perform in a tournament, i.e. prize money. If there is no prize money to be won, they have no direct incentive to play the game. It can even be detrimental to their earnings if they play, as it may reveal their play-style or their strategies for upcoming tournaments.
Here's several reasons why your argument doesn't apply:
In professional sports, players also make money based on how well they perform in tournaments. (It doesn't matter whether it's prize money or a bonus paid out by the team.)
Moreover, Naniwa does also make money from factors other than his performance, most importantly compensation received from Quantic.
(Note: Nestea had prepared specifically for that game, yet nobody claims he is not a serious progamer.)
Naniwa had (he says) prepared strategies specifically for that game. Revealing play-style or strategies was not a factor here, and Naniwa never claimed it was.
Finally, all the prize money they make depends on tournament organizers having a financial incentive to put up that prize money. Indirectly, every SC2 progamer lives off the fact that people watch Starcraft 2; ticket sales add to the money that tournament organizers can work with in addition to money received from sponsors.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
Well NaNiwa vs Nestea MATTERS for pro-gamers and many fans. NaNiwa also mentioned later that the match against wasn't meaningless as he previously thought. GomTV is doing their job by broadcasting the game that matters.
I don't want to drag this topic off on a tangent so I'll try to keep this short. This is the type of things where some people will think one way, and others will think another. To me the match doesn't effect the progression of the tournament, so no longer matters, for other people, any chance to watch Nestea vs Naniwa is important even if nothing but "honour" is on the line, so it does matter. Its just a situation the ideal tournament format will avoid, you want the players to be trying their best, not half assing it, like I said in my post, if this format is used again, the exact same situation will re-occur sooner or later, it is inevitable, the player won't do something as blatant as what Naniwa did, but it will be the same.
Doesn't matter no matter how you slice it. Might as well call it a friendly skrim.
On December 16 2011 12:41 TheBengalTigger wrote: TL;DR - What Naniwa did was not only acceptable, it was the only proper thing to do. It would have been far worse for him to play that game out.
I understand why regular season games (in professional sports) are played after a team is eliminated from contention, but I would never personally watch a game between two teams with nothing at stake. I don't think I'd be getting a quality product, and I don't see why the two teams / players / etc. should have to do it if they don't want to. (What's worse is that teams are often incentivized to lose in professional sports, due to gaining better draft picks.) Nor would I watch an All-Star game. It's a farce, and shows the fans nothing of any substance.
Clearly you are not the viewer GOM was trying to get for the Nestea vs Naniwa matchup then. But you can't deny that many such viewers exist, just like you can't deny that many people do watch All Star games and other games you find no interest in.
For argument's sake, let's say that Naniwa (who gave 0% effort) could have given, in his shattered mental state, at best 70% of his ordinary effort. And let's say that Nestea was capable of giving 90%. People will see that Naniwa isn't playing his best, but they will say "Oh maybe Naniwa isn't that good anymore" rather than "Naniwa must be bothered by today's events." They will judge the quality of his game vs. Nestea as if he were playing his best. Not everyone will, but some people will. And that isn't fair. This isn't some fun sc2 show match. A loss would be humiliating for Naniwa, and feeling like he hadn't been able to give it his best...that would drive any self-respecting player to insanity. Much better to say "I don't feel like I can offer a good game right now" and just concede the match. Rushing all your probes...I don't know if that's the best way to do it, but I don't think "not walking into the booth at all" was an option.
There is no meaningful way of measuring effort on a linear scale to do justice to a situation like this. Keep in mind that Nestea was also 0-3, and yet he gave an effort.
Your entire argument can be turned around: According to your logic, Nestea is bad for esports because he did not do the proper thing and throw the game; in fact, he even prepared specifically for this game despite being behind 0-3 and having no shot at the tournament title.
Either you don't believe that Nestea did something far worse than Naniwa or you're being hypocritical, as far as I can tell.
Naniwa and Nestea both can give an effort. Nobody in their right mind will pretend that that match would have been as important as it would be if they face each other in the finals, but unlike you, many people can still appreciate and enjoy the resulting game.
Also, you claim that feeling that you haven't given your best would drive any self-respecting player to insanity, but that's ridiculous: Other starcraft players have played games that don't directly decide their tournament standing many times before without losing their sanity.
I'm a paying GomTV customer, and I don't feel let down.
That's great, but clearly many customers feel otherwise, or there would have never been any issue at all! If you don't feel let down, that doesn't mean everyone who did feel let down is unreasonable. Professional sports has been around long enough to cut down on games you find "meaningless", the fact that they still exist in so many sports/tournaments shows that people do value those games.
Watching a meaningless game where I know he IS trying but only because GomTV is making him is borderline outrageous.
Nonsense. You know the situation ahead of time, you can always choose not to watch if it doesn't interest you. He knew he was expected to play four games at the very least in exchange for the compensation he received.
This is his job. He does many things "only because his team is making him", like wearing jerseys, acting in ways acceptable to his team (and their sponsors), and so on. He was not forced to participate in the tournament, he knew the tournament structure ahead of time, he was not cheated out of his prize money. Apparently he didn't know that he was expected to try more seriously, or maybe he knew and just wasn't able to decide more wisely -- there is nothing outrageous about any of that.
I actually do kind of agree to this blog... But I must say I understand Nani too, doing a random bad 4gate>loss, or a proberush>loss, is both bad for the viewers...
But this is partly about the "2)" part you wrote: I fail to see how this incident should keep Nani out of GSL, when someone like Idra gets in... Idra has on several occasions not played matches at all in big tournaments, which in my opinion is at least as bad as what Nani did. Gom did right to punish Nani, but they fail hard at having consistency among their actions, and having good explanations for what they do. If they want "professionals" in GSL, Nani and Idra are both poor choices.
Great post. Particularly the last couple paragraphs. I dont really believe that it was meaningless match anyways. What about Naniwa's product? Huge grudge match and rivalry and he forfeits it? He is not doing himself any favours.
On December 16 2011 11:47 Wiklober wrote: I have seen alot of "real" sports comparisons in the Nainwa situation. Lots of sports leagues have meaningless regular season games but can you compare that with SC2, I would say no due to the fact that the formats of most SC2 tournaments are so short and intense that they compare better to playoffs in the sports world. Naniwa had heartbreaking losses to be out of the tournament and was required to within the hour play a game of no importance, I have a hard time seeing professional sports players playing allstar games whitin the hour of a loss in a game 7 of the playoffs. I know in sports physical exaustion prevents this but this is a emotional state I think is more comparable.
This post does not hold any judgement for any part of the situation, just highlighting my opinion to not having meaniless games.
This is how i feel about the sport comparisons too. They're rubbish. But add on to that the fact that in professional sports a player is never alone. There is always someone there to support them. Naniwa didn't have this. Was anyone from the GOM house with him to act as a coach? He, a 21 year old kid, was left alone to make an error in judgement in a highly emotional state.
In real sports the coach subs you, or takes you from the field, or sends you home to wait to play next week. In real sports this shit just doesn't happen because they're able to take the decision out of the player's hands. GOM could have done this but chose to put their meaningless Bo1 ahead of the wants and needs of a young player.
And i'm not blaming Quantic or whoever for not being there to support Naniwa when he needed it the most (although i think Naniwa really needed a friend to help him out). My point is just that this isn't a real sport, yet. It's solo competitors doing what it is best for them. It feels more like watching mercenaries than watching a true professional scene. We've got a long way to go before a player in a foreign country can afford to have the support around him required to prevent these situations from happening when the organizers are too gutless/clueless/ignorant to take the initiative and prevent it themselves. Until such a time as this support is standard it is just wrong to lump the burdens of professionalism onto people not ready for it. You can't wave a magic wand and say this is professional when it's absolutely not.
The real sport comparisons get even dumber when you compare this to match throwing. In real sports matches are thrown when an entire team agrees to do it. It's a top to bottom agreement from board to managers to coaches to players, and to an extent fans will buy into it too because they know its the best decision for the team (give young players more experience, or tank so you get better draft picks, etc). All of this decision making was lumped into one 21 year old kid who wasn't in a sound state of mind.
That comparison isn't fair. I want people to take a step back and remember we're dealing with kids here. Not professionals. Not even adults. These human beings aren't perfect. If they were they would be robots. I don't pay to see robots. I pay to see people like me who are better at SC2 than i am. I pay to see personalities and emotions, people i can relate to and root for. In real sports these people have massive support structures surrounding them to help them through situations like this. Naniwa did not. Give the kid a break.
On December 16 2011 11:47 Wiklober wrote: I have seen alot of "real" sports comparisons in the Nainwa situation. Lots of sports leagues have meaningless regular season games but can you compare that with SC2, I would say no due to the fact that the formats of most SC2 tournaments are so short and intense that they compare better to playoffs in the sports world. Naniwa had heartbreaking losses to be out of the tournament and was required to within the hour play a game of no importance, I have a hard time seeing professional sports players playing allstar games whitin the hour of a loss in a game 7 of the playoffs. I know in sports physical exaustion prevents this but this is a emotional state I think is more comparable.
This post does not hold any judgement for any part of the situation, just highlighting my opinion to not having meaniless games.
This is how i feel about the sport comparisons too. They're rubbish. But add on to that the fact that in professional sports a player is never alone. There is always someone there to support them. Naniwa didn't have this. Was anyone from the GOM house with him to act as a coach? He, a 21 year old kid, was left alone to make an error in judgement in a highly emotional state.
In real sports the coach subs you, or takes you from the field, or sends you home to wait to play next week. In real sports this shit just doesn't happen because they're able to take the decision out of the player's hands. GOM could have done this but chose to put their meaningless Bo1 ahead of the wants and needs of a young player.
And i'm not blaming Quantic or whoever for not being there to support Naniwa when he needed it the most (although i think Naniwa really needed a friend to help him out). My point is just that this isn't a real sport, yet. It's solo competitors doing what it is best for them. It feels more like watching mercenaries than watching a true professional scene. We've got a long way to go before a player in a foreign country can afford to have the support around him required to prevent these situations from happening when the organizers are too gutless/clueless/ignorant to take the initiative and prevent it themselves. Until such a time as this support is standard it is just wrong to lump the burdens of professionalism onto people not ready for it. You can't wave a magic wand and say this is professional when it's absolutely not.
The real sport comparisons get even dumber when you compare this to match throwing. In real sports matches are thrown when an entire team agrees to do it. It's a top to bottom agreement from board to managers to coaches to players, and to an extent fans will buy into it too because they know its the best decision for the team (give young players more experience, or tank so you get better draft picks, etc). All of this decision making was lumped into one 21 year old kid who wasn't in a sound state of mind.
That comparison isn't fair. I want people to take a step back and remember we're dealing with kids here. Not professionals. Not even adults. These human beings aren't perfect. If they were they would be robots. I don't pay to see robots. I pay to see people like me who are better at SC2 than i am. I pay to see personalities and emotions, people i can relate to and root for. In real sports these people have massive support structures surrounding them to help them through situations like this. Naniwa did not. Give the kid a break.
I'm almost certain you never got around to my anecdote just like the rest. There are many valid examples.
Never alone? Try Tennis. Rarely does a coach talk to their player when they're on the court. Anyway, I'd like to see you try to dissect what I said earlier in this blog. There's a reason why no one wants to touch it with a four foot pole.
However, if this is truly to become eSports, then competition and the quality of the competition must be paramount over the entertainment aspect. Would we rather be the World Wrestling Entertainment or the UFC style of event? (Don't get me wrong, I liked the intros in a recent tournament which are straight out of the WWE handbook, with lights, music, and smoke.) Is our primary product to be entertainment (the games must be entertaining!) or competition (games must matter!)?
Your professional sports analogies are good, but not quite true. In professional team sports, ALL games matter; if not for the season, than for the franchise. Either by continuing to prove that it's worth the municipality given a stadium to the team, or by jockeying for the best possible draft choices, every game matters to the entire group.
A better comparison may be made by utilizing professional boxing - a sport in which it is a solo (non-team) endeavor (I apologize, but I care less at present in eSports history about the team attached to the player, than the player him/herself) generally broadcast as a pay per view event which sometimes has questionable matches and actions. (30 second first round knock-outs are accepted, if disliked, by customers and advertisers both; that's just the way it happens sometimes. But it's not the norm.) Naniwa did not put forth his best effort, but there is no incentive for him to do so - except for GOM's reaction. And that may set a poor precedent. It allows a precedent to be set that the entertainment value of the match is more important than the competitive value of a match. I would've enjoyed a good Nestea/Naniwa match - but with a flat pay structure at that level, and nothing else at stake, there was no overriding reason for either to put forward their best efforts. If for no other reason than not revealing a new play style or denying opponents an opportunity to have another replay to analyze. (Another scenario you might wish to add to your list - sometimes teams will play less optimally against one opponent to deny possible intelligence to a future opponent.)
And with regards to Greg/Idra - he doesn't play games in that position either that I have seen. Once he has placed towards the bottom of the pay list, he fails to play further even in events which have some distinction between the bottom payed results - this happened in Orlando and was commented on by other people at that event. (In his defense, he played a loooong streak of games beforehand.) He did it again in Providence. And anecdotal evidence suggests it's the norm.
Your arguments are very good, but I still don't think the true core of the issue has been reached by any party. Nor can I articulated it very well - but I hope that there is some move towards major events coordinating better, and teams and players doing a better job, in explicitly defining what is expected. (But never ban excessive celebrating. Murloc dance is great.)
Oh wow Alex, I'm so glad you made this blog post. That's exactly how I felt about this situation and I'm happy that you've made more people aware about this side of the issue.
On December 16 2011 01:23 StarStruck wrote: In some scenarios general managers and coaches are fined by the league if they cross certain boundaries. One of them being, speaking out about a player's work ethic that isn't on your team.
In some scenarios, yes... clearly not in this one though.
On December 16 2011 01:23 StarStruck wrote: Now let me address GOM. Let's say GOM was the actual team that you came out to see. You bought your ticket to the dance. You have the right to boo or cheer. Certain players show up for work (MMA, MVP, etc.) whereas others don't.
I like hockey, so I'll continue down that road. I'd say Johan showed up for the first fifty minutes of the game. He put up a valiant effort, but he fell apart in the last ten minutes as the game became lopsided. The effort and passion was there in the first fifty. People cheered, but as it became a blowout. The fans started to boo!
I think you get the picture. We have to look at the whole.
Once again, the team played their heart in the first fifty, but once the game didn't matter anymore. Shit hit the fan and stupid penalties were taken (Johan took a fighting major and a game misconduct). It's just one game. Have to wait till the next day!
That's how I picture it anyway.
You are comparing 4 separate SC2 games as if they're a single hockey game. They are not. He played the first 3 games valiantly. The last one he did not show up for (or rather, he showed up for and took a shit on it). Irrelevant comparison.
On December 16 2011 14:17 felisconcolori wrote: Your professional sports analogies are good, but not quite true. In professional team sports, ALL games matter; if not for the season, than for the franchise. Either by continuing to prove that it's worth the municipality given a stadium to the team, or by jockeying for the best possible draft choices, every game matters to the entire group.
And in the case of SC2 and Naniwa every game matters as well (even if it doesn't contribute to the player's progression in a tournament). The proof is the fact that we're having this debate. The sooner players realize that their actions in game reflect upon their professionality, their competitive spirit, and the perception of E-Sports as a legitimate competition, the better it is for E-Sports overall. That game vs. NesTea mattered... if it didn't we wouldn't be talking about it and Naniwa wouldn't have gotten punished for it. Now that other players know that, we won't have them behave that way... at least not in GOM's events... and hopefully - in the near future - in no other events. Childishness, emotional instability and lack of professionalism have no place in competition and no place in E-Sports.
On December 16 2011 01:23 StarStruck wrote: In some scenarios general managers and coaches are fined by the league if they cross certain boundaries. One of them being, speaking out about a player's work ethic that isn't on your team.
In some scenarios, yes... clearly not in this one though.
On December 16 2011 01:23 StarStruck wrote: Now let me address GOM. Let's say GOM was the actual team that you came out to see. You bought your ticket to the dance. You have the right to boo or cheer. Certain players show up for work (MMA, MVP, etc.) whereas others don't.
I like hockey, so I'll continue down that road. I'd say Johan showed up for the first fifty minutes of the game. He put up a valiant effort, but he fell apart in the last ten minutes as the game became lopsided. The effort and passion was there in the first fifty. People cheered, but as it became a blowout. The fans started to boo!
I think you get the picture. We have to look at the whole.
Once again, the team played their heart in the first fifty, but once the game didn't matter anymore. Shit hit the fan and stupid penalties were taken (Johan took a fighting major and a game misconduct). It's just one game. Have to wait till the next day!
That's how I picture it anyway.
You are comparing 4 separate SC2 games as if they're a single hockey game. They are not. He played the first 3 games valiantly. The last one he did not show up for (or rather, he showed up for and took a shit on it). Irrelevant comparison.
There is no governing body for SC2. That's why someone like Alex can get away with such hypocrisy when he talks about other player's work ethic. Because that's what this argument comes down to. Work ethic. This is not how professionals carry themselves.
-
That's why I said you have to look at the whole opposed to the pieces. All 9 matches were played back-to-back. Your ticket was for the entire card and every stanza counts towards the final result. Not just one match as you say. Thus the anecdote has tact.
I could write many more scenarios, but I'm almost certain they would fall on deaf ears because no one reads an entire blog and they hear only what they want to hear.
On December 16 2011 14:44 StarStruck wrote: There is no governing body for SC2. That's why someone like Alex can get away with such hypocrisy when he talks about other player's work ethic. Because that's what this argument comes down to. Work ethic. This is not how professionals carry themselves.
-
That's why I said you have to look at the whole opposed to the pieces. All 9 matches were played back-to-back. Your ticket was for the entire card. Not just one match as you say. Thus the anecdote has tact.
Not really sure what you're talking about... there was no governing body that stopped all the analysts, GMs, owners, coaches, former players, former coaches from sharing their opinions on Lebron's movement from Cleveland to Miami. If there was one, I certainly don't think it acted up on its apparent duty of "not discussing the choices of other players"... In other words, I question the existence of such an organization, at least when it comes to the NBA. I recall quite vividly that I heard a flood of opinions on that choice of LBJ. So, Alex isn't guilty of hypocrisy in any way, except for the way in which you claim (which isn't very clear to me as of yet).
On another note, you're using the manner in which tickets are sold in E-Sports as a way to justify your comparison of four SC2 games to one hockey game. I really don't see why that shows that the anecdote has tact, but if it does to you then to each his own. But I am curious... if I purchase a four-game package deal to four Lakers games and they play well for the first three but decide to take a shit on the court during the last of the four games... am I entitled to a refund of the portion of my purchase that corresponded to that last game? Or should I once again think of it as a whole (as you suggest)?... They played well during the first of those four games and since my package was for all four, I shouldn't complain that they were unprofessional during the last one? Seriously? I am sorry, but I think you can clearly see that your argument and your 'anecdote which has tact' falls apart here.
EDIT: The four-game package is arbitrary... you can consider it a season ticket if you like. Either way do you think that since I purchased a season ticket, I shouldn't complain about the one game during which the team decided to be unprofessional? If you do... then I have to question the way you reason.
On December 16 2011 14:44 StarStruck wrote: There is no governing body for SC2. That's why someone like Alex can get away with such hypocrisy when he talks about other player's work ethic. Because that's what this argument comes down to. Work ethic. This is not how professionals carry themselves.
-
That's why I said you have to look at the whole opposed to the pieces. All 9 matches were played back-to-back. Your ticket was for the entire card. Not just one match as you say. Thus the anecdote has tact.
Not really sure what you're talking about... there was no governing body that stopped all the analysts, GMs, owners, coaches, former players, former coaches from sharing their opinions on Lebron's movement from Cleveland to Miami. If there was one, I certainly don't think it acted up on its apparent duty of "not discussing the choices of other players"... In other words, I question the existence of such an organization, at least when it comes to the NBA. I recall quite vividly that I heard a flood of opinions on that choice of LBJ. So, Alex isn't guilty of hypocrisy in any way, except for the way in which you claim (which isn't very clear to me as of yet).
On another note, you're using the manner in which tickets are sold in E-Sports as a way to justify your comparison of four SC2 games to one hockey game. I really don't see why that shows that the anecdote has tact, but if it does to you then to each his own. But I am curious... if I buy a four-game package to four Lakers games and they play well for the first three but decide to take a shit on the court during the last of the four games... am I entitled to refund of that last game. Or should I once again thinking of it as a whole (as you suggest)... They played well during the first of those four games and since my package was for all four, I shouldn't complain that they were unprofessional during the last one. I am sorry, but I think you can clearly see that your argument and your 'anecdote which has tact' falls apart here.
You are missing the point. GM's and coaches do not question other player's work ethic. It isn't their job to. Thus the Lebron move has no relevancy because they weren't questioning Lebron's work ethic. Pat Quinn and numerous other coaches have been fined heftily by the leagues for doing such demeanor's. It can carry a 5 to 6 digit price tag.
Hell, even calling another player's hit dirty can hit you hard:
(Note: that wasn't the one I was looking for, but it should suffice. Just realize that professional organizations highly frown upon upper management and coaching staff calling out players that aren't on their roster because it's viewed as very unprofessional.)
The reason why the anecdote works is because all 9 matches count towards one thing. Which two players move onto the next round.
Each game won can be viewed as the individual athlete's productivity for the day. If we stick to the hockey reference, goals for/goals against.
At the end of the game if there is a blowout, you can expect the losing team to try and start a fight out of frustration. You aren't entitled to a refund because a player didn't show up to work on that given day. I already explained that with Vince Carter and Phil Kessel. Only thing you are entitled to is booing your team because they gave up and lacked effort. You weren't happy with their performance and that is fine.
I already explained this. Seems like I'm going in circles.
I was almost turned round on this issue by your post Alex. Almost ;p
My main argument against your views is the way you draw a line from people who pay for a subscription to an entire tournament and people who pay to see their team play in an MLB/NBA match. No one paid for the blizz cup just to see 1 game between Nani and NesTea, they paid to see the whole thing. People who pay to see a team play their last game of the season in MLB actually paid specifically to see that team play, and would be rightly aggrieved if said team decided to strike out all game.
Should Nani have just 4gated? probably. Should he be punished for throwing a game? yes. Was what he did in any way comparable to a sports team throwing a match for which thousands of people specifically paid to see? A resounding No.
I pay for Sky Sports (UK Satellite Sports Channels), I pay for it so I can watch a lot of good sport. I'm paying for the whole package. If I turn it on and a football match is on that has no consequence and they put out their 2nd string squad and basically throw the game, am i pissed off and feel like I've paid for something I didn't get? No. Because I wasn't paying for that game, I am paying for the plethora of great content provided by the channel as a whole.
As far as I'm concerned, being that I'm a complete nobody my opinion doesn't matter anyways, Nani shouldn't have thrown the match, should suffer some small punishment (which i think he had already received in the court of public opinion, without being taken out of code S) but no player should ever be put in a position where they have to play out a game that is of no consequence.
The argument about sports teams having to do it all the time is quite clever, but that doesn't take in to account what I said above. Those teams have people who pay specifically to watch each game they play, esports hasn't come that far yet. GOM don't offer a ticket that allows you to watch a specific players games, you pay for the whole package and in my eyes that 1 game didn't detract anything from the money I paid to see the tourney. It was a meaningless game, even if people did want to see a rematch between Nani and NesTea.... it was a bo1..... if you want to see a grudgematch, you want it to be more than a bo1 and you want it to matter.....
On December 16 2011 15:09 StarStruck wrote: You are missing the point. GM's and coaches do not question other player's work ethic. It isn't their job to. Thus the Lebron move has no relevancy because they weren't questioning Lebron's work ethic. Pat Quinn and numerous other coaches have been fined heftily by the leagues for doing such demeanor's. It can carry a 5 to 6 digit price tag.
Hell, even calling another player's hit dirty can hit you hard:
The reason why the anecdote works is because all 9 matches count towards one thing. Which two players move onto the next round.
The words 'work ethic' didn't show up in Alex's blog post... He was commenting on Naniwa's decision to probe-rush. He hasn't stated that he doesn't think Naniwa practices hard.
So the 82 games that each hockey team plays in a season leads to one thing: which 16 teams will make it into the playoffs. So if during a couple of the games, a few teams decide to stay home and watch Jerry Springer rather than show up to their games, should we not care since we have to take the whole picture of the ENTIRE season into consideration and seeing as most of the season was great, then who cares about those couple of games? Again, bad anecdote.
Not sure why the need to post such a long post to basically say this: - Players need to behave, as they are paid by teams and tournament organisers to deliver on the "product" - scary but as I also work in industry I realise this is a reality
I think, however, all of this should be a given. What really is interesting in this whole situation is the GOM-MLG mixup with awarding Code S status from Providence and the severity of punishment dealt to naniwa.
The first problem speaks to incompetencies on GOM and MLG's part to actually agree on terms of Providence re player exchange (or for the conspiracy theorists out there, GOM's shady about turn on their own rules to suit their "face-loss rectification" agenda)
The second problem here is did naniwa's punishment have to be so severe. What GOM is doing is denying naniwa of future potential earnings. Why couldnt they have just taken away his earnings from the Blizzard Cup (or make him repay flight and accom costs, as offered by GOM for foreign players selected to participate)?
Alex's view, couched in a lot of "it's bad for business", doesnt sit well with free loving freeloaders and typically socialist-inclined Scandinavians. And I understand that. But it's a business, despite what fans would like to romanticise about otherwise.
On December 16 2011 15:31 kurosawa wrote: The second problem here is did naniwa's punishment have to be so severe. What GOM is doing is denying naniwa of future potential earnings. Why couldnt they have just taken away his earnings from the Blizzard Cup (or make him repay flight and accom costs, as offered by GOM for foreign players selected to participate)?
By doing that, you are setting a bad precedence for any similar events that occur in the future. If you give Naniwa such a puny punishment, then the next time this occurs you will also be obligated to give the same puny penalty out of fairness. But by giving him a severe punishment, you are showing that this kind of behavior will not be tolerated in your league and ensuring it won't happen again by others who may want to throw away games unprofessionally on live TV.
On December 16 2011 15:31 kurosawa wrote: The second problem here is did naniwa's punishment have to be so severe. What GOM is doing is denying naniwa of future potential earnings. Why couldnt they have just taken away his earnings from the Blizzard Cup (or make him repay flight and accom costs, as offered by GOM for foreign players selected to participate)?
By doing that, you are setting a bad precedence for any similar events that occur in the future. If you give Naniwa such a puny punishment, then the next time this occurs you will also be obligated to give the same puny penalty out of fairness. But by giving him a severe punishment, you are showing that this kind of behavior will not be tolerated in your league and ensuring it won't happen again by others who may want to throw away games unprofessionally on live TV.
Id say that you are right if he broke a black and white rule. He didn't. They took a vague rule and applied it to the situation. It's about face loss for the Koreans (and really, how dare naniwa show such disrespect to one of their own, revered players - Nestea). Nothing else. Hence the severity of the backlash.
On December 16 2011 15:09 StarStruck wrote: You are missing the point. GM's and coaches do not question other player's work ethic. It isn't their job to. Thus the Lebron move has no relevancy because they weren't questioning Lebron's work ethic. Pat Quinn and numerous other coaches have been fined heftily by the leagues for doing such demeanor's. It can carry a 5 to 6 digit price tag.
Hell, even calling another player's hit dirty can hit you hard:
The reason why the anecdote works is because all 9 matches count towards one thing. Which two players move onto the next round.
The words 'work ethic' didn't show up in Alex's blog post... He was commenting on Naniwa's decision to probe-rush. He hasn't stated that he doesn't think Naniwa practices hard.
So the 82 games that each hockey team plays in a season leads to one thing: which 16 teams will make it into the playoffs. So if during a couple of the games, a few teams decide to stay home and watch Jerry Springer rather than show up to their games, should we not care since we have to take the whole picture of the ENTIRE season into consideration and seeing as most of the season was great, then who cares about those couple of games? Again, bad anecdote.
You have to read between the lines of what he said.
I made no mention of practice. Work ethic goes way beyond practice.
You can try to spin doctor it all you want. Here's where your argument falls apart. All of the matches happened on the same day. There is no rest period. No time for preparation. It's a slug fest when it happens back-to-back.
Each competitor fights one round against another opponent. There are four rounds. It's how the event is packaged. You buy your ticket to watch in the studio and it is packaged as one event.
Almost sounds like a UFC fight card, no?
With that said, I have a question for you: would you honestly go up to the ticket booth and ask for your money back when eight bouts were really entertaining and close, but Mark Hominick got KOed in the first nine seconds by the Korean Zombie?
That's very different from what happened, but I think it resonates with the idea that shit happens to great athletes all the time. Lots of people were hyped for that fight, but it was a wash.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: GOM's job (as is the case with any professional sports league) is to provide a quality product to its viewers,
This is the problem. You say, "Naniwa, just do a 2 base all-in, or some other strategy". I think that goes against what it means to try your hardest and provide quality entertainment. Honestly, the probe rush was pretty entertaining, i would have like to see naniwa try and micro it but whatever i thought it was humorous and entertaining.
I'm curious what you would recommend for both the players to do in that situation. They both had specific strats planned for each other but due to the tournament circumstances, could not reveal those strategies. So the only thing they could have done to actually "try your hardest/potential to win" is execute an old, probobly predictable build. There's no way they could have shown their strategies they had prepared and will have to save it for another time when they meet.
On December 16 2011 15:51 StarStruck wrote: You have to read between the lines of what he said.
I made no mention of practice. Work ethic goes way beyond practice.
You can try to spin doctor it all you want. Here's where your argument falls apart. All of the matches happened on the same day. There is no rest period. No time for preparation. It's a slug fest when it happens back-to-back.
Each competitor fights one round against another opponent. There are four rounds. It's how the event is packaged. You buy your ticket to watch in the studio and it is packaged as one event.
Almost sounds like a UFC fight card, no?
With that said, I have a question for you: would you honestly go up to the ticket booth and ask for your money back when eight bouts were really entertaining and close, but Mark Hominick got KOed in the first nine seconds by the Korean Zombie?
That's very different from what happened, but I think it resonates with the idea that shit happens to great athletes all the time. Lots of people were hyped for that fight, but it was a wash.
Work ethic may go way beyond practice... but it certainly isn't what Alex is commenting on. For lack of a better source, Wikipedia defines it as: "a set of values based on hard work and diligence". Alex isn't commenting on those types of values... rather he is discussing the professionality with which one carries oneself. Therefore Alex is not behaving unprofessionally or hypocritically as you've suggested.
And no it's not a one day event... The event isn't even over yet, there's still a day left. Justifying your anecdote with this package-deal, 'whole rather than pieces' concept makes no sense for the various reasons I have outlined in posts above. And your comparisons are so far-fetched that there's no point to arguing with you. A more reasonable comparison would be the following:
Let's assume there was a fight scheduled between Pacquiao and Mayweather (and let's further assume that there is no monetary reward for this fight, nor is it a title fight)... and upon the ringing of the bell to sound off the beginning of the the fight Mayweather walks up to Pacquiao in a non-fighting stance and holds his face out to him for the punching of a lifetime... then if we can't both agree that this would be stupid and unprofessional for Mayweather to do... then we should just agree to disagree.
But comparing four SC2 games to a single hockey game is a horrible anecdote, except perhaps in your mind and a few others. And accusing Alex of lack of professionalism is even more far-fetched... either that or one of us (in my opinion, you) doesn't know what 'work ethic' is. Is GOM also being unprofessional by commenting and condemning Naniwa's behaviour (or as you would call it 'work ethic')?
On December 16 2011 15:09 StarStruck wrote: You are missing the point. GM's and coaches do not question other player's work ethic. It isn't their job to. Thus the Lebron move has no relevancy because they weren't questioning Lebron's work ethic. Pat Quinn and numerous other coaches have been fined heftily by the leagues for doing such demeanor's. It can carry a 5 to 6 digit price tag.
Hell, even calling another player's hit dirty can hit you hard:
The reason why the anecdote works is because all 9 matches count towards one thing. Which two players move onto the next round.
The words 'work ethic' didn't show up in Alex's blog post... He was commenting on Naniwa's decision to probe-rush. He hasn't stated that he doesn't think Naniwa practices hard.
So the 82 games that each hockey team plays in a season leads to one thing: which 16 teams will make it into the playoffs. So if during a couple of the games, a few teams decide to stay home and watch Jerry Springer rather than show up to their games, should we not care since we have to take the whole picture of the ENTIRE season into consideration and seeing as most of the season was great, then who cares about those couple of games? Again, bad anecdote.
You have to read between the lines of what he said.
I made no mention of practice. Work ethic goes way beyond practice.
You can try to spin doctor it all you want. Here's where your argument falls apart. All of the matches happened on the same day. There is no rest period. No time for preparation. It's a slug fest when it happens back-to-back.
Each competitor fights one round against another opponent. There are four rounds. It's how the event is packaged. You buy your ticket to watch in the studio and it is packaged as one event.
Almost sounds like a UFC fight card, no?
With that said, I have a question for you: would you honestly go up to the ticket booth and ask for your money back when eight bouts were really entertaining and close, but Mark Hominick got KOed in the first nine seconds by the Korean Zombie?
That's very different from what happened, but I think it resonates with the idea that shit happens to great athletes all the time. Lots of people were hyped for that fight, but it was a wash.
I haven't read the rest of your posts so Ill just respond to the bold part. Hominick being KOed by Chan a good thing. Thats what many fans pay to see, a highlight reel knockout. That's part of the reason why they pay to watch the UFC (especially fans that are new to the sport) and I would argue that a rare highlight reel knock out like that lives up to the hype.
Some arguments were a little bit far-fetched - particularly those made with the American sports are these are both team games and the league placement have an influence on the business. Thank you for providing your hindsight, you are truly are stable pillar in the community.
For those who are questioning whether Alex has to right to comment on something like this, doesn't it say something when Nazgul supports this blog and is preparing one himself? Doesnt it say something when FXOBoSs already has his opinion blogged? And a number of other notable TL members have also spared their opinion including players like Tyler.. should they all shove it too? We have shows like SToG and LO3 but most of those guys are affiliated with teams and organizations yet they give their opinions weekly, often on controversy matters - and to are delight. They shouldn't stop either.
In line with the real sport comparisons, when David Stern, the commissioner of the NBA blocked a blockbuster trade in recent days did the coaches, players, general managers (especially the ones directly involved) exploded with criticism and disapproval. SC2 isn't at a level where we have professional journalists providing professional commentary on current events in sc2. Therefore, for now at least, I think were quite privileged to be able hear the opinions of players and management's opinion on situations like this.
On December 16 2011 15:51 StarStruck wrote: You have to read between the lines of what he said.
I made no mention of practice. Work ethic goes way beyond practice.
You can try to spin doctor it all you want. Here's where your argument falls apart. All of the matches happened on the same day. There is no rest period. No time for preparation. It's a slug fest when it happens back-to-back.
Each competitor fights one round against another opponent. There are four rounds. It's how the event is packaged. You buy your ticket to watch in the studio and it is packaged as one event.
Almost sounds like a UFC fight card, no?
With that said, I have a question for you: would you honestly go up to the ticket booth and ask for your money back when eight bouts were really entertaining and close, but Mark Hominick got KOed in the first nine seconds by the Korean Zombie?
That's very different from what happened, but I think it resonates with the idea that shit happens to great athletes all the time. Lots of people were hyped for that fight, but it was a wash.
Work ethic may go way beyond practice... but it certainly isn't what Alex is comment on. For lack of a better source Wikipedia defines it as: "a set of values based on hard work and diligence". Alex isn't commenting on those types of values... rather he is discussing the professionality with which one carries oneself. Therefore Alex is not behaving unprofessionally or hypocritically as you've suggested.
And no it's not a one day event... The event isn't even over yet, there's still a day left. Justifying your anecdote with this package-deal, 'whole rather than pieces' concept makes no sense for the various reasons I have outlined in posts above. And your comparisons are so far-fetched that there's no point to arguing with you. A more reasonable comparison would be the following:
Let's assume there was a fight scheduled between Pacquiao and Mayweather... and upon the ringing of the bell to sound off the beginning of the the fight Mayweather walks up to Pacquiao in a non-fighting stance and holds his face out to him for the punching of a lifetime... then if we can't both agree that this would be stupid and unprofessional for Mayweather to do... then we should just agree to disagree.
But comparing four SC2 games to a single hockey game is a horrible anecdote, except perhaps in your mind and a few others. And accusing Alex of lack of professionalism is even more far-fetched... either that or one of us (in my opinion, you) doesn't know what 'work ethic' is.
Haven't profs told their students not to cite wiki as a source for their arguments yet? Give me a break.
Once again, a person doesn't have to flat-out say it. Translate things into your own words. I just gave you a good example of a coach calling out another player and getting fined for it. Did he directly comment on Iggy's work ethic? No, he called him a dirty player and explained how the game used to be played. In layman's terms, Iggy's very lucky that the game isn't still played that way or else he would have got what's coming to him.
Hence the fine. You worry about your own team first and foremost.
Unfortunately Alex comments were very unprofessional and he calls out Johan for being very unprofessional with his snide remarks on how he thinks the game should be played. Unsportsmanlike and hypocritical. He didn't stop there either, but I've already made my point. It's identical to Pat Quinn's rant.
Besides that, you still have a hard time understanding the notion of a day pass. It's exactly that a day pass. Considering SC2 events sell day passes. I don't know how you can still be missing the point. Apparently abstract thoughts don't resonate with you so it's a lost cause. Fair enough.
Last attempt to show you where I'm going with this:
I ask you to consider the ups and downs and what goes on inside a player's head within such a short period of time.
No rest period. 15 minutes between intermissions isn't necessarily enough time to collect yourself.
You have to be able to look at the structure in another way in order to get it.
On December 16 2011 16:23 Angelbelow wrote: For those who are questioning whether Alex has to right to comment on something like this, doesn't it say something when Nazgul supports this blog and is preparing one himself? Doesnt it say something when FXOBoSs already has his opinion blogged? And a number of other notable TL members have also spared their opinion including players like Tyler.. should they all shove it too? We have shows like SToG and LO3 but most of those guys are affiliated with teams and organizations yet they give their opinions weekly, often on controversy matters - and to are delight. They shouldn't stop either.
In line with the real sport comparisons, when David Stern, the commissioner of the NBA blocked a blockbuster trade in recent days did the coaches, players, general managers (especially the ones directly involved) exploded with criticism and disapproval. SC2 isn't at a level where we have professional journalists providing professional commentary on current events in sc2. Therefore, for now at least, I think were quite privileged to be able hear the opinions of players and management's opinion on situations like this.
No organization exists to fine such outlandish comments. Go ahead. Doesn't mean it's the professional thing to do. If you want others to treat you as professionals then conduct yourselves as such.
Keep it behind closed doors. Deal with your own players and don't release everything to the damn Media.
On December 16 2011 16:34 StarStruck wrote: Haven't profs told their students not to use cite wiki as a source for their arguments yet? Give me a break.
Once again, a person doesn't have to flat-out say it. Translate things into your own words. I just gave you a good example of a coach calling out another player and getting fined for it. Did he directly comment on Iggy's work ethic? No, he called him a dirty player and explained how the game used to be played. In layman's terms, Iggy's very lucky that the game isn't still played that way or else he would have got what's coming to him.
Hence the fine. You worry about your own team first and foremost.
Unfortunately Alex comments were very unprofessional and he calls out Johan for being very unprofessional with his snide remarks on how he thinks the game should be played. Unsportsmanlike and hypocritical. He didn't stop there either, but I've already made my point. It's identical to Pat Quinn's rant.
Besides that, you still have a hard time understanding the notion of a day pass. It's exactly that a day pass. Considering SC2 events sell day passes. I don't know how you can still be missing the point. Apparently abstracts don't resonate it with you. Fair enough. The way the games played out on that day is very much like the anecdote I used when you consider the ups and downs and what goes on inside a player's head.
So basically, your argument that Alex is being unprofessional is based on the ambiguously defined term "work ethic" for which I proposed a simple definition with which you weren't happy, but failed to come up with your own. Until you define it, and expand upon it, the argument that Alex is being unprofessional holds not little, but absolutely NO, merit.
Secondly, your comparison of four SC2 games to a single hockey game is based on a confusing anecdote that makes sense only to you and maybe a few others and therefore is an irrelevant comparison. Why should anyone heed your argument when it's based on far-fetched and unjustified viewpoints and analogies? I guess last night's SOTG where several pros discussed Naniwa's behaviour was an unprofessional discussion too, right? I guess the fact that Nazgul made a public statement regarding Naniwa's actions are also unprofessional, right? How about you give me a break, instead of the other way around? Didn't your professors teach you that forming arguments on ambigious terms and irrelevant analogies are poor debating tactics?
On December 16 2011 16:34 StarStruck wrote: Haven't profs told their students not to use cite wiki as a source for their arguments yet? Give me a break.
Once again, a person doesn't have to flat-out say it. Translate things into your own words. I just gave you a good example of a coach calling out another player and getting fined for it. Did he directly comment on Iggy's work ethic? No, he called him a dirty player and explained how the game used to be played. In layman's terms, Iggy's very lucky that the game isn't still played that way or else he would have got what's coming to him.
Hence the fine. You worry about your own team first and foremost.
Unfortunately Alex comments were very unprofessional and he calls out Johan for being very unprofessional with his snide remarks on how he thinks the game should be played. Unsportsmanlike and hypocritical. He didn't stop there either, but I've already made my point. It's identical to Pat Quinn's rant.
Besides that, you still have a hard time understanding the notion of a day pass. It's exactly that a day pass. Considering SC2 events sell day passes. I don't know how you can still be missing the point. Apparently abstracts don't resonate it with you. Fair enough. The way the games played out on that day is very much like the anecdote I used when you consider the ups and downs and what goes on inside a player's head.
So basically, your argument that Alex is being unprofessional is based on the ambiguously defined term "work ethic" for which I proposed a simple definition with which you weren't happy, but failed to come up with your own. Until you define it, and expand upon it, the argument that Alex is being unprofessional holds not little, but absolutely NO, merit.
Secondly, your comparison of four SC2 games to a single hockey game is based on a confusing anecdote that makes sense only to you and maybe a few others and therefore is an irrelevant comparison. Why should anyone heed your argument when it's based on far-fetched and unjustified viewpoints and analogies? I guess last night's SOTG where several pros discussed Naniwa's behaviour was an unprofessional discussion too, right? I guess the fact that Nazgul made a public statement regarding Naniwa's actions are also unprofessional, right? How about you give me a break, instead of the other way around? Didn't your professors teach you that forming arguments on ambigious terms and irrelevant analogies are poor debating tactics?
It goes beyond work ethic. You are still ignoring everything I presented to you. It isn't my fault if you cannot wrap your head around it.
We're done here.
Read the bold. I made it easier for you.
Alex isn't the only one guilty of it. That's why SC2 isn't professional. e-sports has been around for a very long time and professionalism was never there. Hell, I still have beef with some of the shit KeSPA has done in the past with their regulations and policy.
On December 16 2011 03:13 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: That's not an opinion, it's an incorrect assumption. He was invited to play 4 games. I understand the emotions Naniwa went through and as such I think I can understand yours, but you can't make up your own reasons of why someone is invited in order to justify your opinion.
If we take what GOM is saying to be true then Naniwa wasn't invited to play any games. He earned the right to play in the tournament.
In the tournament he tried his best to advance, when that no longer was an option he said "fuck it" and threw away the final game. If someone has a problem with that, it should be his team -- they're the ones losing out on an chance to but their sponsors front and center -- but that's between the player and the team.
Naniwas obligation to the tournament ended when he no longer had a chance to advance.
On December 16 2011 16:47 StarStruck wrote: It goes beyond work ethic. You are still ignoring everything I presented to you. It isn't my fault if you cannot wrap your head around it.
We're done here.
That's because you've presented - for the most part - meaningless banter. And yes, done indeed.
On December 16 2011 16:47 StarStruck wrote: It goes beyond work ethic. You are still ignoring everything I presented to you. It isn't my fault if you cannot wrap your head around it.
We're done here.
That's because you've presented - for the most part - meaningless banter. And yes, done indeed.
Meaningless? If you cannot draw the parallels between Pat Quinn's rant and Alex's. I cannot help you.
I will re-post it in my own words:
I just gave you a good example of a coach calling out another player and getting fined for it. Did he directly comment on Iggy's work ethic?No, he called him a dirty player and explained how the game used to be played. In layman's terms, Iggy's very lucky that the game isn't still played that way or else he would have got what's coming to him. All coming from Mr. Quinn's mouth.
Alex commented on the way he thought the game should be played. He flat out calls Johan unprofessional and childish amongst other things.
That in itself is very unprofessional and hypocritical. THIS IS IDENTICAL TO PAT QUINN'S RANT.
I recommend you actually read the article and if you want more examples it isn't hard to locate the fines different leagues have issued to coaches and general managers alike for making snide comments.
Yet again, we're being told how to think by this man. I agree with many of his general points about professionalism, but let's be honest about one thing. People are milking the crap out of this incident for the humor and other enjoyable publicity. Just see the Blizzard Cup Semifinals preview with the Naniwa artwork. I watched the VODs of the game already knowing what happened, and to my surprise, given the outrage, Moletrap and Khaldor were laughing it up. And they seemed genuinely amused, not just playing it that way because they were on TV.
It's really outrageous that Alex Garfield is attempting to dictate thought/behavior--but not surprising. You learn from positive examples set by others. The Idra example came off as "not even Idra's this bad." Idra's smart enough to generally avoid crossing the line because of Idra's experience doing stupid stuff. Otherwise, if people won't learn by examples, they'll learn by their own mistakes, but probably not because AG says what to think.
Furthermore, you left out of your analogy the fans that leave games when their team is getting blown out, or the many fans who discuss the positive aspects of throwing the rest of the season to improve their team's draft picks. It's utterly ridiculous to imply that fans of NFL/MLB/etc. all feel the same way about this issue of professionalism. I seriously doubt even the players all feel this way. I'm pretty sure we've had some recent examples of what NBA players and owners really care about. Hint: not the game.
I realize that examples of how professional sports isn't perfect don't exactly prove him wrong, and I'm all for the professionalism in esports, just not for comments that we all should feel a certain way, and embarrassingly, the OP pulled another "I don't want to single him out, but I'm going to do it anyway" on Naniwa. For the record, I'm not a big Naniwa fan, but it almost feels as if AG is asking the community to universally condemn Naniwa. According to his own stats, it's already at 65-70%. Does Naniwa really deserve all that hate in addition to the severe punishment he already received? Is this appropriate for a supposed "community pillar?"
On December 16 2011 16:57 StarStruck wrote: Alex commented on the way he thought the game should be played. He flat out calls Johan unprofessional and childish amongst other things.
That in itself is very unprofessional and hypocritical. THIS IS IDENTICAL TO PAT QUINN'S RANT.
I recommend you actually read the article and if you want more examples it isn't hard to locate the fines different leagues have issued to coaches and general managers alike for making snide comments.
Alright genius, I thought we were done? But if not, Alex is NOT commenting on the way Johan played the game... Alex is commenting on the way Johan conducted himself during a game which - for all practical purposes - he DID NOT PLAY, but unprofessionally forfeited. You are not particularly good at providing analogies and drawing parallels and even worse at analyzing a person's argument. Alex is not saying that "the way Johan plays isn't right"... he's commenting on Johan's sportsmanship and professionality; there a very big different between the two... do you not see that?
You can keep posting until you're blue in the face though... I'm gonna go get some sleep.
On December 16 2011 16:57 StarStruck wrote: Alex commented on the way he thought the game should be played. He flat out calls Johan unprofessional and childish amongst other things.
That in itself is very unprofessional and hypocritical. THIS IS IDENTICAL TO PAT QUINN'S RANT.
I recommend you actually read the article and if you want more examples it isn't hard to locate the fines different leagues have issued to coaches and general managers alike for making snide comments.
Alright genius, I thought we were done? But if not, Alex is not commenting on the way Johan played the game... Alex is commenting on the way Johan conducted himself during a game which - for all practical purposes - he DID NOT PLAY, but unprofessionally forfeited. You are not particularly good at providing analogies and drawing parallels and even worse at analyzing a person's argument. Alex is not saying that "the way Johan plays isn't right"... he's commenting on Johan's sportsmanship and professionality; there a very big different between the two... do you not see that?
You can keep posting until you're blue in the face though... I'm gonna go get some sleep.
Actually he did smartass.
You miss the part where he talks about IdrA and other players half-assing matches or not even bothering to show up? He is telling you how he thinks player's should conduct themselves in those situations!
On December 16 2011 16:23 Angelbelow wrote: For those who are questioning whether Alex has to right to comment on something like this, doesn't it say something when Nazgul supports this blog and is preparing one himself? Doesnt it say something when FXOBoSs already has his opinion blogged? And a number of other notable TL members have also spared their opinion including players like Tyler.. should they all shove it too? We have shows like SToG and LO3 but most of those guys are affiliated with teams and organizations yet they give their opinions weekly, often on controversy matters - and to are delight. They shouldn't stop either.
In line with the real sport comparisons, when David Stern, the commissioner of the NBA blocked a blockbuster trade in recent days did the coaches, players, general managers (especially the ones directly involved) exploded with criticism and disapproval. SC2 isn't at a level where we have professional journalists providing professional commentary on current events in sc2. Therefore, for now at least, I think were quite privileged to be able hear the opinions of players and management's opinion on situations like this.
No organization exists to fine such outlandish comments. Go ahead. Doesn't mean it's the professional thing to do. If you want others to treat you as professionals then conduct yourselves as such.
Keep it behind closed doors. Deal with your own players and don't release everything to the damn Media.
So I guess anyone involved with sc2 that has an opinion (especially involving constructive criticism) about someone else in the sc2 community should keep it to themselves or risk being called unprofessional by you?
You don't have to change your opinion, just know that they are a high volume of people that actually appreciate that Alex, Nazgul, Tyler, FXOBoSs, Doa (just to name a FEW) shared their opinions with the fans.
On December 16 2011 16:23 Angelbelow wrote: For those who are questioning whether Alex has to right to comment on something like this, doesn't it say something when Nazgul supports this blog and is preparing one himself? Doesnt it say something when FXOBoSs already has his opinion blogged? And a number of other notable TL members have also spared their opinion including players like Tyler.. should they all shove it too? We have shows like SToG and LO3 but most of those guys are affiliated with teams and organizations yet they give their opinions weekly, often on controversy matters - and to are delight. They shouldn't stop either.
In line with the real sport comparisons, when David Stern, the commissioner of the NBA blocked a blockbuster trade in recent days did the coaches, players, general managers (especially the ones directly involved) exploded with criticism and disapproval. SC2 isn't at a level where we have professional journalists providing professional commentary on current events in sc2. Therefore, for now at least, I think were quite privileged to be able hear the opinions of players and management's opinion on situations like this.
No organization exists to fine such outlandish comments. Go ahead. Doesn't mean it's the professional thing to do. If you want others to treat you as professionals then conduct yourselves as such.
Keep it behind closed doors. Deal with your own players and don't release everything to the damn Media.
So I guess anyone involved with sc2 that has an opinion (especially involving constructive criticism) about someone else in the sc2 community should keep it to themselves or risk being called unprofessional by you?
You don't have to change your opinion, just know that they are a high volume of people that actually appreciate that Alex, Nazgul, Tyler, FXOBoSs, Doa (just to name a FEW) shared their opinions with the fans.
Upper management keeps things behind closed doors for a reason. They know how to conduct themselves with public relations. Every professional organization I know does this.
I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers.
I would have been upset if the game has turned into what happened at Blizzcon between NesTea and MVP. At least Nani didn't waste my time like they did (for whatever reason Blizzcon happened).
On December 16 2011 17:08 StarStruck wrote: Actually he did smartass.
You miss the part where he talks about IdrA and other players half-assing matches or not even bothering to show up? He is telling you how he thinks player's should conduct themselves in those situations!
God you are so slow.
Good riddance.
Your arguments are more meaningless than the game which Naniwa forfeited... and your inability to understand a person's argument is more childish than Naniwa's behaviour during the match. You should re-read Alex's post about IdrA and the other players... maybe it will reveal to you that you have misinterpreted what he is saying. If not, perhaps a course in reading comprehension will benefit you.
On December 16 2011 17:08 StarStruck wrote: Actually he did smartass.
You miss the part where he talks about IdrA and other players half-assing matches or not even bothering to show up? He is telling you how he thinks player's should conduct themselves in those situations!
God you are so slow.
Good riddance.
Your arguments are more meaningless than the game which Naniwa forfeited... and your inability to understand a person's argument is more childish than Naniwa's behaviour during the match. You should re-read Alex's post about IdrA and the other players... maybe it will reveal to you that you have misinterpreted what he is saying. If not, perhaps a course in reading comprehension will benefit you.
Not my fault if you fail to grasp simple concepts. It's your problem; not mine. Maybe eventually you will come around, but I doubt it.
What Johan did is no better than any player half-assing a game and not putting forth their best foot or even bothering to show up. No one wants to see crap games that we can already see on every stream.
On December 16 2011 03:13 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: That's not an opinion, it's an incorrect assumption. He was invited to play 4 games. I understand the emotions Naniwa went through and as such I think I can understand yours, but you can't make up your own reasons of why someone is invited in order to justify your opinion.
If we take what GOM is saying to be true then Naniwa wasn't invited to play any games. He earned the right to play in the tournament.
In the tournament he tried his best to advance, when that no longer was an option he said "fuck it" and threw away the final game. If someone has a problem with that, it should be his team -- they're the ones losing out on an chance to but their sponsors front and center -- but that's between the player and the team.
Naniwas obligation to the tournament ended when he no longer had a chance to advance.
I think Quantic got plenty of publicity/advertising through this whole ordeal
On December 16 2011 16:23 Angelbelow wrote: For those who are questioning whether Alex has to right to comment on something like this, doesn't it say something when Nazgul supports this blog and is preparing one himself? Doesnt it say something when FXOBoSs already has his opinion blogged? And a number of other notable TL members have also spared their opinion including players like Tyler.. should they all shove it too? We have shows like SToG and LO3 but most of those guys are affiliated with teams and organizations yet they give their opinions weekly, often on controversy matters - and to are delight. They shouldn't stop either.
In line with the real sport comparisons, when David Stern, the commissioner of the NBA blocked a blockbuster trade in recent days did the coaches, players, general managers (especially the ones directly involved) exploded with criticism and disapproval. SC2 isn't at a level where we have professional journalists providing professional commentary on current events in sc2. Therefore, for now at least, I think were quite privileged to be able hear the opinions of players and management's opinion on situations like this.
No organization exists to fine such outlandish comments. Go ahead. Doesn't mean it's the professional thing to do. If you want others to treat you as professionals then conduct yourselves as such.
Keep it behind closed doors. Deal with your own players and don't release everything to the damn Media.
So I guess anyone involved with sc2 that has an opinion (especially involving constructive criticism) about someone else in the sc2 community should keep it to themselves or risk being called unprofessional by you?
You don't have to change your opinion, just know that they are a high volume of people that actually appreciate that Alex, Nazgul, Tyler, FXOBoSs, Doa (just to name a FEW) shared their opinions with the fans.
Upper management keeps things behind closed doors for a reason. They know how to conduct themselves with public relations. Every professional organization I know does this.
Fair thing to say but that really depends on WHAT they're discussing.
If its player A is getting cut from the team because hes has ABC problems, then you obviously keep it to yourself.
If they're giving their opinion based on something that happened in front of a national audience is perfectly fine.
What's meaningful in losing, or losing with 1 win? In that position, I probably wouldn't have probe rushed, instead going for some early rush. DTs maybe. Just throw it all out. Difference is just a few minutes and a probable loss (and not very exciting match) in either case. I don't think it's a very big deal at all.
Two notes 1) This is just one game, people are blowing it out of proportion. Yes, giving a good show is important, but this is just one game. One that had no impact. I understand that some people see this "rivalry" between Nestea and Nani, oh well. Maybe some other time, when the stakes are higher and the match matters, we'll see some awesome games between them. 2) Nani's Code S spot wasn't going to do much anyway, let's be realistic here - he would've gone 0-3 immediately and then gone on his way back to the training house. Nani is a good foreigner, but not nearly good enough to compete in Code S. Nani had one good weekend when he got 2nd in Providence because of his one solid build. You need more than one solid build.
I disagree with both EGalex and EGincontrolls (stated on SotG and ITG) opnions, agree with EGidras (stated on ITG) opinion.
What's meaningful for me is the competition and the skill shown in those circumstances, not the "show" or "fun" games. It's a huge difference for me to see a football (soccer) player perform a dribble in Champions League final, compared to doing it on a warm-up or a national friendly.
When I tune in to GSL (or Blizzard Cup), I don't want to see players "putting on a show", I want them to try their best to win, and if they won't/can't, I'd rather they save my time.
On December 16 2011 21:00 Klyberess wrote: So proud of nani <3
When I tune in to GSL (or Blizzard Cup), I don't want to see players "putting on a show", I want them to try their best to win, and if they won't/can't, I'd rather they save my time.
i support Nani here aswell, they should not have matches played if they cant win, why would he give away awesome strats? it should become a non compulsory show match if the game need be played.
This was a good blog and an interesting read. I do like most of it but feel like some of the analogies don't really translate as simple as described here.
There is a huge difference if you go to a sport event (NHLor whatnot) and pay to see that particular game and then one or both of the teams just put their shoes on the field but refuse to play, comparet do if you go to e.g. a boxing gala and one out of all the matches that day turns out to not be so good. I would say that what happened at this event with Nani was the second one of these, i.e. dissapointing that one of the matches of the day was not great but no reason to demand my money back.
I agree that throwing a game is never acceptable. Mostly from a "sportmanship perspective". Those arguing that 4gate would be to lie about the fact that the game was meaningless and not played out in full competition might be correct, but it is not really an excuse not to do it. Better to play badly than not at all, I think. This goes well with the analogy of the teams that field their "B-teams" towards the end of a season.
I would not think twize if GOM decided to pull Nanis pay for the tournament, arguing that if you don't come here to play seriously we don't feel like paying you. Pulling his invite to another tournament, however, is another thing and I feel out or proportion.
Bottom line, I agree that the behaviour was not acceptable. However, it has been blown out of proportion and I think it gets way to much focus and implications.
On December 16 2011 16:23 Angelbelow wrote: For those who are questioning whether Alex has to right to comment on something like this, doesn't it say something when Nazgul supports this blog and is preparing one himself? Doesnt it say something when FXOBoSs already has his opinion blogged? And a number of other notable TL members have also spared their opinion including players like Tyler.. should they all shove it too? We have shows like SToG and LO3 but most of those guys are affiliated with teams and organizations yet they give their opinions weekly, often on controversy matters - and to are delight. They shouldn't stop either.
In line with the real sport comparisons, when David Stern, the commissioner of the NBA blocked a blockbuster trade in recent days did the coaches, players, general managers (especially the ones directly involved) exploded with criticism and disapproval. SC2 isn't at a level where we have professional journalists providing professional commentary on current events in sc2. Therefore, for now at least, I think were quite privileged to be able hear the opinions of players and management's opinion on situations like this.
No organization exists to fine such outlandish comments. Go ahead. Doesn't mean it's the professional thing to do. If you want others to treat you as professionals then conduct yourselves as such.
Keep it behind closed doors. Deal with your own players and don't release everything to the damn Media.
So I guess anyone involved with sc2 that has an opinion (especially involving constructive criticism) about someone else in the sc2 community should keep it to themselves or risk being called unprofessional by you?
You don't have to change your opinion, just know that they are a high volume of people that actually appreciate that Alex, Nazgul, Tyler, FXOBoSs, Doa (just to name a FEW) shared their opinions with the fans.
Upper management keeps things behind closed doors for a reason. They know how to conduct themselves with public relations. Every professional organization I know does this.
Fair thing to say but that really depends on WHAT they're discussing.
If its player A is getting cut from the team because hes has ABC problems, then you obviously keep it to yourself.
If they're giving their opinion based on something that happened in front of a national audience is perfectly fine.
I just explained why this isn't the case. If you've actually read what I said.
On December 16 2011 15:09 StarStruck wrote: You are missing the point. GM's and coaches do not question other player's work ethic. It isn't their job to. Thus the Lebron move has no relevancy because they weren't questioning Lebron's work ethic. Pat Quinn and numerous other coaches have been fined heftily by the leagues for doing such demeanor's. It can carry a 5 to 6 digit price tag.
Hell, even calling another player's hit dirty can hit you hard:
The reason why the anecdote works is because all 9 matches count towards one thing. Which two players move onto the next round.
The words 'work ethic' didn't show up in Alex's blog post... He was commenting on Naniwa's decision to probe-rush. He hasn't stated that he doesn't think Naniwa practices hard.
So the 82 games that each hockey team plays in a season leads to one thing: which 16 teams will make it into the playoffs. So if during a couple of the games, a few teams decide to stay home and watch Jerry Springer rather than show up to their games, should we not care since we have to take the whole picture of the ENTIRE season into consideration and seeing as most of the season was great, then who cares about those couple of games? Again, bad anecdote.
You have to read between the lines of what he said.
I made no mention of practice. Work ethic goes way beyond practice.
You can try to spin doctor it all you want. Here's where your argument falls apart. All of the matches happened on the same day. There is no rest period. No time for preparation. It's a slug fest when it happens back-to-back.
Each competitor fights one round against another opponent. There are four rounds. It's how the event is packaged. You buy your ticket to watch in the studio and it is packaged as one event.
Almost sounds like a UFC fight card, no?
With that said, I have a question for you: would you honestly go up to the ticket booth and ask for your money back when eight bouts were really entertaining and close, but Mark Hominick got KOed in the first nine seconds by the Korean Zombie?
That's very different from what happened, but I think it resonates with the idea that shit happens to great athletes all the time. Lots of people were hyped for that fight, but it was a wash.
I haven't read the rest of your posts so Ill just respond to the bold part. Hominick being KOed by Chan a good thing. Thats what many fans pay to see, a highlight reel knockout. That's part of the reason why they pay to watch the UFC (especially fans that are new to the sport) and I would argue that a rare highlight reel knock out like that lives up to the hype.
I would read all posts. That's what I do anyway. I find it's very important because that way you get a good feel for what the person is trying to say.
Anyway, not everyone is going to share that opinion of what happened. I know a lot of people who were pissed off especially when Mark was fighting in front of his home crowd.
It's the same thing with Naniwa. Everyone has a mixed opinion. Some people laughed, other people booed and some people were indifferent others thought he was just being himself, etc.
That's the great thing about public opinion. You cannot please everybody.
what's the difference if he would have gone for an unmotivated 4gate to end the game ? no one really wants to see that, so what's the point ? this is no quality product for gom either. it's even worse cause it will bore people.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: Please note the following before reading this commentary: 1) While it may not be possible to truly remove all bias when commenting on an opposing team or its player(s), I don't feel that my stance here has been motivated by any pro-EG sentiment. This is an objective commentary from someone with as much eSports-related business experience as anyone in the industry, and someone who's both personally and professionally invested in the long-term success of eSports.
2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa.
3) This commentary will focus more on NaNiWa's actions themselves than GOM's subsequent decision to punish him by removing him from Code S. The relatively small amount of attention paid to GOM's decision is intentional; I want to discuss the NaNiwa/NesTea incident itself, without being distracted by separate (albeit related) events.
--
Okay, here goes By now, we're all aware of what happened between NaNiWa and NesTea in the GOM.TV Blizzard Cup. At the time of their match, both players were 0-3 in their group, both were eliminated from further contention, and as such, the result of the match itself had no tangible effect on the rest of the tournament. NaNi then probe rushed NesTea, and the eSports world exploded.
After reviewing many, many discussion threads on TL and Reddit, as well as other community commentaries, the public sentiment seems to be somewhere between 65/35 and 70/30 in disapproval of NaNiwa's actions. Those against his decision to probe rush usually cite reasons related to sportsmanship, honor, and respect for the game. Those sympathizing with NaNi (including, understandably, many pro players) tend to place the blame on GOM for utilizing a tournament format which allows for meaningless matches. I'm sure this summary is a bit of an oversimplification, but it seems to be the general spectrum of public opinion.
I myself find NaNi's actions completely unacceptable, but for a very different reason than I believe has been popularly expressed. I also find GOM's decision to punish NaNi to be completely reasonable (although I acknowledge that there were other, less extreme, options for how to do so). In any case, as mentioned above, I don't really have a firm opinion on the punishment itself - other than the fact that I believe the situation did warrant some kind of punishment - nor do I wish to spend any more time addressing that subject here. What I'd like to do in this blog is plead my case for why NaNi's actions were completely unacceptable, not only to the 30-35% of the community blaming GOM for the incident, but also to the other 60-65% of the community who agree that NaNi's actions were unacceptable, but for reasons different from mine.
Let me preface my further comments by saying that this is not a personal attack (or, really, an attack of any kind) on NaNiWa, Quantic, or its CEO, Mark Ferraz. I've met both NaNi and Mark in person many times, and I've only experienced the utmost professionalism from them in all of our face-to-face interactions. Actually, this commentary isn't really about NaNiwa, or Quantic, or Mark, at all. It's about a player making a particular decision, and why that decision is not acceptable.
--
As most of you know, IdrA is one of my team's most high-profile players. He's also been involved in some of the more controversial moments in SC2 history (most notably, his early GG's against MMA and HuK). Now, as of late, these kinds of occurrences are much less frequent for Greg - to his credit, he has improved that aspect of his play tremendously. But, back when leaving the game too early was a both common and serious problem for IdrA, people (both fans and community pillars alike) would often ask, "What, exactly, is EG's stance on this? Are they trying to prevent it from happening? Are they talking to IdrA about it? If not, when are they going to step in and do something about it?" The reality is that we really didn't want to intervene, for the most part. Even after the storied games against HuK and MMA, we really didn't say much, other than to be supportive of Greg and let him know that we were there for him. We approached the situation this way for a very long time because we felt that it was Greg's problem to solve (and, to his credit, he eventually did for the most part solve it). However, after taking a passive approach for almost a year, something happened that we felt required our direct intervention.
Last September, in TL Open #22, IdrA faced Nerchio in the bo3 Semifinals. After dropping the first map to some surprise baneling pressure from Nerchio, Greg's frustration boiled over, and he forfeited the second game of the bo3, giving Nerchio the free win and a spot in the finals. This was, frankly, completely unacceptable. And I expressed this point to Greg without any sugar-coating. Out of the many early GG- and bad manner-related IdrA moments that have taken place during his tenure on EG, this was the first time I felt that I needed to step in and say something. And as of now, it's still the only time I've tapped Greg on the shoulder.
--
There are (for the most part) three kinds of situations in which players usually throw matches, or don't put forth maximum effort. There's Scenario A, in which throwing the match would be in the player's own best interests (example: Stephano vs. BratOK at Assembly Summer 2011, in which both players did their best to the lose the match because they each wanted to avoid facing Sen in bracket play). There's Scenario B, in which the match is meaningless for the player himself, but has meaning for his opponent and/or a third-party (example: IdrA vs. White-Ra at the IPL3 Finals, in which IdrA forfeited because he had already qualified for bracket play - which was seeded randomly - and wanted to get some rest). And then, there's Scenario C, in which the match is truly meaningless, and throwing it would be due purely to the fact that the player (for whatever reason) doesn't put forth the time and effort required to play for real (example: NaNi's probe rush vs. NesTea, which sparked all of the recent community discussion and commentary, including this blog).
Scenarios A, B, and C all happen, regularly, in professional sports. At the end of almost every regular season in leagues like the NFL, NBA, NHL and Major League Baseball, there are teams that have the opportunity to determine their first-round playoff opponent, or to prevent a certain team from qualifying for the playoffs, by tanking a couple of games (Scenario A). And, during absolutely every regular season in such leagues, there are teams who are eliminated from playoff contention well before the season is over, but still have to play out their schedules in full - including games against other teams who are still in the playoff hunt (Scenario B). And, lastly, also every regular season in such leagues, there are games late in the schedule between teams who have both already been eliminated from playoff contention (Scenario C).
Now, to be fair, there's a difference between throwing a match, and not putting forth maximum effort, and just not playing well - and that difference is subject to a massive gray area. Professional sports teams often bench their best players in the final game of the regular season, if they've already made the playoffs and their playoff opponent has already been determined. Does that mean that they're throwing the game? Most would say, no. But, what about a sports team that does have something to gain by losing its last game of the season, and starts its best players, but they all happen to have off days? Did the team throw the match? Did the players not try as hard as they could've? Or did the the team try hard, but just not play well? That's a much more complex question, with no uniform answer.
Additionally, while most would agree that flat out throwing a match isn't a good thing, things get much murkier when the subject shifts to effort and passion. Is it necessarily unacceptable, dishonorable or disrespectful to the sport for a team or player to not put forth maximum effort, every game or match? Again, that's a complicated question, and it has no blanket answer. For a highly-paid player or team that's phoning it in on a regular basis, many would say the answer is yes. But, if two last-place MLB teams are facing off on the last day of the regular season, should both sides really be expected to play their hearts out? Many would say, no.
--
The bottom line is that players and teams - in all professional sports - regularly find themselves in Scenarios A, B, and C. And they correspondingly - in all professional sports - throw matches; don't try their hardest on every occasion; and play poorly at convenient times. Furthermore, in most of these situations, it's not even possible to discern which of those three (or what combination thereof) is truly the case - let alone to try and determine, with any level of certainty, whether or not what's happened is unacceptable, or dishonorable, or disrespectful to the sport and its community. Essentially, for the vast majority of situations like these, there are two massive layers of subjectivity standing in the way of any objective conclusion or analysis. That's why you very rarely see league officials involve themselves in such matters.
But if that's the case, then what's the point of this very, very long - sorry... it's just my style - write-up? I stated at the beginning of this blog that NaNiwa's decision to probe rush NesTea was absolutely unacceptable; that I believe everyone in our community should view it as unacceptable; and that I support GOM's decision to levy punishment on NaNi (the severity of the punishment is a different subject altogether). Yet, I've basically used the past five paragraphs to make the argument that... well... that it's not really possible to put together a definitive argument about situations like this one; that they're all just part of professional sports.
So, what's my point?
My point is that in all of the scenarios, examples, and hypotheticals I've outlined above, the player or team - at the very least - still did its job, put on a show for the spectators, and delivered a quality product to its respective league. All of them, of course, except for the one we're all so feverishly discussing.
--
Direct, community-to-industry revenue is the single, most important aspect of both the short- and long-term stability and growth of eSports. The StarCraft 2 community's willingness and enthusiasm to support its teams, players, and tournaments - by watching ads on their streams, buying their merchandise, and purchasing their subscriptions and season passes - has contributed, more than any other factor, to the amazing growth we've seen over the past year and a half. The term "ecosystem" is a buzzword as of late for those of us on the business side of the industry, because we all recognize the fact that in order for eSports to keep growing and find stability, the industry needs to become more self-sustaining, and less reliant on outside income, like corporate sponsorships.
In line with this, selling subscriptions and season passes is, obviously, crucially important to GOM.TV's business model. And ultimately, the quality of their product is defined by the entertainment value of their matches. So, when one of the world's most famous players, in an exciting grudge match (regardless of the players' records in their group), decides to probe rush in front of thousands upon thousands of spectators, many of whom are paying subscribers, he's single-handedly denying GOM a quality product to deliver to its consumer base. That is, simply, unacceptable. It is, objectively, bad for everyone who cares about eSports.
--
Now, I actually find nothing wrong with the fact that NaNi didn't want (or didn't have the mental energy, depending on what you believe) to put forth his best effort against NesTea in the Blizzard Cup. Given some of the names on EG's roster, I'd be a pretty massive hypocrite if I criticized NaNiwa's actions on that basis. With EG's players, I'm actually very understanding of the fact that they have a limited amount of mental energy, and that they're constantly working to improve their own mental toughness. However, no matter how tired or frustrated you are, there's absolutely no excuse for not giving the spectators and fans what they showed up for. This is why, of all the controversial situations that IdrA's been involved in, the only time I felt the need to intervene was when he forfeited a match that was being streamed live to thousands of spectators.*
We don't know whether NaNi was exhausted, or frustrated, or unmotivated, or just didn't care about winning the game (for whatever reason). But, frankly, we don't need to; his actions were absolutely unacceptable, regardless of their reasoning. If he wasn't feeling up to putting forth maximum effort (again, for whatever reason), he could've just done a two-base all-in, or four-gated, or executed one of many other strategies that would've almost certainly ended the game in ten minutes or less.
I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers. What NaNiwa did was basically akin to a last-place MLB team, during its final game of the season, intentionally striking out in every at bat. Just imagine what would happen in that situation: fans would ask for their money back; advertising contracts would be violated; and the league would certainly take action against the team and its players - just like GOM did with NaNi - in order to protect its product.
For those of you who, after reading this, agree that NaNi's actions were unacceptable, but still blame GOM for utilizing a format which allows for inconsequential matches, I would ask you to consider holding players to higher standards of professionalism; and to also consider the fact that it's not GOM's responsibility to cater their format solely to suit players. GOM's job (as is the case with any professional sports league) is to provide a quality product to its viewers, while providing its competitors with fair, reasonable playing conditions, and the Blizzard Cup's format balanced these factors acceptably. Additionally, I would also point out the fact that, as illustrated above, every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist.
Ultimately, in order for eSports to be successful, whether short-term or long-term, players, teams, and tournaments must each pull their weight appropriately. Without all parties contributing, the industry cannot produce a quality product for our fans and community. And without a quality product being produced, there's no community-to-industry revenue, and there's no self-sustaining ecosystem.
Some of you may see my comments as an overreaction, or as blowing things out of proportion - does one probe rush really warrant all of this text? I think so, and I believe that my comments hold an appropriate amount of concern. NaNiwa is one of the most famous players in all of StarCraft 2. He receives a significant salary from his professional team. The tournament in which he was competing was run by the world's most prestigious StarCraft 2 league, whose audience contains a greater percentage of paying subscribers than any other league. But, even with everyone around him meeting their respective obligations - with his team supporting him; with the league providing his playing field and broadcasting his match; and with the community watching advertisements and purchasing subscriptions - the system won't work unless NaNi also meets his obligations.
Against NesTea, NaNiwa didn't do his part. That's why I find his actions to be unacceptable. And that's why you should, too.
NaNi, you're an incredible player, with thousands upon thousands of fans who just want to see you play. Next time, play.
Alex Garfield CEO, Evil Geniuses @ottersareneat on Twitter
*For those of you eager to pull out the pitchforks, the IPL3/White-Ra situation is quite different; at the time of IdrA's match against White-Ra, IPL3 was already behind schedule, and didn't even have time to broadcast all of its remaining group play matches.
thanks for your point of view. i agree on some parts, but have to disagree on others. if i understood you correctly you expect players to put on a show, but on the same hand can understand that they will not play their best (such as teams out of the playoff race). so, let's assume naniwa would have executed a half hearted 4 gate, which would be probably fine with your argumentation (he played the match somewhat, but not his best). do you think that the audience would be excited more? as a viewer and i think there are many more feeling the same way a meaningless isn't exciting at all. for me it is contradicting that on one the hand people accept that players will not give their best and may lack motivation in a meaningless match but on other hand expect a good show. when watching the game i can definitely see people are upset about what naniwa did in this game and it didn't help e-sport, but as others have mentioned before. why playing a meaningless game. it is neither liked by many players nor entertaining for many viewers. your argument here is you expect more professionalism out of players. well, that would mean to always play your best disregarding the meaning of the match or your personal situation. i believe this is too much to expect from human beings.
well, this post was very confusing to me. First, there is no excuse for Naniwa, after that there is explanation why there is excuse, and in the end there is no excuse. I think that everything could be said in some shorter post. Now I really don't know what is perspective on the Naniwa controvery. I really don't.
Or maybe this post is made by 3 different persons? ^^
I think its quite a relevant point that every example you used from other American sports is that they are Team Sports, so if one player isn't emotionally invested in the game it won't necessarily effect the overall outcome or, as the general point of your blog makes, the final broadcasted product.
Also relating back to the team sports point generally, at least in England, when the end of the football season comes and teams have a match which might mean nothing (rare due to the structure of the leagues) and they choose to field a weakened team those players that step in to replace the first-teamers will have been waiting for their chance to show the manager what they can really do and therefore will try harder and have actual motivation, and well I doubt I need to make it clear why that relates to Naniwa.
Without motivation a player will never perform at their best, without a player performing at their best the final broadcasted product will not be the same, so therefore the customer is not getting what they deserve. A good way to stop this in single player sports would be to avoid meaningless games.
Note: I consider it a meaningless game in the sense the players had no gain whatsoever from the result and I essentially believe the players should come first.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
In a tournament like Blizzard Cup part of the main allure is the games between the high profile players. It's very much like an all-star match where considerable entertainment is derived from the matches along the way. I feel many non-invitational tournaments wouldn't have as much of a problem here.
On December 15 2011 18:08 Adebisi wrote: I agree with what you say everywhere more or less (could be nitpicky on certain details and analogies maybe I guess) but I think the one point you miss is that games that do not matter for the progression of the tournament/league should not be broadcast. Ultimately if you want to advocate preserving the integrity of GOMtv's product, the tournament structure must create only games that actually matter (or just be ready to not play/broadcast irrelevent games, simply following the precedent they set in up/down matches) otherwise this situation will rise again, it may not be as blatant as a probe rush (and given this shit storm, I'm shirt it won't), but it will happen again.
In a tournament like Blizzard Cup part of the main allure is the games between the high profile players. It's very much like an all-star match where considerable entertainment is derived from the matches along the way. I feel many non-invitational tournaments wouldn't have as much of a problem here.
Agreed. This is for Esports and players need to keep this in the back of their minds. These Pro's/players wouldn't be shit without the fans. They wouldn't get money, they wouldn't be able to make a living playing Starcraft and would be reduced to some geek who plays games to much. People pay to see these games people. They want some entertainment and high level action. If you can't understand this, then maybe you should go back to being a geek who plays games to much.
Now, on the flip side, this was a blessing in disguise. (Even though this wasn't Naniwas intentions). If you know anything about show business (which is what this is), is that publicity (good or bad) is good. Naniwa has inadvertently benefited Esports than some game like Naniwa Vs Nestea ever would have.
On December 15 2011 23:13 Chrill wrote: Drama queens, jesus. This whole thing is so blown out of proportion that it's silly. I'm embarrassed for the whole community. Yes, he fucked up. We know. The only reason why we're still talking about this is because there's nothing else going on in SC2 right now. No one is going to give two shits about this a month from now. Stop throwing more wood to the fire, all these threads are silly. Also, this korean honor thing is just a bunch of BS. Korean honor isn't worth a damn. You can do whatever the fuck you want in their honor code as long as you're sneaky about it. I.E, a four-gate would be totally acceptable. Removing his Code S is completely unacceptable punishment made up by some imaginary rule or something, it's just GOM being bullies, saying that if you dont play their kind of game they'll punish you, severely. It's all about keeping that fake exterior up, nothing else.
Pretty disrespectful of you say things like that against Koreans. Interestingly enough, where are the Koreans who attack your Swedish heritage? Probably too mannered for that.
Ask yourself if Boxer would have done the same thing as Naniwa. You know the answer.
Those of you defending Naniwa till the end, think about yourselves for a moment and what you do for a living.
When you're wearing the uniform of the company(even if you don't, but stay with me here), you represent the company do you not? Fair to say that they pay your living wages(even if you're on commission)?
So when you have an upset customer staring you down, shouting obscenities - corporate policy dictates that you listen, calm the customer down, realize that he's just venting, and needs time to calm down and be reasonable with you. You've done this a million times.
Then one day your emotional state is a bit fragile(for any number of things that happened). Another irate customer starts to do a number on your mental well being. Do you:
a) lose it, shout right back at the customer and start a fight; b) adopt a "woe is me, i just work here" attitude c) stay calm, collected, professional, and follow company procedures as per normal
I really hope that you guys have to wisdom to know which is the correct answer.
I would just like to say I've never really respected Naniwa as a person... until now.
I actually admire the fact that he was honest about his feelings towards the game, if we accept that no player in the world would have provided their best game in that scenario (even if you are willing to put in effort to the game you will *not* bring out your best strategy in an inconsequential game), then an honest admission of that, regardless of the extremity, is not something I'd even consider getting upset over.
I find it slightly worrying that GOM were comfortable with Stephano being at the Blizzard Cup, but punish Naniwa. I lost *all* respect for Stephano and BratOK after that ASUS series, and will pretty much never support them ever again. What I find most curious, however, was that I'm pretty sure if Naniwa was in the same position as BratOK and Stephano his response would've been 'Oh I have to play Sen if I win? Guess I'll just beat Sen then...' and he would've actively sought out the challenge. It's all conjecture ofcourse, but I've gotta say I have a lot more respect for that type of approach.
There's a difference between not wanting to play a game and deliberately insulting the intelligence of the viewer - which is exactly what Stephano and BratOK did.
If Naniwa had gone with a 4gate as everyone suggests I would've had absolutely no respect for him, if you're not interested in participating in a game, don't put on a mock show just because 'the fans' are watching, or 'it's good for ESports.' Infact I think such actions are actually detrimental for the 'good of Esports'
And you're quite correct Mr. Garfield, this sort of thing does happen regularly, but I feel sick and lose respect for a player when they DO put on a show just because the fans are watching. If I want to watch a game, I want to watch a game of the fiercest competition possible. If the game setting is not conducive to competition, that's a problem with the setting, not the players. When those situations come up I usually don't watch the games even when my favorite players are playing.
I think it's TERRIBLE to set a precedent where putting on a sham performance in a match is *more* acceptable than forfeiting a match, and I've felt this way for a very long time.
I think Naniwa's approach *should be the universal approach* and yes, I think it 'for the good of ESports.' Sure, lay heavy punishments in scenarios when the games *actually* carry some significance, but every player should have the right to tap out of a game that A) means nothing and B) they have no interest in playing. If doing so loses them fans, that is *their* issue, not Gom's issue.
As an aside: I respect the right for broadcasters to set up clauses in tournament signups requiring players not to throw any games... but those clasues need to be present *before* the tournament is played out. I personally would respect a tournament less for enforcing such laws.
tl:dr: I think it's TERRIBLE to set a precedent where putting on a sham performance in a match is *more* acceptable than forfeiting a match in cases where a game carrys no weight.
This is a fantastic post and echoes my sentiments exactly. I respect Naniwa's play immensely, and as ardent fan of e-sports and a spectator, I was expecting another fantastic ZvP (my favorite matchup) and to just witness that was unacceptable for exactly the reasons you have stated. Everyone here wants eSports to take off to even greater heights, and throwing matches on probe vs. drone wars does us no favors.
OP has highlighted a ridiculous problem in many different sports by talking about completely unnecessary games and highlighting how teams DO NOT put everything they have into them because the games are meaningless, yet instead of thinking that Starcraft 2 could simply solve this problem by NOT doing what every other sport has done (and oftentimes GOM does, indeed, eliminate inconsequential games), he says that SC2 players should deal with it the way other athletes have. I understand that this is because of the OP's perspective as being a manager and businessman, instead of an athlete, but we in the competitive gaming community are cerebral types who are offended at being told that something is valuable when we can see that the format itself prevents reward. This elimination of unnecessary games is an EASY FIX, not some ancient thing that "has existed since the beginning of time in sports and thus must be recognized as legitimate." OP himself discusses all the gray areas of these types of games, especially the type C which is what we have here. If the game doesn't matter (ie the format gives no reward for winning or losing, be it money or the capacity to progress further in the tournament), I DON'T WANT the players to bust out their best strategies and secret weapons. Tbh, I'd rather that the game not even be played (which was clearly Nani's intention by requesting to forfeit before he was denied that option).
Furthermore, the OP suggested several times that he disagreed with the severity of Nani's punishment, but for some reason didn't get into that. IT'S IMPORTANT. Right now you sound like you're just kissing up to GOM. You jump in to defend GOM by ultimately stating that they (and this is basically what you said) make the same format mistakes as major league baseball and other athletic organizations, you criticize Naniwa's actions, and don't actually go into the one opinion you have that might be critical of GOM. Play it safe by attacking the party that can't respond to you in a way that might harm your business...
Naniwa, you've had a tough run in Korea so far. I wasn't always a big fan of yours, but your games in Korea have made me a bigger fan. I'm watching the quality of the games you've been playing, and recognize that those games come from a competitive spirit which can only exist when the format promotes passionate competition. Keep your chin up, your day will come. Your games have been awesome. Even though you've had a lot of losses, the games themselves have demonstrated that you do belong in the same arena as those top players.
Edit: wanted to add that I agree with Methy: "I think it's TERRIBLE to set a precedent where putting on a sham performance in a match is *more* acceptable than forfeiting a match, and I've felt this way for a very long time."
I couldn't agree more. I still think that the one of the biggest problems of eSport that needs to be solved is how the players behave. The phase that goes from esport hobby (online mostly) to professional eSport is really hard to overcome and it's mostly because of the players, top tier players. Maybe the job that Fans, supporters and Administrators need to do is to motivate a proper behaviour into the players.
Nice words and since I pay for a lot of SC2 eSport content I feel raped when this situations happens.
Thank you very much for this extremely well written, insightful piece. I think your comments are spot on. I know this wasn't your intent, but besides better articulating my feelings on the matter, you have improved my view of EG and Idra-related incidents. You've made it easier for me to cheer for IdrA again, which is good timing given his re-entrance to the GSL. So thanks!
the face of koreans commentators after the game says every thing.
nice write alex... you bringing the mlb nba nfl examples were just awesome
if you like volley u should remember like 2 years ago when Brasil deliberate lost a game to Argentina to dont face Russia on brackets, as so did Italy and Poland on same tourney. You guys probably remember that event made the International Volley Confederation put a rule that u cant lose on propose, in all their tourneys.
I agree, but really... While the way Naniwa acted here is 100 % unacceptable, the way GomTV, and korea in general handled this situation(based on reactions, former MvP coach said some nasty things for example about naniwa)
I think that their response was far more unprofessional.. Also, in the law, there is a principle, that say one should always take the least interfering action. besides, the seeding that Naniwa got from MLG Providence clearly stated he would get a code S spot, but then after they come and justify the actions towards Naniwa by stating they never did, but only gave him a spot in the blizzard cup. This is a clear lie, based on the GSL/MLG exchange program.. this means they did in fact take his code s spot, and not just took him out of consideration, and simply removing him like that, is directly against the law. The least intefering action, would mean to debate the problem, talk about it first.
Conclusion: I think what Naniwa did was bad, but the reaction from Gomtv and other koreans was far more unprofessional.
It's a reasonable perspective; I think most people would agree he should have played the game. I definitely disagree that GOM shouldn't take any blame for the format. A poor format hurts the tournament from a spectator point of view too. Even if Naniwa had played the game, it would have been hard to really put any weight behind it when you know he isn't trying. So we missed out on Naniwa half assing a game in some other way. I guess that would have been cool for all the ignorant people who don't see what's really going on, but I'm not sure the rest of us really care.
Never mind the slippery slope that this has started. Up until now, we've mostly turned the other way when someone does some sort of weird play that's obviously going to lose the game. Those games usually matter too. But when a controversial player takes it to the extreme at a high profile tournament in a game that's essentially a glorified showmatch, suddenly everyone sees the light. The point here is that this is going to lead to a lot more controversy down the line. What happens when some zerg 6 pools a terran now? Is he manipulating the tournament? Should 6p vs terran be illegal? Should it not be illegal but we'll just arbitrarily handle those situations as they arise? That would probably be the worst solution.
On December 16 2011 20:51 10or10 wrote: I disagree with both EGalex and EGincontrolls (stated on SotG and ITG) opnions, agree with EGidras (stated on ITG) opinion.
What's meaningful for me is the competition and the skill shown in those circumstances, not the "show" or "fun" games. It's a huge difference for me to see a football (soccer) player perform a dribble in Champions League final, compared to doing it on a warm-up or a national friendly.
agree 100%, either way I don't really know what all the fuss is about. MC was bitching Naniwa out and then the next day he does some stupid carrier/mothership/collossus build that got slaughtered and wasn't very entertaining.
On December 17 2011 03:02 Vidar wrote: OP has highlighted a ridiculous problem in many different sports by talking about completely unnecessary games and highlighting how teams DO NOT put everything they have into them because the games are meaningless, yet instead of thinking that Starcraft 2 could simply solve this problem by NOT doing what every other sport has done (and oftentimes GOM does, indeed, eliminate inconsequential games), he says that SC2 players should deal with it the way other athletes have. I understand that this is because of the OP's perspective as being a manager and businessman, instead of an athlete, but we in the competitive gaming community are cerebral types who are offended at being told that something is valuable when we can see that the format itself prevents reward. This elimination of unnecessary games is an EASY FIX, not some ancient thing that "has existed since the beginning of time in sports and thus must be recognized as legitimate." OP himself discusses all the gray areas of these types of games, especially the type C which is what we have here. If the game doesn't matter (ie the format gives no reward for winning or losing, be it money or the capacity to progress further in the tournament), I DON'T WANT the players to bust out their best strategies and secret weapons. Tbh, I'd rather that the game not even be played (which was clearly Nani's intention by requesting to forfeit before he was denied that option).
Furthermore, the OP suggested several times that he disagreed with the severity of Nani's punishment, but for some reason didn't get into that. IT'S IMPORTANT. Right now you sound like you're just kissing up to GOM. You jump in to defend GOM by ultimately stating that they (and this is basically what you said) make the same format mistakes as major league baseball and other athletic organizations, you criticize Naniwa's actions, and don't actually go into the one opinion you have that might be critical of GOM. Play it safe by attacking the party that can't respond to you in a way that might harm your business...
Naniwa, you've had a tough run in Korea so far. I wasn't always a big fan of yours, but your games in Korea have made me a bigger fan. I'm watching the quality of the games you've been playing, and recognize that those games come from a competitive spirit which can only exist when the format promotes passionate competition. Keep your chin up, your day will come. Your games have been awesome. Even though you've had a lot of losses, the games themselves have demonstrated that you do belong in the same arena as those top players.
Edit: wanted to add that I agree with Methy: "I think it's TERRIBLE to set a precedent where putting on a sham performance in a match is *more* acceptable than forfeiting a match, and I've felt this way for a very long time."
That's a well thought-out post. I would like to correct one thing however, Naniwa has said this on LO3, he did not ask for a forfeit. (However, if he had asked I think the answer would have been no; not sure though)
On December 17 2011 03:02 Vidar wrote: OP has highlighted a ridiculous problem in many different sports by talking about completely unnecessary games and highlighting how teams DO NOT put everything they have into them because the games are meaningless, yet instead of thinking that Starcraft 2 could simply solve this problem by NOT doing what every other sport has done (and oftentimes GOM does, indeed, eliminate inconsequential games), he says that SC2 players should deal with it the way other athletes have. I understand that this is because of the OP's perspective as being a manager and businessman, instead of an athlete, but we in the competitive gaming community are cerebral types who are offended at being told that something is valuable when we can see that the format itself prevents reward. This elimination of unnecessary games is an EASY FIX, not some ancient thing that "has existed since the beginning of time in sports and thus must be recognized as legitimate." OP himself discusses all the gray areas of these types of games, especially the type C which is what we have here. If the game doesn't matter (ie the format gives no reward for winning or losing, be it money or the capacity to progress further in the tournament), I DON'T WANT the players to bust out their best strategies and secret weapons. Tbh, I'd rather that the game not even be played (which was clearly Nani's intention by requesting to forfeit before he was denied that option).
Furthermore, the OP suggested several times that he disagreed with the severity of Nani's punishment, but for some reason didn't get into that. IT'S IMPORTANT. Right now you sound like you're just kissing up to GOM. You jump in to defend GOM by ultimately stating that they (and this is basically what you said) make the same format mistakes as major league baseball and other athletic organizations, you criticize Naniwa's actions, and don't actually go into the one opinion you have that might be critical of GOM. Play it safe by attacking the party that can't respond to you in a way that might harm your business...
Naniwa, you've had a tough run in Korea so far. I wasn't always a big fan of yours, but your games in Korea have made me a bigger fan. I'm watching the quality of the games you've been playing, and recognize that those games come from a competitive spirit which can only exist when the format promotes passionate competition. Keep your chin up, your day will come. Your games have been awesome. Even though you've had a lot of losses, the games themselves have demonstrated that you do belong in the same arena as those top players.
Edit: wanted to add that I agree with Methy: "I think it's TERRIBLE to set a precedent where putting on a sham performance in a match is *more* acceptable than forfeiting a match, and I've felt this way for a very long time."
That's a well thought-out post. I would like to correct one thing however, Naniwa has said this on LO3, he did not ask for a forfeit. (However, if he had asked I think the answer would have been no; not sure though)
Naniwa did actually ask for forfeit the match, but it was rejected
Thanks for this perspective. I was up and watching the tournament when it happened, and the incident was quite a surprise. One of the things I wish pro-gamers would really appreciate is the degree to which they're supported by fans. Among the thousands watching, there are some really passionate folks playing vicariously through the pros "This is our chance to beat Nestea!!" I think Catz embraces this level of support with his frequent cheers of, "We win" when he's streaming. When you look at the flip side of that, who wants to say, "We threw the game?"
No matter how well written and well developed the OPs post is, I can stand behind it, for multiples reasons.
First and foremost, I think that the discussion of whether or not Naniwa's action was warranted or not is a moot point. Most, if not everyone, seems to agree on the fact that Naniwa shouldn't have done that, and he gave out public excuse, which to me, closes the matter. I believe that mistakes are made by everyone, professional or not, and as long as a proper recognition of the wrong and excuses are given out to the appropriate person, I don't see the need to further discuss the matter.
I also believe that this post, while highly informative, derails what should be the real discussion. As mentionned, to me debate on Naniwa's action really should come to a close and I don't see further need to discuss it. The only thing that additionnal discussion of this matter does is stir away the discussion from GOM's action, and to a lot of people, serve as an excuse for GOM themselves . Now I know your post willfully avoided talking about GOM, but through it, arguments can still be found that would somewhat justify GOM's approach, and what I find annoying is not so much your stance on it, but rather that your post can be used by people as an argument in GOM's favor as a whole.
eg : ''Well look, EGALEX said that Naniwa was in the wrong and people agreed with him, so obviously the logical conclusion is that what GOM did is okay right?''
In any case, to conclude that point, I basically don't see the true reason to further discuss something that to me should be closed, other then serve as ammunition in another debate which you seemed to want to avoid.
Now as far as the post itself, theres also a couple of points on which I would like to disagree
I would ask you to consider holding players to higher standards of professionalism; and to also consider the fact that it's not GOM's responsibility to cater their format solely to suit players. GOM's job (as is the case with any professional sports league) is to provide a quality product to its viewers, while providing its competitors with fair, reasonable playing conditions, and the Blizzard Cup's format balanced these factors acceptably
To me, this seems completely wrong. GOM is a business, they are the ones that want my money, they should be the ones acting to a very high standard of professionalism if they do want my money. IT IS their responsability to cater their format to suit players, as the players are the show, the only reason their business is making money is by displaying these players to the audience, as such it should be all about the players. They can make me as happy as they want, if there is no player playing it wont matter to me I will not give them any money. The quality product is the players, and to have players doing things right you need to have an event set up right. But of course, they also need fair and reasonable playing conditions, but these conditions need to be player driven, which is exactly the opposite of what happened. (Forcing a player to play a pointless game of a tournament once he was on tilt and exhausted, and then punishing him unfairly for this.) To me, this is unacceptable when your business is making money only due to these players.
By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist.
I can't believe this comparison was even made. Your whole argumentation was good but things like this just undermine the whole credibility of the argument. (Theres a big difference between ''the outcome of the game being meaningles'' and a game being totally ''meaningless'' to a player. The all-star games are not meaningless for the players who play in them.)
Now, with that in mind, I dont think either that what Nani did was right, but would people really have prefered a game where Naniwa would have done a fail 4-gate without any willingness to win? I dont think so. It wouldn't have stirred all that drama, but in the end the result is exactly the same, it wouldnt have been interesting for the viewers either, and that is all GOMs fault for putting up a stage where such result can exist.
Anyways, even if I don't totally agree with your point, thank you very much for your input, opinion of people inside the business is always welcomed.
Hmm this is a pretty well thought out post... I guess I agree with most of it, but still think that Naniwa is not completely to blame, but that GOM does share some of the burden for their format
And yeah, people are comparing e-sports to other big sports like hockey. But there's a big difference: in e-sports, the people who compete are gamers. They're not athletes. They're just ordinary joes, gamers, and that's why we love them. Like Idra, for instance. He's a great personality to have in the scene regardless of how you feel about him. Personally I think he sucks, but he's funny (the video on youtube with Artosis dodging his awkward high five is hilarious) when he rages and gg's early, so I'm glad he's with us. The kind of behavior he's put out in the past would've earned him ridicule at best in say soccer. Albeit, there are athletes who behave badly as well. But it's hard to compare, really, and that's why I think you shouldn't.
Point is, don't try to make that comparison. E-sports is for nerds by nerds and the competitors are nerds. As far as I'm concerned. I understand they want to expand, and that's fine, being a nerd is socially acceptable these days. Just look at all the Barcrafts. Bringing all the nerds out of the woodwork.
But yeah, Korea and all. Serious business. And I respect that. Don't doubt for a second though that if it was dreamhack or MLG, it wouldn't have been half the uproar.
On December 17 2011 03:02 Vidar wrote: OP has highlighted a ridiculous problem in many different sports by talking about completely unnecessary games and highlighting how teams DO NOT put everything they have into them because the games are meaningless, yet instead of thinking that Starcraft 2 could simply solve this problem by NOT doing what every other sport has done (and oftentimes GOM does, indeed, eliminate inconsequential games), he says that SC2 players should deal with it the way other athletes have. I understand that this is because of the OP's perspective as being a manager and businessman, instead of an athlete, but we in the competitive gaming community are cerebral types who are offended at being told that something is valuable when we can see that the format itself prevents reward. This elimination of unnecessary games is an EASY FIX, not some ancient thing that "has existed since the beginning of time in sports and thus must be recognized as legitimate." OP himself discusses all the gray areas of these types of games, especially the type C which is what we have here. If the game doesn't matter (ie the format gives no reward for winning or losing, be it money or the capacity to progress further in the tournament), I DON'T WANT the players to bust out their best strategies and secret weapons. Tbh, I'd rather that the game not even be played (which was clearly Nani's intention by requesting to forfeit before he was denied that option).
Furthermore, the OP suggested several times that he disagreed with the severity of Nani's punishment, but for some reason didn't get into that. IT'S IMPORTANT. Right now you sound like you're just kissing up to GOM. You jump in to defend GOM by ultimately stating that they (and this is basically what you said) make the same format mistakes as major league baseball and other athletic organizations, you criticize Naniwa's actions, and don't actually go into the one opinion you have that might be critical of GOM. Play it safe by attacking the party that can't respond to you in a way that might harm your business...
Naniwa, you've had a tough run in Korea so far. I wasn't always a big fan of yours, but your games in Korea have made me a bigger fan. I'm watching the quality of the games you've been playing, and recognize that those games come from a competitive spirit which can only exist when the format promotes passionate competition. Keep your chin up, your day will come. Your games have been awesome. Even though you've had a lot of losses, the games themselves have demonstrated that you do belong in the same arena as those top players.
Edit: wanted to add that I agree with Methy: "I think it's TERRIBLE to set a precedent where putting on a sham performance in a match is *more* acceptable than forfeiting a match, and I've felt this way for a very long time."
That's a well thought-out post. I would like to correct one thing however, Naniwa has said this on LO3, he did not ask for a forfeit. (However, if he had asked I think the answer would have been no; not sure though)
Naniwa did actually ask for forfeit the match, but it was rejected
incorrect, when he was asked directly on live on 3 if he had asked to forfeit, he answered that he had not asked.
edit: which the poster above you already mentioned. If you still think he has asked to forfeit but was denied maybe you should cite a source, since he has stated explicitly in an interview that he did not ask.
On December 16 2011 16:23 Angelbelow wrote: For those who are questioning whether Alex has to right to comment on something like this, doesn't it say something when Nazgul supports this blog and is preparing one himself? Doesnt it say something when FXOBoSs already has his opinion blogged? And a number of other notable TL members have also spared their opinion including players like Tyler.. should they all shove it too? We have shows like SToG and LO3 but most of those guys are affiliated with teams and organizations yet they give their opinions weekly, often on controversy matters - and to are delight. They shouldn't stop either.
In line with the real sport comparisons, when David Stern, the commissioner of the NBA blocked a blockbuster trade in recent days did the coaches, players, general managers (especially the ones directly involved) exploded with criticism and disapproval. SC2 isn't at a level where we have professional journalists providing professional commentary on current events in sc2. Therefore, for now at least, I think were quite privileged to be able hear the opinions of players and management's opinion on situations like this.
No organization exists to fine such outlandish comments. Go ahead. Doesn't mean it's the professional thing to do. If you want others to treat you as professionals then conduct yourselves as such.
Keep it behind closed doors. Deal with your own players and don't release everything to the damn Media.
So I guess anyone involved with sc2 that has an opinion (especially involving constructive criticism) about someone else in the sc2 community should keep it to themselves or risk being called unprofessional by you?
You don't have to change your opinion, just know that they are a high volume of people that actually appreciate that Alex, Nazgul, Tyler, FXOBoSs, Doa (just to name a FEW) shared their opinions with the fans.
Upper management keeps things behind closed doors for a reason. They know how to conduct themselves with public relations. Every professional organization I know does this.
Fair thing to say but that really depends on WHAT they're discussing.
If its player A is getting cut from the team because hes has ABC problems, then you obviously keep it to yourself.
If they're giving their opinion based on something that happened in front of a national audience is perfectly fine.
I just explained why this isn't the case. If you've actually read what I said.
On December 16 2011 15:09 StarStruck wrote: You are missing the point. GM's and coaches do not question other player's work ethic. It isn't their job to. Thus the Lebron move has no relevancy because they weren't questioning Lebron's work ethic. Pat Quinn and numerous other coaches have been fined heftily by the leagues for doing such demeanor's. It can carry a 5 to 6 digit price tag.
Hell, even calling another player's hit dirty can hit you hard:
The reason why the anecdote works is because all 9 matches count towards one thing. Which two players move onto the next round.
The words 'work ethic' didn't show up in Alex's blog post... He was commenting on Naniwa's decision to probe-rush. He hasn't stated that he doesn't think Naniwa practices hard.
So the 82 games that each hockey team plays in a season leads to one thing: which 16 teams will make it into the playoffs. So if during a couple of the games, a few teams decide to stay home and watch Jerry Springer rather than show up to their games, should we not care since we have to take the whole picture of the ENTIRE season into consideration and seeing as most of the season was great, then who cares about those couple of games? Again, bad anecdote.
You have to read between the lines of what he said.
I made no mention of practice. Work ethic goes way beyond practice.
You can try to spin doctor it all you want. Here's where your argument falls apart. All of the matches happened on the same day. There is no rest period. No time for preparation. It's a slug fest when it happens back-to-back.
Each competitor fights one round against another opponent. There are four rounds. It's how the event is packaged. You buy your ticket to watch in the studio and it is packaged as one event.
Almost sounds like a UFC fight card, no?
With that said, I have a question for you: would you honestly go up to the ticket booth and ask for your money back when eight bouts were really entertaining and close, but Mark Hominick got KOed in the first nine seconds by the Korean Zombie?
That's very different from what happened, but I think it resonates with the idea that shit happens to great athletes all the time. Lots of people were hyped for that fight, but it was a wash.
I haven't read the rest of your posts so Ill just respond to the bold part. Hominick being KOed by Chan a good thing. Thats what many fans pay to see, a highlight reel knockout. That's part of the reason why they pay to watch the UFC (especially fans that are new to the sport) and I would argue that a rare highlight reel knock out like that lives up to the hype.
I would read all posts. That's what I do anyway. I find it's very important because that way you get a good feel for what the person is trying to say.
Anyway, not everyone is going to share that opinion of what happened. I know a lot of people who were pissed off especially when Mark was fighting in front of his home crowd.
It's the same thing with Naniwa. Everyone has a mixed opinion. Some people laughed, other people booed and some people were indifferent others thought he was just being himself, etc.
That's the great thing about public opinion. You cannot please everybody.
The only reason the home crowd would be mad is because Mark got beat in an embarrassing fashion.. but Mark didnt throw the fight. He went out cocky and got caught. The Korean Zombie is known to be a wild striker who loves to bang, Mark shouldn't have came out with his hands down like that. But make no mistake, Mark wanted to win. As an avid MMA fan, I see NO reason why anyone would be mad about that match unless they're a Mark Hominick fan boy and are upset that he lost. Ive never seen anyone complain about a highreel knockout (unless its their favorite player that got knocked out =p)
Its absolutely not the same thing with Naniwa because the only thing youre actually comparing is the length of the match. I guarantee you that match is going to be in the next "UFC Ultimate Knockouts" while Naniwa's game will never be marketed to an audience and will continue to be condemned.
btw on a side note.. what did you think about that Mir and Nog fight.. as an old pride fan it sucked watching that fight lol. Mir is a such a submission beast though.
I agree with you Alex but I actually think the vast majority actually thought Naniwas decision was poor for just those reasons you explain. Even though they might have not expressed it as good as you have.
I think the inflammatory issue many want to debate is the arbitrary rules and GomTV's and MLGs relation regarding seed into Code S and the severeness of the punishment. If GomTV had warned Naniwa for his actions and then said "Next season anyone who do anything similar will be removed from their Code S status" I think everyone would have been more or less happy with the situation. However, after following the BW scene for years I doubt the majority in Korea share my oppinion.
Edit: We have had the same issues with our national football association here in Sweden, where they screw up one day, make up a story and change the rules to fit their new story. This happens in politics, legislation and other places where corruption is bound to happen. This is why I care so much, not because I care about Naniwa, but because right should be right and not something else.
On December 16 2011 16:23 Angelbelow wrote: For those who are questioning whether Alex has to right to comment on something like this, doesn't it say something when Nazgul supports this blog and is preparing one himself? Doesnt it say something when FXOBoSs already has his opinion blogged? And a number of other notable TL members have also spared their opinion including players like Tyler.. should they all shove it too? We have shows like SToG and LO3 but most of those guys are affiliated with teams and organizations yet they give their opinions weekly, often on controversy matters - and to are delight. They shouldn't stop either.
In line with the real sport comparisons, when David Stern, the commissioner of the NBA blocked a blockbuster trade in recent days did the coaches, players, general managers (especially the ones directly involved) exploded with criticism and disapproval. SC2 isn't at a level where we have professional journalists providing professional commentary on current events in sc2. Therefore, for now at least, I think were quite privileged to be able hear the opinions of players and management's opinion on situations like this.
No organization exists to fine such outlandish comments. Go ahead. Doesn't mean it's the professional thing to do. If you want others to treat you as professionals then conduct yourselves as such.
Keep it behind closed doors. Deal with your own players and don't release everything to the damn Media.
So I guess anyone involved with sc2 that has an opinion (especially involving constructive criticism) about someone else in the sc2 community should keep it to themselves or risk being called unprofessional by you?
You don't have to change your opinion, just know that they are a high volume of people that actually appreciate that Alex, Nazgul, Tyler, FXOBoSs, Doa (just to name a FEW) shared their opinions with the fans.
Upper management keeps things behind closed doors for a reason. They know how to conduct themselves with public relations. Every professional organization I know does this.
Fair thing to say but that really depends on WHAT they're discussing.
If its player A is getting cut from the team because hes has ABC problems, then you obviously keep it to yourself.
If they're giving their opinion based on something that happened in front of a national audience is perfectly fine.
I just explained why this isn't the case. If you've actually read what I said.
On December 16 2011 16:14 Angelbelow wrote:
On December 16 2011 15:51 StarStruck wrote:
On December 16 2011 15:20 Kahuna. wrote:
On December 16 2011 15:09 StarStruck wrote: You are missing the point. GM's and coaches do not question other player's work ethic. It isn't their job to. Thus the Lebron move has no relevancy because they weren't questioning Lebron's work ethic. Pat Quinn and numerous other coaches have been fined heftily by the leagues for doing such demeanor's. It can carry a 5 to 6 digit price tag.
Hell, even calling another player's hit dirty can hit you hard:
The reason why the anecdote works is because all 9 matches count towards one thing. Which two players move onto the next round.
The words 'work ethic' didn't show up in Alex's blog post... He was commenting on Naniwa's decision to probe-rush. He hasn't stated that he doesn't think Naniwa practices hard.
So the 82 games that each hockey team plays in a season leads to one thing: which 16 teams will make it into the playoffs. So if during a couple of the games, a few teams decide to stay home and watch Jerry Springer rather than show up to their games, should we not care since we have to take the whole picture of the ENTIRE season into consideration and seeing as most of the season was great, then who cares about those couple of games? Again, bad anecdote.
You have to read between the lines of what he said.
I made no mention of practice. Work ethic goes way beyond practice.
You can try to spin doctor it all you want. Here's where your argument falls apart. All of the matches happened on the same day. There is no rest period. No time for preparation. It's a slug fest when it happens back-to-back.
Each competitor fights one round against another opponent. There are four rounds. It's how the event is packaged. You buy your ticket to watch in the studio and it is packaged as one event.
Almost sounds like a UFC fight card, no?
With that said, I have a question for you: would you honestly go up to the ticket booth and ask for your money back when eight bouts were really entertaining and close, but Mark Hominick got KOed in the first nine seconds by the Korean Zombie?
That's very different from what happened, but I think it resonates with the idea that shit happens to great athletes all the time. Lots of people were hyped for that fight, but it was a wash.
I haven't read the rest of your posts so Ill just respond to the bold part. Hominick being KOed by Chan a good thing. Thats what many fans pay to see, a highlight reel knockout. That's part of the reason why they pay to watch the UFC (especially fans that are new to the sport) and I would argue that a rare highlight reel knock out like that lives up to the hype.
I would read all posts. That's what I do anyway. I find it's very important because that way you get a good feel for what the person is trying to say.
Anyway, not everyone is going to share that opinion of what happened. I know a lot of people who were pissed off especially when Mark was fighting in front of his home crowd.
It's the same thing with Naniwa. Everyone has a mixed opinion. Some people laughed, other people booed and some people were indifferent others thought he was just being himself, etc.
That's the great thing about public opinion. You cannot please everybody.
The only reason the home crowd would be mad is because Mark got beat in an embarrassing fashion.. but Mark didnt throw the fight. He went out cocky and got caught. The Korean Zombie is known to be a wild striker who loves to bang, Mark shouldn't have came out with his hands down like that. But make no mistake, Mark wanted to win. As an avid MMA fan, I see NO reason why anyone would be mad about that match unless they're a Mark Hominick fan boy and are upset that he lost. Ive never seen anyone complain about a highreel knockout (unless its their favorite player that got knocked out =p)
Its absolutely not the same thing with Naniwa because the only thing youre actually comparing is the length of the match. I guarantee you that match is going to be in the next "UFC Ultimate Knockouts" while Naniwa's game will never be marketed to an audience and will continue to be condemned.
btw on a side note.. what did you think about that Mir and Nog fight.. as an old pride fan it sucked watching that fight lol. Mir is a such a submission beast though.
How can you even compare what Naniwa did to what happened to Hominick. Naniwa gave up, Hominick just got his ass handed to him in record fashion. It was never a question of effort or tossing the match. On that note why the hell did Hominick underestimate an opponent that is nicknamed the the motherf****** korean zombie. Also that Nog fight made me sad because Mir seems like a big douchebag and Nog deserved better
Scenario B, in which the match is meaningless for the player himself, but has meaning for his opponent and/or a third-party (example: IdrA vs. White-Ra at the IPL3 Finals, in which IdrA forfeited because he had already qualified for bracket play - which was seeded randomly - and wanted to get some rest).
I fail to see how this is ANY different than what happened in Naniwa's game. I'm also surprised you didn't "tap on his shoulder" for that one.
In line with this, selling subscriptions and season passes is, obviously, crucially important to GOM.TV's business model. And ultimately, the quality of their product is defined by the entertainment value of their matches.
Except there is nothing entertaining about meaningless games...
We don't know whether NaNi was exhausted, or frustrated, or unmotivated, or just didn't care about winning the game (for whatever reason).
Actually we do know. There's was an interview in which he talked about how hard he tried. How would anyone not be mentally exhausted, frustrated, or unmotivated after losing 3 heartbreaking games and having to play a meaningless one?
But, frankly, we don't need to; his actions were absolutely unacceptable, regardless of their reasoning. If he wasn't feeling up to putting forth maximum effort (again, for whatever reason), he could've just done a two-base all-in, or four-gated, or executed one of many other strategies that would've almost certainly ended the game in ten minutes or less.
The end result would be the same. You don't honestly believe that a 4 gate would work against Nestea right? You're basically asking him to "dance" and I'm pretty sure (much like Harrison Ford in one of his many political movies) he wouldn't want to stoop to that level.
I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers. What NaNiwa did was basically akin to a last-place MLB team, during its final game of the season, intentionally striking out in every at bat. Just imagine what would happen in that situation: fans would ask for their money back; advertising contracts would be violated; and the league would certainly take action against the team and its players - just like GOM did with NaNi - in order to protect its product.
I am a disgruntled GOM customer. Ex-customer actually. I have been a subscriber since day one of GSL sc2 but I will not buy a pass ever again after their decision to suspend him from Code S. I value entertaining games with high profile players playing games that MATTER. Where they are forced to work for their wins. Not games where they do halfed ass 4 gates, 6 pools, 2 base all ins because they don't care about winning.
Also your MLB comparison is flawed because most people don't buy a single ticket to see several exciting games in a row, and then given an exhibition match at the end that is meaningless. I would say if anything, most people would walk out of the stadium after seeing the nail biting matches that mattered.
For those of you who, after reading this, agree that NaNi's actions were unacceptable, but still blame GOM for utilizing a format which allows for inconsequential matches, I would ask you to consider holding players to higher standards of professionalism; and to also consider the fact that it's not GOM's responsibility to cater their format solely to suit players.
They are NOT catering to the viewers by forcing pros to play meaningless games. This is exactly why noone takes the Pro Bowl seriously. You can't even blitz for crying out loud. Everyone KNOWS that they're not really trying and are doing their best to not get injured so that they remain healthy for the games that actually matter!
GOM's job (as is the case with any professional sports league) is to provide a quality product to its viewers, while providing its competitors with fair, reasonable playing conditions, and the Blizzard Cup's format balanced these factors acceptably. Additionally, I would also point out the fact that, as illustrated above, every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist.
See above! Also, I find that comparing sc2 to professional sports is huge stretch. Especially your "meaningless games" comparison. NFL and NBA teams for example, are often comprised of new players who need time to gel and work together as a cohesive unit. There is only so much you can do in practice to attain that level. Playing regular season games however helps them. It's like a perfect form of practice - Experience. Most starcraft players play so many ladder games and custom games against other pros that are seldom different in nature than a tournament game. I'm sure it's pretty safe to say that Naniwa is at a point right now where he doesn't really need the "booth experience." I'm sure most of us would also agree that it is also important for him to not reveal all his strategies in meaningless games when he could save them for a real game. Imagine for one moment that Naniwa had thought up a brilliant and unique strategy against Nestea. Now imagine that he executes it perfectly and wins. What does he have to show for it? Sure he can brag that he beat Nestea again, but I'm sure he would much rather save a build like that for a Code S match or another MLG event etc
Ultimately, in order for eSports to be successful, whether short-term or long-term, players, teams, and tournaments must each pull their weight appropriately. Without all parties contributing, the industry cannot produce a quality product for our fans and community. And without a quality product being produced, there's no community-to-industry revenue, and there's no self-sustaining ecosystem.
I couldn't agree more! Time for GomTv to take a look at their format and ask themselves if it works.
Against NesTea, NaNiwa didn't do his part. That's why I find his actions to be unacceptable. And that's why you should, too.
No. I happen to have a difference of opinion. I hope you're ok with that.
NaNi, you're an incredible player, with thousands upon thousands of fans who just want to see you play. Next time, play.
He will. But not because of your post, because he doesn't want tournament officials to get all emo and suspend him again.
Alex Garfield CEO, Evil Geniuses @ottersareneat on Twitter
*For those of you eager to pull out the pitchforks, the IPL3/White-Ra situation is quite different; at the time of IdrA's match against White-Ra, IPL3 was already behind schedule, and didn't even have time to broadcast all of its remaining group play matches.
el oh el That makes ALL the difference! *rolls eyes*
Also your MLB comparison is flawed because most people don't buy a single ticket to see several exciting games in a row, and then given an exhibition match at the end that is meaningless. I would say if anything, most people would walk out of the stadium after seeing the nail biting matches that mattered.
However I'm sure there are still people who want to watch the game, so the players have to play.
See above! Also, I find that comparing sc2 to professional sports is huge stretch. Especially your "meaningless games" comparison. NFL and NBA teams for example, are often comprised of new players who need time to gel and work together as a cohesive unit. There is only so much you can do in practice to attain that level. Playing regular season games however helps them. It's like a perfect form of practice - Experience. Most starcraft players play so many ladder games and custom games against other pros that are seldom different in nature than a tournament game. I'm sure it's pretty safe to say that Naniwa is at a point right now where he doesn't really need the "booth experience." I'm sure most of us would also agree that it is also important for him to not reveal all his strategies in meaningless games when he could save them for a real game. Imagine for one moment that Naniwa had thought up a brilliant and unique strategy against Nestea. Now imagine that he executes it perfectly and wins. What does he have to show for it? Sure he can brag that he beat Nestea again, but I'm sure he would much rather save a build like that for a Code S match or another MLG event etc
Any player in the NFL (or any high end competitive league for anything (sports, chess, etc)) has a ton of field experience as well, from practice to extremely important matches. Are you saying they don't need any more "booth experience" (i.e. field experience) as well, or is that even an argument? Naniwa doesn't have to show any new secret strategy, he could've have 4 gated like he said.
There are people who want to see a meaningless game, some of you are completely ignoring this reality. It's especially true if the game has been announced beforehand and there is hype around it, when that is the case the player has the responsibility to play a game, meaningless or not. If the player doesn't fill that responsibility then people do get upset and the people who support the player (teams, sponsors, leagues) do notice...this could be very bad for the player if he continues to repeat this kind of behavior. Fortunately, Naniwa understood this and probably won't do this again.
On December 17 2011 08:08 Reggiegigas wrote: And yeah, people are comparing e-sports to other big sports like hockey. But there's a big difference: in e-sports, the people who compete are gamers. They're not athletes. They're just ordinary joes, gamers, and that's why we love them.
I feel bad for you if you can't see athletes as ordinary people.
On December 15 2011 19:02 Gobe wrote: The problem is that if Naniwa had played out the match and entirely fail because he was unable to perform his best, that then directly reflects on him as a player. The format of the tournament put Naniwa in a bad position, and then punished him when he responded.
Yes, because people judge his performance and talent based on 1 single BO1 right? If people do, then its a problem with those fans and not with NaNiwa.
On December 17 2011 14:56 Ruski wrote: Herp Derp lets makes games not matter and expect people to try. Corporate stupidity & Greed.
How dare a company try and generate enough revenue to continue running the highest level, in terms of skill, tournament and make a profit to continue improving it! The audacity!
The fact the game didn't matter has no effect on the situation. The tournament isn't designed around making Naniwa happy, it is designed around creating high level and entertaining games the captivate an audience and generate profit.
As I had turned off the stream before their game even started because I didn't even want to watch a game that meant nothing. If GOM didn't want to lose money they should have had a better tournament format.
Herp Derp lets makes games not matter and expect people to try. Corporate stupidity & Greed.
There are lots of games that don't matter in all sports, games that don't matter to one side or both because they've made them that way by losing in prior games. Blatantly and deliberately throwing their meaningless game still isn't acceptable. The league didn't make those games meaningless, the teams' prior failures to win did.
Corporate greed is not an accurate charge against GOM, or stupidity.
On December 16 2011 16:23 Angelbelow wrote: For those who are questioning whether Alex has to right to comment on something like this, doesn't it say something when Nazgul supports this blog and is preparing one himself? Doesnt it say something when FXOBoSs already has his opinion blogged? And a number of other notable TL members have also spared their opinion including players like Tyler.. should they all shove it too? We have shows like SToG and LO3 but most of those guys are affiliated with teams and organizations yet they give their opinions weekly, often on controversy matters - and to are delight. They shouldn't stop either.
In line with the real sport comparisons, when David Stern, the commissioner of the NBA blocked a blockbuster trade in recent days did the coaches, players, general managers (especially the ones directly involved) exploded with criticism and disapproval. SC2 isn't at a level where we have professional journalists providing professional commentary on current events in sc2. Therefore, for now at least, I think were quite privileged to be able hear the opinions of players and management's opinion on situations like this.
No organization exists to fine such outlandish comments. Go ahead. Doesn't mean it's the professional thing to do. If you want others to treat you as professionals then conduct yourselves as such.
Keep it behind closed doors. Deal with your own players and don't release everything to the damn Media.
So I guess anyone involved with sc2 that has an opinion (especially involving constructive criticism) about someone else in the sc2 community should keep it to themselves or risk being called unprofessional by you?
You don't have to change your opinion, just know that they are a high volume of people that actually appreciate that Alex, Nazgul, Tyler, FXOBoSs, Doa (just to name a FEW) shared their opinions with the fans.
Upper management keeps things behind closed doors for a reason. They know how to conduct themselves with public relations. Every professional organization I know does this.
Fair thing to say but that really depends on WHAT they're discussing.
If its player A is getting cut from the team because hes has ABC problems, then you obviously keep it to yourself.
If they're giving their opinion based on something that happened in front of a national audience is perfectly fine.
I just explained why this isn't the case. If you've actually read what I said.
On December 16 2011 16:14 Angelbelow wrote:
On December 16 2011 15:51 StarStruck wrote:
On December 16 2011 15:20 Kahuna. wrote:
On December 16 2011 15:09 StarStruck wrote: You are missing the point. GM's and coaches do not question other player's work ethic. It isn't their job to. Thus the Lebron move has no relevancy because they weren't questioning Lebron's work ethic. Pat Quinn and numerous other coaches have been fined heftily by the leagues for doing such demeanor's. It can carry a 5 to 6 digit price tag.
Hell, even calling another player's hit dirty can hit you hard:
The reason why the anecdote works is because all 9 matches count towards one thing. Which two players move onto the next round.
The words 'work ethic' didn't show up in Alex's blog post... He was commenting on Naniwa's decision to probe-rush. He hasn't stated that he doesn't think Naniwa practices hard.
So the 82 games that each hockey team plays in a season leads to one thing: which 16 teams will make it into the playoffs. So if during a couple of the games, a few teams decide to stay home and watch Jerry Springer rather than show up to their games, should we not care since we have to take the whole picture of the ENTIRE season into consideration and seeing as most of the season was great, then who cares about those couple of games? Again, bad anecdote.
You have to read between the lines of what he said.
I made no mention of practice. Work ethic goes way beyond practice.
You can try to spin doctor it all you want. Here's where your argument falls apart. All of the matches happened on the same day. There is no rest period. No time for preparation. It's a slug fest when it happens back-to-back.
Each competitor fights one round against another opponent. There are four rounds. It's how the event is packaged. You buy your ticket to watch in the studio and it is packaged as one event.
Almost sounds like a UFC fight card, no?
With that said, I have a question for you: would you honestly go up to the ticket booth and ask for your money back when eight bouts were really entertaining and close, but Mark Hominick got KOed in the first nine seconds by the Korean Zombie?
That's very different from what happened, but I think it resonates with the idea that shit happens to great athletes all the time. Lots of people were hyped for that fight, but it was a wash.
I haven't read the rest of your posts so Ill just respond to the bold part. Hominick being KOed by Chan a good thing. Thats what many fans pay to see, a highlight reel knockout. That's part of the reason why they pay to watch the UFC (especially fans that are new to the sport) and I would argue that a rare highlight reel knock out like that lives up to the hype.
I would read all posts. That's what I do anyway. I find it's very important because that way you get a good feel for what the person is trying to say.
Anyway, not everyone is going to share that opinion of what happened. I know a lot of people who were pissed off especially when Mark was fighting in front of his home crowd.
It's the same thing with Naniwa. Everyone has a mixed opinion. Some people laughed, other people booed and some people were indifferent others thought he was just being himself, etc.
That's the great thing about public opinion. You cannot please everybody.
The only reason the home crowd would be mad is because Mark got beat in an embarrassing fashion.. but Mark didnt throw the fight. He went out cocky and got caught. The Korean Zombie is known to be a wild striker who loves to bang, Mark shouldn't have came out with his hands down like that. But make no mistake, Mark wanted to win. As an avid MMA fan, I see NO reason why anyone would be mad about that match unless they're a Mark Hominick fan boy and are upset that he lost. Ive never seen anyone complain about a highreel knockout (unless its their favorite player that got knocked out =p)
Its absolutely not the same thing with Naniwa because the only thing youre actually comparing is the length of the match. I guarantee you that match is going to be in the next "UFC Ultimate Knockouts" while Naniwa's game will never be marketed to an audience and will continue to be condemned.
btw on a side note.. what did you think about that Mir and Nog fight.. as an old pride fan it sucked watching that fight lol. Mir is a such a submission beast though.
How can you even compare what Naniwa did to what happened to Hominick. Naniwa gave up, Hominick just got his ass handed to him in record fashion. It was never a question of effort or tossing the match. On that note why the hell did Hominick underestimate an opponent that is nicknamed the the motherf****** korean zombie. Also that Nog fight made me sad because Mir seems like a big douchebag and Nog deserved better
I'm assuming youre responding to Starstruck but quoted me? Anyway I agree with you and disagreed with him. Completely different situations.
As a person who does not follow e-sports to any great degree, save for when my friends tell me about something crazy/funny/cool that happened in the SC2 pro scene, I find the dichotomy between the SC2 "professional" model and that of established professional sports (in the United States, at least), to have a substantial bearing on the situation.
Allow me to explain: if Felix Hernandez, of the usually-last-place Mariners, pitches poorly for a few innings, puts his team out of the game, and generally sucks, he does not have to go through the ignominy of playing out the remaining innings of the game.. His manager walks out to the mound, slaps him on the butt, and sends him on his way. The fans know King Felix is one of the best in the game, and on a moribund franchise like the Mariners, they likely only came to the game to see Hernandez pitch. The fans understand, however, that even the best pitcher in the game can't always be great. Instead, an eager young reliever, someone who is hungry, and generally on a tight rope in terms of his roster spot, comes into the game. They know they need to pitch well, or at least try, to maintain their roster spot. The fans watch the reliever, hoping he is the next big thing for their team. The fans don't demand that Felix Hernandez stay in the game for another eight innings just so they can watch Felix Hernandez throw a little ball for a little while longer. They let him retire to the comfort of his teammates, away from the spotlight so he can get it back together. Yay.
Now, in this situation with the Swedish fellow, we have a young guy (and forgive my ignorance of the structure of e-sports tournaments here), who is essentially all alone in a foreign country. In absolute terms, he gets hammered in his matches. He just gave up eight runs in the first inning, and when he looks into the dugout, there is no manager there to pull the plug; there is no one there to stop the bleeding. Instead, he realizes that he has to keep playing, even though his mental focus has been utterly shattered.
Again, here is where the odd format of these tournaments comes to light. In a high school wrestling tournament, for example, you typically have a match every hour or so until you lose twice. At that point, you are eliminated from contention. You cannot win, and as such you do not continue to have opponents. Would people still watch you if the tournament organizers threw you out onto a mat with some other guy who just got his ass kicked? Probably. Would it be fun for you, at all? No. It would suck. You just finished getting demolished by people you were supposed to beat, or at least contend with. You feel awful. You're tired, physically and emotionally.
What if they made you go out there, though? Your coaches would pull you aside - explain to you that you have to go out there, one more time. There are fans watching. They would tell you to get yourself back in the game for the next six minutes (length of a wrestling match - highly relevant, I know). They would tell you that the match doesn't mean anything, but it doesn't mean you should just give up, either. They would motivate you. They would tell you they watched the other guy's matches, and he sucks. You can beat him if you give it your best. You can end the tournament on a good note. You get amped up - you dredge up your last reserves of energy, and you go out there and try to kick some ass.
Naniwa, though? He (to my knowledge) doesn't have someone in his ear every step of the tournament, telling him to dig a little deeper, telling him that while this match may not matter now, it matters. It's not an easy thing to drag yourself up from total defeat to go play one more round - a round that is meaningless, a show match for the bemusement of those left watching the fallen. It makes you feel like a puppet. It isn't something you want to do - you don't care that the tournament organizer sold tickets for people to watch - you just want to go home and gather your emotions together.
Yes, I understand that what Naniwa did was, in absolute terms, wrong. However, throwing him back out there for a match that was utterly without meaning? There are very, very few people on this planet who would perform well under those circumstances.
There are people who said he could have done any number of things - he could have 4gated, 2 gated, cannon rushed, whatever. Why? What purpose would it serve? The community would still recognize the lack of effort.
This, in my opinion, is about the tournament organizers, and to an extent, the fans, feeling disrespected by Naniwa's "actions." Unfortunately, very few people have been empathetic enough to respect how Naniwa must have felt about the situation he was placed in. The tournament structure put him in an awful situation. If a 20 year old reliever gives up three home runs in a game, the manager doesn't say, "alright son, you're gonna pitch again in the nightcap." No, he gives the reliever the damn night off to get his mind back in the right place.
Some people are better at dealing with 'failure' in public than others. Some players can stand at their locker after giving up the game winning hit and talk to the media for twenty minutes about how great the fans are, or how nice the lady at Taco Bell was yesterday. Some players just can't do it, though. They look at the reporter, say "I sucked," and go home. They can't explain in sickening detail every mistake they made.
I feel that whoever is responsible for the player management of Naniwa needed to do a better job of keeping his mind in the right place. I feel that the tournament organizers were foolish in creating this scenario. I feel that Naniwa could have been more respectful - forcing him to play was not the answer, but he could have easily just said "I'm not up to it, sorry for letting you down."
I feel that the response to his actions was grossly exaggerated - recognize that he is a very popular, very young player. Young men make mistakes. This is a fact of life. You do not destroy them when they do foolish things simply to prove that you have more power than they do. You help them learn from it so they can grow stronger.
On December 16 2011 20:51 10or10 wrote: I disagree with both EGalex and EGincontrolls (stated on SotG and ITG) opnions, agree with EGidras (stated on ITG) opinion.
What's meaningful for me is the competition and the skill shown in those circumstances, not the "show" or "fun" games. It's a huge difference for me to see a football (soccer) player perform a dribble in Champions League final, compared to doing it on a warm-up or a national friendly.
agree 100%, either way I don't really know what all the fuss is about. MC was bitching Naniwa out and then the next day he does some stupid carrier/mothership/collossus build that got slaughtered and wasn't very entertaining.
Oh great, now I find myself thinking about MC's MLG Orlando final against his good friend HuK. >.<'
What people seem to overlook is that Naniwas game, although short, had more entertainment value to most viewers than the last three gsl finals combined. I guarantee you the vod will have more views than any other match on gom's site. More people have talked about gom's Blizzard Cup than they ever would have because of the probe rush. So I find Alex's point of Naniwa taking away value from GOMs product completely not valid. If anything he has caused their biggest Media campaign to date. And so they should be silently thankful for his action, appologize for the unthoughtful format and make sure this won't happen again.
On December 17 2011 18:43 remedium wrote: Now, in this situation with the Swedish fellow, we have a young guy (and forgive my ignorance of the structure of e-sports tournaments here), who is essentially all alone in a foreign country. In absolute terms, he gets hammered in his matches.
I agree with most of your post, just wanted to point out that Naniwa didn't get hammered. 0:3 sounds horrible but in reality all three of the games were very close.
I agree it was wrong of Naniwa but at the same time even though his rush had no chance of winning and he didn't even try, shouldn't gom tv then punish players who rush for wins in games less than 8 minutes, sometimes shortening a night of good viewing in half because of all the 2 rax or early pool all ins?
it seems to me that Gom tv is more concerned with the honor around naniwa not performing purposefully rather than there simply being a bad product like this blog implied, as there have been plenty of other short, bad games.
Anyways, I love GSL and all and I feel bad for Nani for having to take this punishment, but such is life. Hopefully he keeps up his career and doesn't let this hold him down.
On December 17 2011 18:43 remedium wrote: As a person who does not follow e-sports to any great degree, save for when my friends tell me about something crazy/funny/cool that happened in the SC2 pro scene, I find the dichotomy between the SC2 "professional" model and that of established professional sports (in the United States, at least), to have a substantial bearing on the situation.
Allow me to explain: if Felix Hernandez, of the usually-last-place Mariners, pitches poorly for a few innings, puts his team out of the game, and generally sucks, he does not have to go through the ignominy of playing out the remaining innings of the game.. His manager walks out to the mound, slaps him on the butt, and sends him on his way. The fans know King Felix is one of the best in the game, and on a moribund franchise like the Mariners, they likely only came to the game to see Hernandez pitch. The fans understand, however, that even the best pitcher in the game can't always be great. Instead, an eager young reliever, someone who is hungry, and generally on a tight rope in terms of his roster spot, comes into the game. They know they need to pitch well, or at least try, to maintain their roster spot. The fans watch the reliever, hoping he is the next big thing for their team. The fans don't demand that Felix Hernandez stay in the game for another eight innings just so they can watch Felix Hernandez throw a little ball for a little while longer. They let him retire to the comfort of his teammates, away from the spotlight so he can get it back together. Yay.
Now, in this situation with the Swedish fellow, we have a young guy (and forgive my ignorance of the structure of e-sports tournaments here), who is essentially all alone in a foreign country. In absolute terms, he gets hammered in his matches. He just gave up eight runs in the first inning, and when he looks into the dugout, there is no manager there to pull the plug; there is no one there to stop the bleeding. Instead, he realizes that he has to keep playing, even though his mental focus has been utterly shattered.
Again, here is where the odd format of these tournaments comes to light. In a high school wrestling tournament, for example, you typically have a match every hour or so until you lose twice. At that point, you are eliminated from contention. You cannot win, and as such you do not continue to have opponents. Would people still watch you if the tournament organizers threw you out onto a mat with some other guy who just got his ass kicked? Probably. Would it be fun for you, at all? No. It would suck. You just finished getting demolished by people you were supposed to beat, or at least contend with. You feel awful. You're tired, physically and emotionally.
What if they made you go out there, though? Your coaches would pull you aside - explain to you that you have to go out there, one more time. There are fans watching. They would tell you to get yourself back in the game for the next six minutes (length of a wrestling match - highly relevant, I know). They would tell you that the match doesn't mean anything, but it doesn't mean you should just give up, either. They would motivate you. They would tell you they watched the other guy's matches, and he sucks. You can beat him if you give it your best. You can end the tournament on a good note. You get amped up - you dredge up your last reserves of energy, and you go out there and try to kick some ass.
Naniwa, though? He (to my knowledge) doesn't have someone in his ear every step of the tournament, telling him to dig a little deeper, telling him that while this match may not matter now, it matters. It's not an easy thing to drag yourself up from total defeat to go play one more round - a round that is meaningless, a show match for the bemusement of those left watching the fallen. It makes you feel like a puppet. It isn't something you want to do - you don't care that the tournament organizer sold tickets for people to watch - you just want to go home and gather your emotions together.
Yes, I understand that what Naniwa did was, in absolute terms, wrong. However, throwing him back out there for a match that was utterly without meaning? There are very, very few people on this planet who would perform well under those circumstances.
There are people who said he could have done any number of things - he could have 4gated, 2 gated, cannon rushed, whatever. Why? What purpose would it serve? The community would still recognize the lack of effort.
This, in my opinion, is about the tournament organizers, and to an extent, the fans, feeling disrespected by Naniwa's "actions." Unfortunately, very few people have been empathetic enough to respect how Naniwa must have felt about the situation he was placed in. The tournament structure put him in an awful situation. If a 20 year old reliever gives up three home runs in a game, the manager doesn't say, "alright son, you're gonna pitch again in the nightcap." No, he gives the reliever the damn night off to get his mind back in the right place.
Some people are better at dealing with 'failure' in public than others. Some players can stand at their locker after giving up the game winning hit and talk to the media for twenty minutes about how great the fans are, or how nice the lady at Taco Bell was yesterday. Some players just can't do it, though. They look at the reporter, say "I sucked," and go home. They can't explain in sickening detail every mistake they made.
I feel that whoever is responsible for the player management of Naniwa needed to do a better job of keeping his mind in the right place. I feel that the tournament organizers were foolish in creating this scenario. I feel that Naniwa could have been more respectful - forcing him to play was not the answer, but he could have easily just said "I'm not up to it, sorry for letting you down."
I feel that the response to his actions was grossly exaggerated - recognize that he is a very popular, very young player. Young men make mistakes. This is a fact of life. You do not destroy them when they do foolish things simply to prove that you have more power than they do. You help them learn from it so they can grow stronger.
I apologize for the oft rambling monologue.
I didn't find it much of a rambling really. I appreciate you taking your time to give some perspective on Alex's sports analogies. I was pretty much already on the clear that even though what Naniwa did was wrong, the response from both GOM and particularly the Korean fans (despite there being reasons for it ofc) was exaggerated and lacked understanding of Naniwa's situation, you explained very well that the world of sports isn't as stone-cold and absolute as Alex makes it sound. There's a lot of consideration and compassion in sports, and players get support from their coaches in their time of need, but Naniwa simply didn't have that support. How are we supposed to expect that Naniwa makes the right decision in such a bad spot as he was mentally in?
It's like TT1 said: until e-sports players have a union, it's all a big joke. And the same is true for giving the players the support they need. E-sports is still in it's infancy, and teams simply can't support each of their players with a coach at every match, however desperately some need it. Give that some consideration before you hate on Naniwa.
On December 17 2011 18:43 remedium wrote: Now, in this situation with the Swedish fellow, we have a young guy (and forgive my ignorance of the structure of e-sports tournaments here), who is essentially all alone in a foreign country. In absolute terms, he gets hammered in his matches.
I agree with most of your post, just wanted to point out that Naniwa didn't get hammered. 0:3 sounds horrible but in reality all three of the games were very close.
Which however makes it worse. Feeling ahead, or in contention in every game and every single time it slips away just in the last second is pretty taxing.
On December 17 2011 18:43 remedium wrote: As a person who does not follow e-sports to any great degree, save for when my friends tell me about something crazy/funny/cool that happened in the SC2 pro scene, I find the dichotomy between the SC2 "professional" model and that of established professional sports (in the United States, at least), to have a substantial bearing on the situation.
Allow me to explain: if Felix Hernandez, of the usually-last-place Mariners, pitches poorly for a few innings, puts his team out of the game, and generally sucks, he does not have to go through the ignominy of playing out the remaining innings of the game.. His manager walks out to the mound, slaps him on the butt, and sends him on his way. The fans know King Felix is one of the best in the game, and on a moribund franchise like the Mariners, they likely only came to the game to see Hernandez pitch. The fans understand, however, that even the best pitcher in the game can't always be great. Instead, an eager young reliever, someone who is hungry, and generally on a tight rope in terms of his roster spot, comes into the game. They know they need to pitch well, or at least try, to maintain their roster spot. The fans watch the reliever, hoping he is the next big thing for their team. The fans don't demand that Felix Hernandez stay in the game for another eight innings just so they can watch Felix Hernandez throw a little ball for a little while longer. They let him retire to the comfort of his teammates, away from the spotlight so he can get it back together. Yay.
Now, in this situation with the Swedish fellow, we have a young guy (and forgive my ignorance of the structure of e-sports tournaments here), who is essentially all alone in a foreign country. In absolute terms, he gets hammered in his matches. He just gave up eight runs in the first inning, and when he looks into the dugout, there is no manager there to pull the plug; there is no one there to stop the bleeding. Instead, he realizes that he has to keep playing, even though his mental focus has been utterly shattered.
Again, here is where the odd format of these tournaments comes to light. In a high school wrestling tournament, for example, you typically have a match every hour or so until you lose twice. At that point, you are eliminated from contention. You cannot win, and as such you do not continue to have opponents. Would people still watch you if the tournament organizers threw you out onto a mat with some other guy who just got his ass kicked? Probably. Would it be fun for you, at all? No. It would suck. You just finished getting demolished by people you were supposed to beat, or at least contend with. You feel awful. You're tired, physically and emotionally.
What if they made you go out there, though? Your coaches would pull you aside - explain to you that you have to go out there, one more time. There are fans watching. They would tell you to get yourself back in the game for the next six minutes (length of a wrestling match - highly relevant, I know). They would tell you that the match doesn't mean anything, but it doesn't mean you should just give up, either. They would motivate you. They would tell you they watched the other guy's matches, and he sucks. You can beat him if you give it your best. You can end the tournament on a good note. You get amped up - you dredge up your last reserves of energy, and you go out there and try to kick some ass.
Naniwa, though? He (to my knowledge) doesn't have someone in his ear every step of the tournament, telling him to dig a little deeper, telling him that while this match may not matter now, it matters. It's not an easy thing to drag yourself up from total defeat to go play one more round - a round that is meaningless, a show match for the bemusement of those left watching the fallen. It makes you feel like a puppet. It isn't something you want to do - you don't care that the tournament organizer sold tickets for people to watch - you just want to go home and gather your emotions together.
Yes, I understand that what Naniwa did was, in absolute terms, wrong. However, throwing him back out there for a match that was utterly without meaning? There are very, very few people on this planet who would perform well under those circumstances.
There are people who said he could have done any number of things - he could have 4gated, 2 gated, cannon rushed, whatever. Why? What purpose would it serve? The community would still recognize the lack of effort.
This, in my opinion, is about the tournament organizers, and to an extent, the fans, feeling disrespected by Naniwa's "actions." Unfortunately, very few people have been empathetic enough to respect how Naniwa must have felt about the situation he was placed in. The tournament structure put him in an awful situation. If a 20 year old reliever gives up three home runs in a game, the manager doesn't say, "alright son, you're gonna pitch again in the nightcap." No, he gives the reliever the damn night off to get his mind back in the right place.
Some people are better at dealing with 'failure' in public than others. Some players can stand at their locker after giving up the game winning hit and talk to the media for twenty minutes about how great the fans are, or how nice the lady at Taco Bell was yesterday. Some players just can't do it, though. They look at the reporter, say "I sucked," and go home. They can't explain in sickening detail every mistake they made.
I feel that whoever is responsible for the player management of Naniwa needed to do a better job of keeping his mind in the right place. I feel that the tournament organizers were foolish in creating this scenario. I feel that Naniwa could have been more respectful - forcing him to play was not the answer, but he could have easily just said "I'm not up to it, sorry for letting you down."
I feel that the response to his actions was grossly exaggerated - recognize that he is a very popular, very young player. Young men make mistakes. This is a fact of life. You do not destroy them when they do foolish things simply to prove that you have more power than they do. You help them learn from it so they can grow stronger.
I apologize for the oft rambling monologue.
I didn't find it much of a rambling really. I appreciate you taking your time to give some perspective on Alex's sports analogies. I was pretty much already on the clear that even though what Naniwa did was wrong, the response from both GOM and particularly the Korean fans (despite there being reasons for it ofc) was exaggerated and lacked understanding of Naniwa's situation, you explained very well that the world of sports isn't as stone-cold and absolute as Alex makes it sound. There's a lot of consideration and compassion in sports, and players get support from their coaches in their time of need, but Naniwa simply didn't have that support. How are we supposed to expect that Naniwa makes the right decision in such a bad spot as he was mentally in?
It's like TT1 said: until e-sports players have a union, it's all a big joke. And the same is true for giving the players the support they need. E-sports is still in it's infancy, and teams simply can't support each of their players with a coach at every match, however desperately some need it. Give that some consideration before you hate on Naniwa.
Agreed. Long post, but not a rambling (Alex's post was in the same vein). Although the baseball analogies are generally lost to people outside the US
How are we supposed to expect that Naniwa makes the right decision in such a bad spot as he was mentally in?
I naturally expect professionals to behave professionally even when they lose. Don't you? He's not some 15 years old amateur first time on big stage. He's a seasoned professional. Like they say at MLG: win with style, lose with dignity.
@Sejanus: I'm sure you don't expect professionals to be super-humans, and I don't expect them to be little kids with no experience. Try to understand that he was left out in the fucking cold whereas pretty much every professional athlete has someone there for him/her to support when these things happen. Recognize that fact at least.
He's a professional, and at the end of the day, the fans pay his bills. He should man up, apologize to his fans and GOMTV (if he hasn't done so already), and get back out there.
he could've just done a two-base all-in, or four-gated, or executed one of many other strategies that would've almost certainly ended the game in ten minutes or less
Yes lets all watch a soulless match where Naniwa all-in's after 7min.. T.T
OP has a very corporate mindset and only wish the show to be played regardless of how pointless it may be. Let Naniwa proberush all he wants, if he qualify for something he should be allowed to do anything that the ingame gameplay allows him to, as long as it does not involve cheating.
So what's my point?
Naniwa has done nothing wrong, he played the game and lost. He didnt satisfy those fans that wanted to see a pointless match, big fucking deal. Only his team should punish him if they felt he went against the team policy about exposure and such.
Every sport has its humble origins as an organized struggle between two opposing parties (including potential rivalries and loads of mockery involved) and ends as an entertainment system for those with money?
There should be a disclaimer at the bottom of the paying subscriber agreement stating that the actions of their players don't reflect the standpoint of GOM simply because it's a competition, not a theater; everything is and will be possible, including shitty games.
Yes lets all watch a soulless match where Naniwa all-in's after 7min.. T.T
OP has a very corporate mindset and only wish the show to be played regardless of how pointless it may be. Let Naniwa proberush all he wants, if he qualify for something he should be allowed to do anything that the ingame gameplay allows him to, as long as it does not involve cheating.
So what's my point?
Naniwa has done nothing wrong, he played the game and lost. He didnt satisfy those fans that wanted to see a pointless match, big fucking deal. Only his team should punish him if they felt he went against the team policy about exposure and such.
I disagree on that last point. Imagine any sponsor CMO logging in to see this. "This is what I'm paying for?" sponsorship money dries up and so long GOM. In fact, I can imagine a scenario where right after that match Mr. Chae gets a call from Pepsi / Coke / whoever and gets an ear full. GOM isn't in a position yet where sponsors are bidding heavily for the right to have their name on the marquee.
It seems a little over the top but I have to agree with their actions, and good post by Alex.
We all like to live in the idealized world where its the game that matters and skill has value in itself that everybody will respect. The simple fact of the matter is that the business side is what really matters. Product creation, sale numbers and cash in the bank. Pro gamers are entertainers. The value they contribute is a built in customer base for their derivative products much like how big name actors contribute to blockbuster movies.
Basically the real controversy this Naniwa situation brings to light is how much the business people who actually control the scene should humor the naive masses. They are the customers so the answer is a lot, but where exactly is the line drawn.
I disagree on that last point. Imagine any sponsor CMO logging in to see this. "This is what I'm paying for?" sponsorship money dries up and so long GOM. In fact, I can imagine a scenario where right after that match Mr. Chae gets a call from Pepsi / Coke / whoever and gets an ear full. GOM isn't in a position yet where sponsors are bidding heavily for the right to have their name on the marquee.
This is really funny! I understand some big time C(O/E)O talking about sponsors and stuff, but this is just ridiculous.
Do you really think anyone from Pepsi give a thing about what is actually happening during the games. If we have the best ever GSL final, do you think they would know about it? Yes, may be they would know that the game was watched 7.32% more than the average final and they would be happy about it, but it will be always 7.32% for them, not a flock of mutalisks, giant deathball, perfect macro or а ... probe rush. The matter of fact is that it was never talked more about Naniwa himself, his team, or sponsors. Ever.
The whole purpose of any sports game is to determine who is the best. "playing to win" is the whole point of sports. The reason they exist. There isn't a sport in the world, that is not played for a win. The ability to objectively calculate a score and declare a winner is the definition for a "sport".
Nobody in his right mind can remove any player's right to play for a win (in this context the "win" is the first place in the tournament). Especially and the least - tournament organisers. I understand showmatches and games designed for fun, but they are not an esport and have no place between actual tournament.
The only possible fix to this thing ever happening again, is for GOM and all tournament organisers to make better tournaments that do not form around meaningless matches. No player would ever play such a game on 100 percent. No fan (or i guess most of them) wants to watch a game of 10% naniwa, and 40% nestea, This is what will actually hurt viewers numbers, which in turn will hurt sponsors, teams, etc ...
I disagree on that last point. Imagine any sponsor CMO logging in to see this. "This is what I'm paying for?" sponsorship money dries up and so long GOM. In fact, I can imagine a scenario where right after that match Mr. Chae gets a call from Pepsi / Coke / whoever and gets an ear full. GOM isn't in a position yet where sponsors are bidding heavily for the right to have their name on the marquee.
This is really funny! I understand some big time C(O/E)O talking about sponsors and stuff, but this is just ridiculous.
Do you really think anyone from Pepsi give a thing about what is actually happening during the games. If we have the best ever GSL final, do you think they would know about it? Yes, may be they would know that the game was watched 7.32% more than the average final and they would be happy about it, but it will be always 7.32% for them, not a flock of mutalisks, giant deathball, perfect macro or а ... probe rush. The matter of fact is that it was never talked more about Naniwa himself, his team, or sponsors. Ever.
The whole purpose of any sports game is to determine who is the best. "playing to win" is the whole point of sports. The reason they exist. There isn't a sport in the world, that is not played for a win. The ability to objectively calculate a score and declare a winner is the definition for a "sport".
Nobody in his right mind can remove any player's right to play for a win (in this context the "win" is the first place in the tournament). Especially and the least - tournament organisers. I understand showmatches and games designed for fun, but they are not an esport and have no place between actual tournament.
The only possible fix to this thing ever happening again, is for GOM and all tournament organisers to make better tournaments that do not form around meaningless matches. No player would ever play such a game on 100 percent. No fan (or i guess most of them) wants to watch a game of 10% naniwa, and 40% nestea, This is what will actually hurt viewers numbers, which in turn will hurt sponsors, teams, etc ...
So True. What I think EGalex is misunderstanding is that we, the fans, want to watch every match. When I'm watching GSL I want to watch the games that matter. After seeing a lot of games, I'd much rather see Naniwa throw a meaningless game, than two players dukin' it out for Jack Shit. I guess it's different for some people, but EGalex should stop assuming what people think. He should stick to managing players and leave his opinion with his wife. I think it's very unprofessional, but never had EG in high regards anyway.
"The whole purpose of any sports game is to determine who is the best. "playing to win" is the whole point of sports. The reason they exist. There isn't a sport in the world, that is not played for a win. The ability to objectively calculate a score and declare a winner is the definition for a "sport"." That is not the definition of "sport" and the whole propose of a sports game is not to determine who is the best, id say that the main propose of a sports game is fun or entertainment, would you like to watch a contest to see who is the best at say speed reading im sure you could find a way to objectively calculate a score and determine who is the best but who cares it would be boring as fuck, the point is entertainment, that's why people are watching, determining who is the best adds to the the entertainment value but its not the be all end all definition, and if you think a probe rush is entertaining because its a huge joke that's cool for you but most people who put time and money into making something entertaining for the fans are not looking for it to be made into a joke. I don't know if the punishment was just or not and that wasn't the point of the OP but i don't think a probe rush in a game with thousands of viewers between two high profile players was a good plan. That being said i totally understand why he did it and i might have done the same thing myself as i am a very sore looser as well, but i am trying to be objective here. edit; while you are mostly correct in saying the definition of a sport is to determine a winner id say an equally important part is to have a good and entertaining match regardless of winner.
Thank you for the blog post, and making me think of this situation in a slightly different way.
I guess the best thing to do in this situation, if you really are mentally drained and emotionally sorrowed, is to four gate and then complain to GOM about the format later.
Right now I just hope that people (pro players and spectators alike) have been educated, and we can move on and stop discussing (lambasting?) Naniwa so much.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote: Please note the following before reading this commentary:
...... NaNi, you're an incredible player, with thousands upon thousands of fans who just want to see you play. Next time, play.
Alex Garfield CEO, Evil Geniuses @ottersareneat on Twitter
*For those of you eager to pull out the pitchforks, the IPL3/White-Ra situation is quite different; at the time of IdrA's match against White-Ra, IPL3 was already behind schedule, and didn't even have time to broadcast all of its remaining group play matches.
I disagree with this guy. Some people just don't understand what its like to be in someone else's shoes... its easy to say "player X is killing Esports" when you are sitting in the comfort of your home eating popcorn and you feel entitled to watch a game on your seasonal gom pass. It's a completely different feeling when you're Naniwa... sitting in the booth- you just lost 0-3 after practicing really hard.. your mental state is completely destroyed.. you are upset.. pissed off...sad.. and you ask to forfeit a meaningless match because you just can't deal with the situation right now. Next thing you know they tell you that you can't forfeit and you must play.. fuck it - I would've probe rushed too.
Sometimes people forget that the players are human- they are capable of making mistakes, getting angry/upset, and even playing poorly.I find some of the expectations absurd.. people are not robots and they don't have to deliver flawless games everytime.
as tasteless once said " some people just don't know what its like to be human"
Do you really think anyone from Pepsi give a thing about what is actually happening during the games. If we have the best ever GSL final, do you think they would know about it? Yes, may be they would know that the game was watched 7.32% more than the average final and they would be happy about it, but it will be always 7.32% for them, not a flock of mutalisks, giant deathball, perfect macro or а ... probe rush. The matter of fact is that it was never talked more about Naniwa himself, his team, or sponsors. Ever.
My example is a little severe, but yeah, marketing people (CMO = Chief Marketing Officer, not CEO) are very reactive with sponsorships. They do listen to the most ridiculous remarks and inane chatter out there. I work in advertising for a major NBA (USA pro basketball league) sponsor and if something happens it generally does make it to them because that's their job, to pay attention to everything that touches their brand.
It's ESPECIALLY sensitive because they DON'T understand the game and all they really pay attention is chatter. They don't care about the game, they care about the griping and seeming lack of integrity.
Sorry, didn't mean to set you off, just had an insight based on my own experience with sponsorships (albeit with way more dollars on the line).
I understand your point of view, I don't necessarily agree. I remember the ipl that stephano won, I think that was ipl 3? I was looking forward to a lot of Idra games (because i'm a total idra nerd fan) in the group/placement stages, but then Idra played only 1 or 2 of those games, and forfeited the rest because they were inconsequential. I was quite disappointed... I don't see how this is much different? Though I completely understands idra's position, he had just flown to IPL right after IEM guanzhao, and was suffering terrible jetlag and fatigue.
ok, Idra six pools in the NASL season 1 tie break on xel naga caverns to determine seeding and naniwa probe rushes in a game with equal meaning to the players involved. where exactly is the line drawn between the two? Is it because he didn't micro his probes? what exactly is it about his behaviour that differentiates his play from a 6 pool, or any other "all -in cheese" for that matter?
Although I don't like the fact that I paid to see awesome games and instead saw a probe rush, how can anyone really quantify the difference?
Agree with the vieuw as explained by the op. There is maybe a solution to completely eliminate "meaningless" matches. This solution would be to introduce a rating list based on all official tournament and league games (gsl esl etcetera) Every match then has an impact on a players rating and as such a meaning. Will players find their rating important enough to always put an effort? I think yes, if we look at the chess world players take great pride in their elo (a.k.a ego lol) rating and the rating list wich is published every month and updated after every game is a huge status symbol. Maybe implement a similar list for starcraft , not one based on ladder games but one solely based on all matches played on pro tournaments and leagues, and make that list popular. Players then have an incentive to get a rating as high as possible and this incentive will be huge, the ones on top of the list WILL be considered the best players.
Thank you EGAlex for giving us a perspective that is actually more from the viewpoint of GOM than GOM would like to admit. I definitely agree that at the end of the day, they want to sell their product, and if things like 6 probe rush (which is clearly an unwinnable strategy) occur they are far more worried about them losing consumers of their product than any sort of "honor" code or what have you.
In another, completely related point, to all of you saying "blah blah IdrA this IdrA that" you clearly didn't understand the article. Alex's job is to sell his product, EG, of course he is going to defend his player. If he didn't that would be a horrible business move.
GOM usually does not play out 'unimportant' matches, but I think in this case, what with the all-star lineup of the Blizzard Cup, every match was important to viewers. The cup offered great games, all of which were like a high-caliber showmatch in terms of player skill and spectator draw. I understand why GOM would want to televise the Naniwa vs Nestea game, because they knew people would still want to watch it. Even if they were both out of the tournament, it was still good content. So I can see why GOM is upset with Naniwa's actions, and I can see why Korean gamers (who consistently cite their desire to create good games for the viewers as one of their top goals in televised matches) are questioning Naniwa's professionalism. In cases such as this tournament I think it should be made clear to the players that while it is an elimination tournament, their audience still wants to see the losers' games, because they would still be great games to watch. That's why they played and televised the game and that's why people are upset about what happened. Naniwa didn't respect or wasn't aware of the audience's desire to watch him and Nestea play or GOM's desire to show it, which I hope he has been made aware of, along with any other pro gamers who thought the same way.
I'm with you on everything Alex but I contend that just because major sports have meaningless games in their format doesn't mean we have to have them in esports. We can be better and more efficient.
I want to preface my post by saying I am a huge EG fan, and especially an idrA fan.
However, that does not mean I take every post from anyone on the EG team and proclaim it as treasure without actually thinking a bit about its contents - this is especially addressed to all the schmoozers who replied: "o_o AMAZING post!!!". I am sure the poster does not require such meaningless validation.
Now to the actual analysis. I think the post is extremely hypocritical. Sure, all the pro-teams and franchises (GOMTV, MLG) want to make money. Sure, it's more than reasonable to punish a player that disrespects - or is perceived as disrespecting - the producers/fans/other players, etc. What is NOT reasonable is to make up rules or hand out extremely harsh punishments that alienates many other players/fans that will inadvertently disagree.
Let me point this out how Mr. EG Alex actually handled a very SIMILAR situation.
"My point is that in all of the scenarios, examples, and hypotheticals I've outlined above, the player or team - at the very least - still did its job, put on a show for the spectators, and delivered a quality product to its respective league. All of them, of course, except for the one we're all so feverishly discussing. "
So how did idrA's forfeits against WhiteRa and Nerchio put on a good show?
Regardless, EG Alex did not fire idrA or cut his salary for his repeated forfeits or bad mannerisms. He knew this would hurt his business. Maybe idrA would leave - taking away a huge chunk of fans and revenue away from the team.
Same applies to GOMTV and their ridiculous punishment. It's not like Naniwa forfeited repeatedly or BM-ed the opponents in all his matches. This was a first instance of bad judgement and action on his part. Did he deserve punishment? Sure, I can't argue against that. But GOMTV should have just warned him or given him a small fine instead of taking away his spot and taking such a radical measure for a first offense. The fact that it spurred such negative reactions is a testament of it. By the way, I disagree with the 65/35 and 70/30 - the statistic is subjective and not based on any measurements - personally I believe it is much closer to 50/50, especially with regards to the harshness of the decision.
Answer us this, Mr. Alex, would you believe suspending idrA after one of his first offenses, or even after his Nerchio forfeit acceptable? Obviously not, since you did not do it. So please stop asking everyone else to accept GOMTV's punishment as acceptable.
On December 19 2011 10:42 revan89 wrote: I want to preface my post by saying I am a huge EG fan, and especially an idrA fan.
However, that does not mean I take every post from anyone on the EG team and proclaim it as treasure without actually thinking a bit about its contents - this is especially addressed to all the schmoozers who replied: "o_o AMAZING post!!!". I am sure the poster does not require such meaningless validation.
Now to the actual analysis. I think the post is extremely hypocritical. Sure, all the pro-teams and franchises (GOMTV, MLG) want to make money. Sure, it's more than reasonable to punish a player that disrespects - or is perceived as disrespecting - the producers/fans/other players, etc. What is NOT reasonable is to make up rules or hand out extremely harsh punishments that alienates many other players/fans that will inadvertently disagree.
Let me point this out how Mr. EG Alex actually handled a very SIMILAR situation.
"My point is that in all of the scenarios, examples, and hypotheticals I've outlined above, the player or team - at the very least - still did its job, put on a show for the spectators, and delivered a quality product to its respective league. All of them, of course, except for the one we're all so feverishly discussing. "
So how did idrA's forfeits against WhiteRa and Nerchio put on a good show?
Regardless, EG Alex did not fire idrA or cut his salary for his repeated forfeits or bad mannerisms. He knew this would hurt his business. Maybe idrA would leave - taking away a huge chunk of fans and revenue away from the team.
Same applies to GOMTV and their ridiculous punishment. It's not like Naniwa forfeited repeatedly or BM-ed the opponents in all his matches. This was a first instance of bad judgement and action on his part. Did he deserve punishment? Sure, I can't argue against that. But GOMTV should have just warned him or given him a small fine instead of taking away his spot and taking such a radical measure for a first offense. The fact that it spurred such negative reactions is a testament of it. By the way, I disagree with the 65/35 and 70/30 - the statistic is subjective and not based on any measurements - personally I believe it is much closer to 50/50, especially with regards to the harshness of the decision.
Answer us this, Mr. Alex, would you believe suspending idrA after one of his first offenses, or even after his Nerchio forfeit acceptable? Obviously not, since you did not do it. So please stop asking everyone else to accept GOMTV's punishment as acceptable.
I am not sure how a recommendation from a single-post critic would affect anyone's opinion, but thanks for sharing yours, I guess. Did you get your account solely to criticize Alex with some anonymous account? Because it really seems that way and if so, I really don't think that was necessary...
I think that the incident was actually good for GOMTV, if Naniwa hadn't left the game I dont think everyone would have been talking about a match that didn't matter the next day unless it was somehow this epic hour long game. I also don't think that anyone will no longer watch GOM because of one "bad game". I think with this situation the punishment was pretty harsh.
The difference, Alex, is that for a MLB match of the end of regular season, people paid their seat for this particular match. In the case of naniwa, people paid for a package of games (i.e a tournament or a whole season) including several matches per day. And what interests people is to watch games with a minimum of pressure.
On December 19 2011 21:48 BoYoB wrote: The difference, Alex, is that for a MLB match of the end of regular season, people paid their seat for this particular match. In the case of naniwa, people paid for a package of games (i.e a tournament or a whole season) including several matches per day. And what interests people is to watch games with a minimum of pressure.
On what earth does a Naniwa vs Nestea match, which is televised by GOM.TV not matter? This is a good match for a broadcaster and tons of people would have watched it... I mean people look other people "mauling" the ladder all the time... And a "practise" game of Naniwa vs Nestea is suddenly not important enough to watch? Kidding?
Games do not need to be "meaningful" to be entertaining. Thousands of people watch ladder streams for entertainment. Games need to be, first and foremost, entertaining to be profitable. I'd sooner watch well played matches that have no consequence than someone getting rolled over for some tournament result.
Edit: I guess I should say what I disagree with. I don't agree that the difference between the circumstances are that Idra and Nerchio fulfilled what they were suppose to do (pleasing the fans, sponsors, other people that pay to have them play).
It came down to NaNiwa not understanding and not predicting other people's emotions. He just didn't know people's reactions would be this volatile. Now that he knows, he won't do something like this again. That's how it is for him, and for him it has nothing to do with a letter game of scenarios; that's for everyone else to worry about and spend his or her time discussing. For him, there probably is no A, B, and C, but only benefit and detriment. And now he's identified a detriment.
Hopefully they do change the format, though. The A, B, and C kind of games usually only produce quality entertainment if there is drama about them like this time.
I don't see how anybody could actually agree with this blog post. It's like a case study in false analogies. If I were teaching a debate class and I wanted to give people examples of how to incorrectly demonstrate similarities between two seemingly similar things, I would just link them to this thread. I get that everybody loves the idea of esports being treated the same as real sports, but you can't compare an individual playing back-to-back matches for a teacher's salary getting burned out and throwing a single game, one of many that he had to play that day or week, to an entire team of million-dollar-a-year professionals all collectively throwing the only game they will play that week. I'm sorry, these situations just aren't congruent at all. A better analogy would be comparing this one 10 minute match to a team benching a player for half a game, which they do ALL THE TIME.
You dont simply get it, shame on you being a CEO!!!
''I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers. ''
WOW, such an epic fail of understanding! FAIL! Flat on the nose! Sorry EG-guy, you just lost your credibility.
This is why: Nani DID a GREAT job, punishing the tourney makers for their letting nonense match-ups happen... I was GLAD to go on to the next match, because of Nani's action...
Read my other posts, then you understand, that this ''blog'' is biased as hell. The only way to perceive this matter is as follows:
Nani: be a guy, accept that you can also fail and PLAY for FUN if you cant WIN.
On December 15 2011 18:25 chadissilent wrote: NaNiwa enters game, forfeits. IdrA doesn't enter game, forfeits. How about his forfeits at MLG Providence against Haypro? I fail to see the difference.
On December 20 2011 07:18 epb1982 wrote: You dont simply get it, shame on you being a CEO!!!
''I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers. ''
WOW, such an epic fail of understanding! FAIL! Flat on the nose! Sorry EG-guy, you just lost your credibility.
This is why: Nani DID a GREAT job, punishing the tourney makers for their letting nonense match-ups happen... I was GLAD to go on to the next match, because of Nani's action...
Read my other posts, then you understand, that this ''blog'' is biased as hell. The only way to perceive this matter is as follows:
Nani: be a guy, accept that you can also fail and PLAY for FUN if you cant WIN.
Seems to me that you simply don't get it as well.
This tournament is an invitational tournament - meaning everyone invited will share a bit of the total prize pool. This means you are paid to be here and to play the matches, and now you just make a fool out of everyone when you find out you can't make more money?
The format of tournament was given to you. If you didn't like it and want to punish the organizer, you can refuse to play in the tournament when they invited you. You can even publicly make a huge post about refusing to play in Blizzard Cup AND denouncing GOMTV on the shitty format of the tournament. Even this will be more acceptable than freaking accept to play in the tournament and make a fool out of everyone else.
You were GLAD to go on to the next match, but I was MAD that I paid $10 to see this nonsense.
Your "opinion" is also as biased as hell, and ignorant to an unbelievable extend.
Naniwa's action can be rationalized but never be justified in any way. There are tons of means to punish a tournament organizer if you don't like their format. You can boycott their tournament. You can make a public statement before and after the tournament. Accepting an invitation, and making a move like this in the middle of tournament is definitely the WRONG way to approach the matter. Its utterly unprofessional, immature, and selfish move.
I'm actually surprised that I haven't read more angry posts from disgruntled GOM customers. What NaNiwa did was basically akin to a last-place MLB team, during its final game of the season, intentionally striking out in every at bat. Just imagine what would happen in that situation: fans would ask for their money back; advertising contracts would be violated; and the league would certainly take action against the team and its players - just like GOM did with NaNi - in order to protect its product.
This is really all that needs to be said IMO. If people want e-sports to blow up and to be taken seriously by the general public, you must hold yourself to the same standard of real sports.
Something like this in another sport would cause a scandal, as alex wrote. GOM is a business first and foremost and having their product undermined by something like this is simply unacceptable. A simple demotion is less than what Nani deserved.
To the people talking about forfeits in other tournaments - I agree with you that they should be dealt with much more harshly. GOM was willing to take a stand and they have clearly distinguished themselves as the most professional tournament organizer. It's up to the other tournaments to do the same. GOM is acting as the governing body of a real professional sport would, while other tournaments (mostly the NA ones) seem to be built to cater to the players every whim.
What all the rabid Nani fanboys fail to realize is that if E-sports is to grow and eventually become mainstream, such behavior is simply intolerable. One word. Professionalism.
Thank you for your insight on the matter. The article was interesting and well written however I still almost whole-heartedly disagree with your stance.
The game meant nothing. Taking everything you said into consideration I still don't think he should have been punished. I agree that perhaps something should have been said, but only on the same level as to what you did concerning game 2 of IdrA vs Nerchio. But that, as you said multiple times, is a different subject altogether so I will not go there (though it's hard not to, heh).
I know that even if there is nothing on the line fans want to see their favourite players duking it out against other titans. That they paid to be entertained. However I don't believe that a player should fake a game just for the sake of the entertainment. The whole 'do your part' argument was almost convincing, but still comes short. I've always fought against doing pointless things in life, and that is one of them. Let Naniwa sleep or get a hamburger if he wants, damnit.
That you're willing to completely side step the fact that the knife of professionalism cuts both ways really disappoints me. Naniwa fucked up, but he does not hold within his hands the ability to do real damage to the premier SC2 tournament, much less turn it into a kespa Frankenstein.
The fact that there weren't as many outraged GOM customers as you expected disservices your argument.There is a very loud, and I would think fairly widespread demand for leaner, longer tournament formats. What GOM did wasn't even in defense of a better product than what you get in any average GSL, by a lot of counts it was a crappier product. Gambling the broadcasted professionalism on player attitudes seems like a weird choice when there is a simple fix that can just be built into the tournament. Much like in the game of Starcraft, it's best to take the sure thing.
I hear some sympathy for Naniwa, but I hear very few voices saying what he did is acceptable or should not have been punished at all, and by misrepresenting that view point you've opened the door for a red haring that isn't going to help GOM or esports. They need to get bit in the ass by the community every inch as badly as Naniwa does.
That being said, I think you're basically right about Naniwa. I still think the issue with his behavior is fundamentally the same issue with GOM's.
The relationship between the two could be described as "irrefragable", if you need a ten dollar word.
On December 19 2011 10:42 revan89 wrote: I want to preface my post by saying I am a huge EG fan, and especially an idrA fan.
However, that does not mean I take every post from anyone on the EG team and proclaim it as treasure without actually thinking a bit about its contents - this is especially addressed to all the schmoozers who replied: "o_o AMAZING post!!!". I am sure the poster does not require such meaningless validation.
Now to the actual analysis. I think the post is extremely hypocritical. Sure, all the pro-teams and franchises (GOMTV, MLG) want to make money. Sure, it's more than reasonable to punish a player that disrespects - or is perceived as disrespecting - the producers/fans/other players, etc. What is NOT reasonable is to make up rules or hand out extremely harsh punishments that alienates many other players/fans that will inadvertently disagree.
Let me point this out how Mr. EG Alex actually handled a very SIMILAR situation.
"My point is that in all of the scenarios, examples, and hypotheticals I've outlined above, the player or team - at the very least - still did its job, put on a show for the spectators, and delivered a quality product to its respective league. All of them, of course, except for the one we're all so feverishly discussing. "
So how did idrA's forfeits against WhiteRa and Nerchio put on a good show?
Regardless, EG Alex did not fire idrA or cut his salary for his repeated forfeits or bad mannerisms. He knew this would hurt his business. Maybe idrA would leave - taking away a huge chunk of fans and revenue away from the team.
Same applies to GOMTV and their ridiculous punishment. It's not like Naniwa forfeited repeatedly or BM-ed the opponents in all his matches. This was a first instance of bad judgement and action on his part. Did he deserve punishment? Sure, I can't argue against that. But GOMTV should have just warned him or given him a small fine instead of taking away his spot and taking such a radical measure for a first offense. The fact that it spurred such negative reactions is a testament of it. By the way, I disagree with the 65/35 and 70/30 - the statistic is subjective and not based on any measurements - personally I believe it is much closer to 50/50, especially with regards to the harshness of the decision.
Answer us this, Mr. Alex, would you believe suspending idrA after one of his first offenses, or even after his Nerchio forfeit acceptable? Obviously not, since you did not do it. So please stop asking everyone else to accept GOMTV's punishment as acceptable.
Just read through this post, maybe you should do the same with OP. Almost everything you critize is complete bs and Alex has stated a different opinion than you tell.
Thanks for nothing, person-that-creates-a-new-account-to-hate-here..
Also, GOM did not "take away Naniwas spot" they simply revoked an offer made to him, because of his actions. Had Naniwa forfeit a live-broadcasted game in some other important tournament, GOM might have done exactly the same. Their goal is to get the foreigners that show the most potential to advance far and to provide a great show. Not playing one's games is not exactly providing a great show. If I would work at GOM I would have done the same. Also, Naniwa can now prove that he really is as good as people believe, by making it through Code A and thus getting in Code S. (Also makes Code A more interresting for me)
Very insightful and interesting read. As a fan of the e-sports scene I agree for the most part. As a player I couldn't care less about Nani's decision. If you're playing in a major tournament, get knocked out completely with no chance to continue and then are told you are not allowed to forfeit a match and must play.... no way are you going to make any effort. After seeing both the players in that position I didn't even plan on watching the match. Moving away from the sports analogy if by some (horrible) turn of events I was failing one of my courses and had no way of passing but I HAD to write the final exam I would write my name on the thing and leave. Sometimes, it's better to cut your losses. I'm a fan of Nani and I'll look forward to the Nani vs. Nestea match that matters. Not a forced game that means nothing.
Great read, I agree with many of the points you stated and just wanted to add something else.
Everyone knows that the match had no real meaning tournament wise, but hell, he was selected along with other 9 players to play GOM's final tournament of the year, whether you can qualify or not, you've been selected as one of the top players throughout the year, many other high skilled players would do anything to play there, just for the sake of respect (both to the fans and the tournament) you should play all your matches, it's dumb to think that because you just want to win you have the right to mess with the entertainment schedule that has been planned. Honor and respect are a big part of eastern culture, and you should take that into consideration.
I know that, for instance, Boxer would never do something like this because he clearly understands that for Starcraft to work you need to give quality games to the public, as a player you're responsible for bringing entertainment, he hasn't show amazing results, however I can assure you, a lot of people will watch his games because they're just great to watch.
Players should start thinking about the big picture here, for e-sports to grow you need tournaments, teams, sponsors and players to do their job, the industry built around Starcraft only works if players realize that this is bigger than them alone.
GOM's decision to withdraw Naniwa from the candidates of code S is pretty reasonable considering their view on professionalism and respect.
While I agree that in other sports teams purposedly throw games, they still play the whole game (90 mins in soccer and so on), when a game's lenght isn't determined by time it just looks silly when someone doesn't want to play.
Throwing games in a rising e-sport hurts way more than doing it in a established sport, we're building a new form of entertainment from scratch and simply can't afford to be unprofessional or immature.
Just wanted to say that I fully agree w/ this write up. Nothing against Naniwa, but as a paying customer I was disappointed the match up went like it did. Naniwa vs. nestea was a headline game of the entire Blizzard Cup for me and I'm sure others as well.. Anyways thanks for the informative post!
Nani kept his honor by dropping the game in an explicit manner, not by faking ''doing his best'' and lose...
The thinking behind the scenes at GOM isnt considered in this blinded, one-sided article. The writer ''Alex'' didnt notice this aspect of the tourney.. making dump reverences with real-life sport (a striker missing every throw, bla bla bla)... I dont watch friendly high-profile soccer games, because IT SUCKS BIG TIME compared to the real thing... wake up, don't believe that PRO's should think as you manager/commercial CEO do, no way that is appropiate! Nani didnt cheated, he showed that SC2 is just a FUCKING game, and that wicked Korea shouldn't think that all players are flawless in behavior,,, wake up!, they are gamers, sitting behind a computer! FOR GOD SAKES!
I am glad that this blog delivers a sound explanation of the issue. In previous threads, many fans argued that Naniwa didn't really break any rule so that the punishment by Gom is unwarranted. While that argument is correct in a formal sense, other arguments exists which do warrant some kind of action to ensure that this should not happen again.
Also I am glad that the point was made that a competition which is held to create a product of entertainment cannot be tailored purely from competitive points of views, so scheduling a match with a meaningless outcome is okay in this case.
As I saw the Blizzard Cup finals with the award ceremony before the actual finals, I saw that the cup was planned as a big spectacle, not only another random tournament.
On December 21 2011 06:42 epb1982 wrote: Nani kept his honor by dropping the game in an explicit manner, not by faking ''doing his best'' and lose...
The thinking behind the scenes at GOM isnt considered in this blinded, one-sided article. The writer ''Alex'' didnt notice this aspect of the tourney.. making dump reverences with real-life sport (a striker missing every throw, bla bla bla)... I dont watch friendly high-profile soccer games, because IT SUCKS BIG TIME compared to the real thing... wake up, don't believe that PRO's should think as you manager/commercial CEO do, no way that is appropiate! Nani didnt cheated, he showed that SC2 is just a FUCKING game, and that wicked Korea shouldn't think that all players are flawless in behavior,,, wake up!, they are gamers, sitting behind a computer! FOR GOD SAKES!
They are not gamers, they are professional esports athletes.
Naniwa did not kept his honor in showing the world that he doesn't care. He compromised the Cup and the spirit of sportsmanship. He gets paid even for not leaving the group stage, one can expect that he puts up a show. If he isn't in the mood to play or if he wants to save his originally planned strategy versus Nestea for the next encounter (which is fully understandable) he could go with a standard game or even with a risky all-in.
He gets paid by Gom for the Cup and by his team manager. What he did was like leaving work early – without having the agreement that he can take some time off.
I did watch the game. Oh man, Nestea already out, Naniwa too. How sad. But wait, there is a history between both players and Gom did schedule the match even though neither of them can advance. YES!
I saw the proberush – even without any micro – and was irked. Yeah I knew Nestea and Naniwa couldn't get out, but there still was pride on the line. I was especially annoyed that Naniwa showed this kind of disrespect to Nestea. He denied Nestea to save face to finish at least not last place with a single regular win.
Naniwa is not just a gamer. He is a professional esports athlete.
If you're not interested in my own personal thoughts that I felt a need to share here, do not continue reading.
Okay, so I have a few feelings I would like to share about this post and the entire issue. I want to start by saying that I by no means want to be offensive or in anyway rude. I just want to share my thoughts on this post. I am certain that EGAlex can understand that and can read this as constructive criticism, hopefully the rest of you guys can as well. I also want to say that I, like Alex, am not going to go into the punishment chosen by GOMTV. This has been discussed in various threads and does not belong in this one. This is also written as a direct response to said person.
I want to start off with trying to understand why you decided to throw yourself into the debate. I do understand that you are a big pillar of eSports and has a lot of power and knowledge. Off topic I also deeply respect you for this. However you are extremely biased. It is inevitable that you are. I do understand your feeling that you want to express how the “business side” of eSports views the issue but I feel that, like many of the repliers have pointed out, comparing this with IdrA is something you definitely want to avoid if you want to stay unbiased. I do think that you, as a representative of a different team, should stay out of these kinds of discussions unless you want to express the official statement of Evil Geniuses. I think it is impossible for someone in your position to make a personal statement. To make an example, IdrA's old habit of leaving games to early is most likely one of the reasons why his stream has such a huge amount of viewers. All publicity is good publicity in the long run. This however is not the main point of this post.
I think that the entire comparison between what you refer to as “professional sports” and eSports is flawed. The reason for this is the relative shortness of each StarCraft-game compared to a, for example, NFL game. This means that you will, most likely, never pay money to go see one StarCraft-game. Unless a best of 9 or something like that becomes standard it is hard to sell StarCraft “one game at a time”, if you get what I mean. Unless it's for a really big finals (In which case forfeiting is unlikely) this will never be the case. Even if all of the NFL fans bought a season ticket, there would still be differences between one game of American football (I am Swedish, deal with it ^^) and one game of out of many of StarCraft. What I mean is that there is a lot more planning involved in a NFL game than in a StarCraft game. You get into the car, go to the stadium, find your seats, buy popcorn and so on and so on. It requires a lot of planning. This is of course similar in a situation like the GSL finals. However, at this stage of StarCraft 2 a “meaningless” match will never be played as a single game, but will be played as one game of many being played that day.
This means that buying a ticket for a NFL game which only lasts for one game and the game takes 3 hours (I don't know actually, there are so much commercials you can't really tell during Super Bowl which is the only NFL I ever watch) is vastly different to paying for a whole StarCraft 2 tournament. You know that there will be meaningless games and you don't really care for them either. Even the mighty American MLG quits one stream instead of showing placement matches simply because the audience doesn't care as much for it. The GOMTV product is a tournament as a whole and it is not each single game. What GOMTV wants people paying for is the entire experience of a tournament and not a package of games. You also by yourself point out (I actually can't find it now that I'm looking but I'm 99% sure, please correct me if I'm wrong) that you're surprised there aren't many unhappy subscribers. I think that there are very few viewers that were actually dissatisfied. They saw the starter of this huge controversy live and even though they had looked forward to seeing “the grudge match” it obviously wasn't half as intriguing with both players being out. No one would ever give the winner any credit anyway, since both players obviously would play halfhearted. This would also be the case in a “professional sport”.
I just want to finish this wall of text by saying that the behavior of Naniwa was despicable. I do believe though, that you are letting, something that in the end is Quantic Gamings and Naniwas PR-problem, get out of proportion.
The game is meaningles, because you have 60% Nestea against 20% Naniwa. No pro player will ever play on 100% if it doesn't mean anything for him. Even if he loves every single fan personaly (lol), he is not capable of puting 100%. Everything that drives him in wanting to be the very best player in the world is gone. He wants to be the best, but it can't happen. Can happen tomorrow, but not today. He may try to play the game, but it will not be real. It can never be real. Why on earth you would ever want to see such game? Really?
I also wonder about people saying this is actually bad for Naniwa. He was one of the least liked players around. Not hated, just not loved. He was rarely good at interviews, not funny, switching teams. Now he actually expressed himself in a strong way. Lotsa people like him for it, lot of people hate him. All they care.
I've always respected Naniwa as a player, now i actually like him. Go go Naniwa!
On December 22 2011 00:58 Madars wrote: NaNi is just a human...
He is just a human. He is given the chance to learn from the mistake he made. He is not "banned" from GSL, and this thread focuses on more the action than the player himself.
For those of you saying that Nani is in the wrong, that may very well be the case, but just because he is wrong doesn't warrant the punishment. While this blog talks about this action representing a precedence of e-sports athletes taking games seriously, there is another precedent being created by GOM saying that tournament organizers have the right to revoke spots they've guaranteed as prizes for a tournament because they don't like something that an individual did; something which was never expressed as being against the rules or wrong. If you are looking towards the future of e-sports, it is very important to preserve player trust in organizers, otherwise the whole system breaks down. It's even worse when they very blatantly lie about it in the way GOM did. I'm curious if anyone actually believed GOM's statement about the MLG Providence prize not being a Code S spot.
Now what actions should GOM have taken? Make a statement expressing your disappointment with Naniwa's actions and that those actions may effect what events GOM invites Nani to. At this point the inevitable Nani apology would come and you could move on from there.
I do not care about an E-sports scene as a football fan would care about football. I care starcraft because it's fun to watch. A starcraft match can only be fun to watch when either the players are really driven to win and put in their abslute bests, or when there is a showmatch kind of match (Shoutcraft invitationals). Half-hearted matches either result in rushes or boring games. Naniwa is one of the most driven players of all to win a tournament, and I compltely understand that he would forfeit a game that has no meaning to him (at that time), and I personally think the game he would have played if he didn't probe rush wouldn't have been any fun either (people keep mentioning he could have 4-gated, but who cares bout an unmicroed 4-gate?).
I suggest people just enjoy starcraft and don't get so involved in a major bunch of drama about a pointless match.
I agree with the decisions of everyone involved, but I try to imagine what it would feel like if everything I did was meaningless. Why try hard if my efforts don't matter.
What I got out of Alex's post is that pro athletes don't blatantly throw matches therefore sc2 players shouldn't. It's been said 5,000 times. Mainstream sports have much, much more money riding on the line in sponsorships, and is a completely different culture to gaming.
He makes it out like everyone who watched that night expected some monumental performance from both players. It's been said a ton of times, but I'm just going to say it again: would anyone have been satisfied with a 4 gate? Has anyone ever watched a player throw a match with the tiniest bit of discreetness and came out "entertained?" The very fact theres nothing on the line makes the match that much less exciting. There are a few rare games that become epic, but it's disingenuous to intelligent starcraft viewers to suggest everyone watches these low quality games come out dumbfounded when the all-in fails.
Then the contradictions. EVERY Idra fan got upset when he gg'd early and dropped out. I could be completely wrong, but I've never seen ANYONE give sympathy to an argument where a fan wants to see their favorite player drop out of a tournament. I don't know why Alex brought up the Idra vs Nerchio comparison at all; it's an entirely different situation that was much worse. Alex knows, I know, and EVERYONE knows that if Naniwa threw a semi-finals match he would get 100% shit on by EVERYBODY and there would be very little if any sympathy for him at all.
And ultimately, the hypocrisy. Alex admitted himself, this happens all the time. In EVERY major tournament with pointless matches they get thrown in much less discreet ways. Not a bullshit 4 gate, and sometimes they're not even played outright as opposed to the 2nd most obvious which is a worker rush. It happens every MLG, it happens at the televised qualifiers for IPL. NONE OF THESE PLAYERS ARE VILIFIED. None of them get punished. It can almost reliably be said it's an inevitability. GSL however had no inconsequential matches, ever. Their formats were always well thought out to bring a ton of high quality games from players. For the first time they placed these matches in one tournament, and just like EVERY other tournament, it happened. It happened to Naniwa. It wasn't in America. It wasn't in Europe. No fucks would have been given. It happened in Korea, and the Koreans went ape shit berserk over it. If the Koreans wouldn't have cared, no one else would have either. Not to the extent would have because of the Drama that followed. Naniwa was given every ounce of shit. Everyone admits its a fantasy to place these unrealistic expectations upon progamers to play their hardest 100% of the time, to always want to win and to have honor and sportsmanship and that jazz. Yet, they'll turn around and shit on Naniwa for it in droves over this. And I'm not suggesting theres a major bias just because it's Naniwa. There may be a little, but really its only because it happened in Korea, and because the Koreans cranked the drama to the maximum over it. It's fucking petty drama.
Everyone knows tournament organizers and sponsors have money on the line with every game, which only serves to confuse me as to why do they include these pointless matches at all? They KNOW the players aren't going to try as hard. They know the fans aren't going to care as much because it doesn't affect the tournament outcome. Fans want to see their favorite players giving it their all, and players want an incentive to win. Just don't include them, the entire tournament becomes higher quality. And it's not even to suggest that I want tournaments to make less money and have less content. Manipulate the format for more games played. Make sure they all count. That's it. Tournaments get much more content out of players, fans see the highest quality games, players can't throw games without dropping out of the tournament and invoking the rage of the entire starcraft community.
What also upsets me is how willing Alex is to give all power to the tournament organizers and sponsors. Everyone wants to see players play their hardest, but again it's unrealistic. It doesn't mean tournaments have no obligation to them. If anything they rely on them. It's a ridiculous power grab, even if it wasn't intentional. He's also forgetting the Koreans boycotting NASL over the less than favorable playing times. Was Alex telling the Koreans it isn't NASL's job to cater to the players and make sure the viewers watch games live at a reasonable time? Tournaments definitely don't have that power. You can say it's their tournament and they can do everything to maximize viewership numbers, but the players only have to rally together and obviously tournaments will bend over to a reasonable demand. And it's ridiculous because this is SUCH a miniscule issue with inconsequential matches that has never been a problem until GSL made it a problem, so they're given that power and Naniwa suffers.
And to everyone saying Naniwa didn't have the spot in the first place, it's bullshit. Naniwa was 100% going to code S until that night at blizzard cup, when GSL pulled the rug from beneath both Naniwa and MLG. To make sure he didn't go because they're butthurt they had an inferior format for drawing viewership/high quality games and like every other tournament it happened to theirs. Only they actually televised it. You can argue semantics, but ultimately they dealt a 'punishment' and removed his otherwise guaranteed code s spot, and they're disingenuous as hell to suggest otherwise.
All of this isn't to defend Naniwa's decision. I agree what he did was wrong. Everyone wants to see him play his hardest, but he didn't that night. It doesn't mean he deserves the shit he got, nor the punishment. It was miniscule, happens all the time, and Naniwa is unfairly vilified. Everyone puts what he did at an 8/10 when it's realistically a 2, and he's treated like it was 6.
Mad Respect for the write up to compensate the neglects in the story of Alex, those neglects are very obvious to me. Hopefully you got the last word on it, and everybody learn from this situation.
We in the Netherlands had a BIG discussion on a dicision by a referee during a high stakes soccer game, giving a red card to a goal keeper, only because he defended himself with two ''extra'' kicks on the legs of an attacking supporter that ran on the field during the game. This was the ''rule'' that must be obeyed, according to the referee. He judged that a player ''should never be displaying violence during a game, it is not professional and therefore should be punished severely''. In fact this lead to a boycot of the game by the coach of the keeper's team, which has never happened before in Dutch soccer history.
I think there are a lot of parallels between these stories, eg everyone tries to make a dicision that is in accord with their power based on a ''professional code''. The thing you mentioned about this being blown out of proportion, I think this is a consequence of incorrect use of power to ''force a professional code''. This overpowering and punishing the all-investing professional, instead of accepting his/her uniques faults being demonstrated in ''unprofessional'' situations. This thing is backfiring on the Korean SC2 community, because they dominate with ''unconventional'' demands for non-Korean players/tourneys. Because we should ''copy their style''? I dont know, but it doesnt work that way, I do know.
I can relate to Nani, knowing his struggles in the past and his winner mentality, but a referee in Korea doesnt give a SHIT, sadly. The referee in the Dutch soccer game, is probably someone who doesnt understand that this keeper couldnt run away like a girl, as the referee certainly would have done if he was attacked. I think it is sad that Korea referee couldnt get their head in a ''atypical'' professional, i think that should be everyones conclusion.
Hopefully Alex and his groupies will finally understand, Korean SC2 community dont understand this, but I can forgive them.
On December 24 2011 16:36 Tyrant0 wrote: What I got out of Alex's post is that pro athletes don't blatantly throw matches therefore sc2 players shouldn't. It's been said 5,000 times. Mainstream sports have much, much more money riding on the line in sponsorships, and is a completely different culture to gaming.
He makes it out like everyone who watched that night expected some monumental performance from both players. It's been said a ton of times, but I'm just going to say it again: would anyone have been satisfied with a 4 gate? Has anyone ever watched a player throw a match with the tiniest bit of discreetness and came out "entertained?" The very fact theres nothing on the line makes the match that much less exciting. There are a few rare games that become epic, but it's disingenuous to intelligent starcraft viewers to suggest everyone watches these low quality games come out dumbfounded when the all-in fails.
Then the contradictions. EVERY Idra fan got upset when he gg'd early and dropped out. I could be completely wrong, but I've never seen ANYONE give sympathy to an argument where a fan wants to see their favorite player drop out of a tournament. I don't know why Alex brought up the Idra vs Nerchio comparison at all; it's an entirely different situation that was much worse. Alex knows, I know, and EVERYONE knows that if Naniwa threw a semi-finals match he would get 100% shit on by EVERYBODY and there would be very little if any sympathy for him at all.
And ultimately, the hypocrisy. Alex admitted himself, this happens all the time. In EVERY major tournament with pointless matches they get thrown in much less discreet ways. Not a bullshit 4 gate, and sometimes they're not even played outright as opposed to the 2nd most obvious which is a worker rush. It happens every MLG, it happens at the televised qualifiers for IPL. NONE OF THESE PLAYERS ARE VILIFIED. None of them get punished. It can almost reliably be said it's an inevitability. GSL however had no inconsequential matches, ever. Their formats were always well thought out to bring a ton of high quality games from players. For the first time they placed these matches in one tournament, and just like EVERY other tournament, it happened. It happened to Naniwa. It wasn't in America. It wasn't in Europe. No fucks would have been given. It happened in Korea, and the Koreans went ape shit berserk over it. If the Koreans wouldn't have cared, no one else would have either. Not to the extent would have because of the Drama that followed. Naniwa was given every ounce of shit. Everyone admits its a fantasy to place these unrealistic expectations upon progamers to play their hardest 100% of the time, to always want to win and to have honor and sportsmanship and that jazz. Yet, they'll turn around and shit on Naniwa for it in droves over this. And I'm not suggesting theres a major bias just because it's Naniwa. There may be a little, but really its only because it happened in Korea, and because the Koreans cranked the drama to the maximum over it. It's fucking petty drama.
Everyone knows tournament organizers and sponsors have money on the line with every game, which only serves to confuse me as to why do they include these pointless matches at all? They KNOW the players aren't going to try as hard. They know the fans aren't going to care as much because it doesn't affect the tournament outcome. Fans want to see their favorite players giving it their all, and players want an incentive to win. Just don't include them, the entire tournament becomes higher quality. And it's not even to suggest that I want tournaments to make less money and have less content. Manipulate the format for more games played. Make sure they all count. That's it. Tournaments get much more content out of players, fans see the highest quality games, players can't throw games without dropping out of the tournament and invoking the rage of the entire starcraft community.
What also upsets me is how willing Alex is to give all power to the tournament organizers and sponsors. Everyone wants to see players play their hardest, but again it's unrealistic. It doesn't mean tournaments have no obligation to them. If anything they rely on them. It's a ridiculous power grab, even if it wasn't intentional. He's also forgetting the Koreans boycotting NASL over the less than favorable playing times. Was Alex telling the Koreans it isn't NASL's job to cater to the players and make sure the viewers watch games live at a reasonable time? Tournaments definitely don't have that power. You can say it's their tournament and they can do everything to maximize viewership numbers, but the players only have to rally together and obviously tournaments will bend over to a reasonable demand. And it's ridiculous because this is SUCH a miniscule issue with inconsequential matches that has never been a problem until GSL made it a problem, so they're given that power and Naniwa suffers.
And to everyone saying Naniwa didn't have the spot in the first place, it's bullshit. Naniwa was 100% going to code S until that night at blizzard cup, when GSL pulled the rug from beneath both Naniwa and MLG. To make sure he didn't go because they're butthurt they had an inferior format for drawing viewership/high quality games and like every other tournament it happened to theirs. Only they actually televised it. You can argue semantics, but ultimately they dealt a 'punishment' and removed his otherwise guaranteed code s spot, and they're disingenuous as hell to suggest otherwise.
All of this isn't to defend Naniwa's decision. I agree what he did was wrong. Everyone wants to see him play his hardest, but he didn't that night. It doesn't mean he deserves the shit he got, nor the punishment. It was miniscule, happens all the time, and Naniwa is unfairly vilified. Everyone puts what he did at an 8/10 when it's realistically a 2, and he's treated like it was 6.
Amen, the OP is just pure contradictory, logic-devoid crap.
1.- Part of the reason Idra is so popular is because he is real. If he's angry, he'll say so. If he's raging, he'll quit, if he's not pleased, he will bm. A HEALTHY alternative to the 'me so polite, me so happy always' korean mentality where you're not supposed to speak your mind.
Naniwa is just the same. He's being real in his own way. And if any of you haters want this sport to go any further, you should accept individual attitudes and styles. Idra ragequits and gives up on important matches while Naniwa gives up on one non-important match. Boo hoo, please, stop being so utterly delicate and incapable of rational thought.
2.- The game vs Nestea was not something most of us were truly anticipating. Why? because BO1 is crap, because you can cheese BO1 and it still doesn't prove you're the best man. If GOM were so worried and interested in keeping its customers entertained, then perhaps it would pay more attention to either the 100,000 complaints about its secondary casters or, without going off on a tangent, change its tournament structure to something that generates more interest from the fans and viewers. Get rid of useless matches, just like you do in the UP & DOWN matches for the code A to code S jumped. How many times have I seen 'this set was not played' because it was irrelevant? Nobody cried then. Save for the Finals, the Blizzard cup was by large and far, an uninteresting, unimportant tournament compared to virtually every MLG for example. No thrill to any game save for the finals.
There's countless things GOM can do to make something interesting happen between Nani and Nestea: a special super match, bo3/bo5/bo7 with tastosis commentating. Everyone would tune in, that's for sure.
3.- The most stupid part of this whole wretched debate and the OP's key points is that everybody feels entitled to tell Naniwa or any other player what to do. In fact, it's only the sponsors and team leaders that can. And even then, one thing is to sit down with Nania and talk him through the whole ordeal or making an appeal for the fans...while an other entirely is to jump on this bitch & moan bandwagon and just drown the rest us of us with tears.
4.- The Punishment, albeit not addressed directly in the OP, is just more of the same. It's quite simply a gross, brute-force fix to a subtle problem. Finding a scapegoat instead of addressing the key issues. The key issue here is that the game was pointless and uninteresting beyond help. Everyone will much rather see these two magnificent players giving their heart's out in a bo7 when HAVING the chance to go forward rather than PRETEND they care like a bunch of classical-sports hypocrites that the match is actually important and that they're giving it their alleged best when its the absolute opposite.
5.- Drawing similarities to professional physical sports athletes is dumb. Perhaps, if you paid Naniwa 10MILLION USD a year, then yeah, he surely would feel obliged - as part of his contract - and other numerous advertisement deals - to act like a hypocrite and pretend he cares when the team is not going to the playoffs. But until then, please...just stop. He's a player on the rise who wants with all his heart to win the GSL, not please 3 haters with a crappy meaningless match. And because of that stupid punishment, not only Naniwa suffers unjustly, but, more importantly, US THE FANS AND VIEWERS lose great games in the upcoming GSL Code S season. Poor thinking by GOM. Then again, it was expected.
your team promotes bad manners, yet you find this unacceptable? you sell a t-shirt that says "I <3 Bad Manners" with EvilGeniuses below it.. wether you want to say its your personal view or not, you're still running a company that promotes this. And don't even get me started on greg. This would be like Bill Gates and discussing his point of view of living on the streets and being poor his whole life... The biggest bm'er in the scene is on your team.
What Naniwa did wasn't as bad as the 6pools Stephano did in which the winner or loser would decide an outcome...
The games didn't matter, gom is to blame for a bad structure.. Did you watch up/downs and watch oGsInca lose to a scouted baneling bust with a hole in his wall - to his ex-teammate who needed the win while he did not. That should be what we're discussing, not a game that had no relevance or effect on anyone.
WTF is this for crap-blog, sometimes, someone has to do the unconventional ''in-your-face'', this time NaniWa did 100% correct, respect for him doing the disrespect to a BROKEN tourney set-up. Let them learn the hard way, NaniWa is not someone who acts on BULLSHIT reasons, like a tourney maker creating a delusive match...
A am fan of NaniWa from now on, because he choses to stand above the ''professional code'' to let everyone see that GOM fucked up with their tourney concept. RESPECT, to take the penalty, say sorry to the organisation, and go on with revelant tourney is the future... pls Nani dont enter code S, they dont deserve you!
On December 26 2011 19:01 epb1982 wrote: WTF is this for crap-blog, sometimes, someone has to do the unconventional ''in-your-face'', this time NaniWa did 100% correct, respect for him doing the disrespect to a BROKEN tourney set-up. Let them learn the hard way, NaniWa is not someone who acts on BULLSHIT reasons, like a tourney maker creating a delusive match...
A am fan of NaniWa from now on, because he choses to stand above the ''professional code'' to let everyone see that GOM fucked up with their tourney concept. RESPECT, to take the penalty, say sorry to the organisation, and go on with revelant tourney is the future... pls Nani dont enter code S, they dont deserve you!
??? Break etiquette, don't join most prestigious tournament... Naniwa = 100% correct + a bamf to boot
I think you should read some of the more thoughtful replies to mellow your thoughts -.- I mean you can support Naniwa, but... uhhh... ok
On December 26 2011 19:01 epb1982 wrote: WTF is this for crap-blog, sometimes, someone has to do the unconventional ''in-your-face'', this time NaniWa did 100% correct, respect for him doing the disrespect to a BROKEN tourney set-up. Let them learn the hard way, NaniWa is not someone who acts on BULLSHIT reasons, like a tourney maker creating a delusive match...
A am fan of NaniWa from now on, because he choses to stand above the ''professional code'' to let everyone see that GOM fucked up with their tourney concept. RESPECT, to take the penalty, say sorry to the organisation, and go on with revelant tourney is the future... pls Nani dont enter code S, they dont deserve you!
??? Break etiquette, don't join most prestigious tournament... Naniwa = 100% correct + a bamf to boot
I think you should read some of the more thoughtful replies to mellow your thoughts -.- I mean you can support Naniwa, but... uhhh... ok
I think NaniWa went in, thinking he would show the world the best playing of SC2. And indeed he failed in showcasing his unique unbeatable style (which he is known for after his unbelievable 23-24? kill streak during the MLG Dallas), thus he went disillusioned after 3-0 intense close matches (heavily decided by luck factor).
He didnt think about failing, the tourney managers have to think about letting a player deal with his emotions after failing!
They chose this format with certain risks, probably knowing these risks. Then they state with the marketing formula that the tourney is one of the most relevant/most at stake tourneys of the year (which is BS, in my opinion). So my conclusion is they hype and pump an potential defective tourney format, as if it is the greatest and best ever?!? strange, right?
I think they went flat on their nose, and blamed the foreign player NaniWa for exposing their precious hollow and superficial tourney. So maybe they WANT to do some EXPLANATION, or better to drop the F*cking arrogant attitude ''we dont need to explain to any foreign sucker, because we ARE the tourney''
So, Alex and his groupies: stop defending the Korean, be a foreigner. We dont understand them, they dont understand us. Who is the fault? I dont know, but THEY need to be understandable, otherwise I think they are pretty dump, or a least not smart.
On December 26 2011 19:01 epb1982 wrote: WTF is this for crap-blog, sometimes, someone has to do the unconventional ''in-your-face'', this time NaniWa did 100% correct, respect for him doing the disrespect to a BROKEN tourney set-up. Let them learn the hard way, NaniWa is not someone who acts on BULLSHIT reasons, like a tourney maker creating a delusive match...
A am fan of NaniWa from now on, because he choses to stand above the ''professional code'' to let everyone see that GOM fucked up with their tourney concept. RESPECT, to take the penalty, say sorry to the organisation, and go on with revelant tourney is the future... pls Nani dont enter code S, they dont deserve you!
??? Break etiquette, don't join most prestigious tournament... Naniwa = 100% correct + a bamf to boot
I think you should read some of the more thoughtful replies to mellow your thoughts -.- I mean you can support Naniwa, but... uhhh... ok
I think NaniWa went in, thinking he would show the world the best playing of SC2. And indeed he failed in showcasing his unique unbeatable style (which he is known for after his unbelievable 23-24? kill streak during the MLG Dallas), thus he went disillusioned after 3-0 intense close matches (heavily decided by luck factor).
He didnt think about failing, the tourney managers have to think about letting a player deal with his emotions after failing!
They chose this format with certain risks, probably knowing these risks. Then they state with the marketing formula that the tourney is one of the most relevant/most at stake tourneys of the year (which is BS, in my opinion). So my conclusion is they hype and pump an potential defective tourney format, as if it is the greatest and best ever?!? strange, right?
I think they went flat on their nose, and blamed the foreign player NaniWa for exposing their precious hollow and superficial tourney. So maybe they WANT to do some EXPLANATION, or better to drop the F*cking arrogant attitude ''we dont need to explain to any foreign sucker, because we ARE the tourney''
So, Alex and his groupies: stop defending the Korean, be a foreigner. We dont understand them, they dont understand us. Who is the fault? I dont know, but THEY need to be understandable, otherwise I think they are pretty dump, or a least not smart.
The match was pointless in the context of the tournament, but incredibly important for Naniwa's team, GOM and indeed Naniwa himself. This was the grudge match against NesTea that many sc2 fans wanted to see and were instead denied. By at least playing it out Naniwa still intentionally loses but without damaging the profitability of himself and the tourney in the process.
@britwrangler ''The match was pointless in the context of the tournament, but incredibly important for Naniwa's team, GOM and indeed Naniwa himself. This was the grudge match against NesTea that many sc2 fans wanted to see and were instead denied. By at least playing it out Naniwa still intentionally loses but without damaging the profitability of himself and the tourney in the process.''
Passive aggressive reaction against his own best interest, I hope NaniWa can keep it together next time. I agreed completely from the beginning that the fault is primarily on NaniWa. It is BS that he had to quit a serious game on stage b/c he's completely pissed off. But should a pro-gamer think about more than winning a game?
I dont care about him being a pussy for throwing a game away, i only care that i see the best / peak performance and skills of the pro-gamers when a lot is on stake. So, he must be bashed for his off-perfomance during the tourney, not for the disrespect toward ''the world''... it just pisses me off!
Pinging this post as well. EG needs to make a statement or a response with regards to the Idra/Alive showmatch. Punish or protect, I don't care. But what you do now will help define what kind of team EG is, and what kind of culture Western e-sports will have. We already know what the Korean response would be.
I'm glad somebody bumped this because I would LOVE to see alex actually respond. Please let us know if you are sincere about what you said earlier or if it was just empty words.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://tcpm.mrlazyinc.com/files/images/games/memes/mlg_2011_orlando_boxer_stays_late_cake_song_lyrics.PNG)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nZuk2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Vb0yn.gif)
. Regarding why my opinion is relevant, I feel that I understand the economics and business side of the eSports industry as well as anyone around; given that EG is generally viewed as a successful business (even by those who don't like us very much), I feel that I have some reputability on the subject.
![[image loading]](http://f.cl.ly/items/1g3l393Q2K3K2X19272Z/lim_yo-hwan.jpg)
) one of my main GSL memories was Idra vs Jinro in which idra 6pooled, and jinro somehow managed to escort his marine into a bunker with like 1-2 health left on it. the game only lasted 5-6 minutes, but the suspense of wether he would get that marine in or not, and the "OMG I CAN'T BELIEVE HE JUST DID THAT" when he did, made it imo a very memorable game.
