EPT[MSL Spoiler] His Overwhelming Advantage - Page 17
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
EvoChamber
France2505 Posts
| ||
|
Appendix
Sweden979 Posts
On January 24 2010 13:31 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: hey, i have definitely supported the idea that jaedong is at a massive advantage at that point. i'm merely saying that KeSPA failed to establish a precedent on these issues, and that a blanket "always rematch" rule is far more objective, and should be the route the governing body takes i have also said that given the circumstances, KeSPA was absolutely forced to give the game to jaedong, because that precedent has not been set. i haven't said that jaedong wasn't at a huge advantage, and i haven't said that KeSPA realistically could have made a different decision. I'm definitely of the opinion that they should have, simply because it's better to begin this sort of thing late than not do it at all. I'm really just musing about the gigantic hole KeSPA has dug itself into. Objective doesn't have to mean blind. You can still make objective rulings on a case-to-case basis. It just have to be clear who has the final say, and that everybody accepts that. It is also important that there is a framework of criterias by which the decision is made, so there can be some form of check-up and a basis for complaints to rely on. The best solution would be ofc to introduce some form of save states so that games can take off from where they were interrupted. I don´t have the technical skills to know if that is possible though. | ||
FakeSteve[TPR]
Valhalla18444 Posts
On January 24 2010 14:27 Appendix wrote: Objective doesn't have to mean blind. You can still make objective rulings on a case-to-case basis. It just have to be clear who has the final say, and that everybody accepts that. It is also important that there is a framework of criterias by which the decision is made, so there can be some form of check-up and a basis for complaints to rely on. The best solution would be ofc to introduce some form of save states so that games can take off from where they were interrupted. I don´t have the technical skills to know if that is possible though. except then it relies on the discretion of the referee. here we have myself, idra, and several other trustable names saying flash could have won that game. we all agree its an advantage. games shouldn't be awarded for an advantage. how can kespa reliably assure that the ref will make the correct decision? is it really better to rely on the referee making the decision, when their game knowledge doesn't compare to the players, and the general public will without a doubt be torn over the decision? it puts unnecessary stress on the referee, and gives people a target on which to place the blame. it's a terrible system. | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On January 24 2010 13:44 Creationism wrote: I think the whole difference in the game is that you have no replay, you have no supply and no actual mineral count to base off of except what the commentators decided to look at. Even at the end, whether those ultras survived is also the question, the amount of health they had left. Even if Jaedong was taking another expansion, it was far from being done, and further from being mined. The way the game went was left with what Flash could do. I really don't like people quoting other people on their opinion of the advantage and using it to convince people that Jaedong was massively ahead. Do they know the game better or does Flash know the game better? Seeing the way he gged in the first game, the very fact that he stayed in the game means to me he believed he still had a fighting chance. And the argument that Jaedong had showed his build on this map and therefore was at a disadvantage is a flawed argument simply because both players obviously had specific BOs and both showed them. The racial imbalance on fighting spirit is very debatable because it is based off of past games, which do not number in the thousands, but simply in tens. Can't even law of large numbers that shit. Even given all that I'm pretty torn between a rematch and the given victory, but I pretty much believe a rematch should be given in all situations of this type. Being a competition I think the trend should go towards allowing players to compete instead of taking away someone's ability to compete. so if you were playing a 20 minute game in a tournament like this in game 3 on a terran favored map (70% correct?) and actually winning with a build that would only work once you wouldn't be pist if you had to do a rematch? Think about it Flash is just doing standard 1 rax fe as expected while jaedong did 3 hatch before pool into fast ultra which is way different and riskier. Do you really think if they rematched jaedong could/would do that same build? He would be at a disadvantage because he had that build specifically in mind for that game and would have been utter bullshit if they had to re it. Now while I was rooting for jaedong I unlike most people look at this through 2 different views. For starters I do know that for Flash he may have had a chance (a very small one mind you) but he still thought he had a chance or he was just hoping Jaedong would fuck up and he would be able to win who knows but it would be more devestating for jaedong if there was a re as what would he do? 2 hatch muta all in? Yeah thats awesome because of MBC's stupid computers Jaedong has to do that strategy or lose as what else can he do? He can't do that 3 hatch before pool Flash wouldn't allow that so again think of it in Jaedongs perspective as well not just flash's. While I do think this was the best decision I do hate how its a lose/lose either way as had they said Re I would be surprised if Jaedong somehow won considering the map and he would have to do some different strategy. That game was epic and I still after watching the end of the vod, the threads with why it looked like flash was going to lose I still hold to Kespa's decision. It just sucks it had to happen in game 3 why couldn't it have happened in game 1 or something its very ironic it happens in the best game of the series so far T_T. | ||
|
tissue
Malaysia441 Posts
If you are JD, and asked to take a rematch: Say yes, you are basically screwing yourself out of a win, and if you go on to lose, you will be known as the guy who threw it all away. More realistically, you can't even guarantee you will ever get to another major finals in the future. You've managed to survive all kinds of cheese, weird strats, straight up play, continual harass, doom drops, sucky maps - you don't wade through gallons of nerd blood to give away games you have basically won. Say no, you will be branded as a massive douche by fanboys. Reverse applies for flash, too. In the case of disagreement, it's the worst case scenario as you will get fanboy riots all over the place, and kespa still has to be called in. Perhaps this way is for the best. The little fanboy inside each of us doesn't really care who won last night. We can keep on believing our beloved champion is the best. You could say everyone loses, but you could just as well say everyone is a winner in your heart. | ||
|
Appendix
Sweden979 Posts
On January 24 2010 14:35 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: except then it relies on the discretion of the referee. here we have myself, idra, and several other trustable names saying flash could have won that game. we all agree its an advantage. games shouldn't be awarded for an advantage. how can kespa reliably assure that the ref will make the correct decision? is it really better to rely on the referee making the decision, when their game knowledge doesn't compare to the players, and the general public will without a doubt be torn over the decision? it puts unnecessary stress on the referee, and gives people a target on which to place the blame. it's a terrible system. Yes, it does rely on the discretion of the referee, or preferably referees. That is why it is important to have criterias by which their rulings can be reviewed and allow for formal complaints. Of course wrong decisions can be made, and of course it puts some stress on the referee, especially in cases like this when a fair decision just can´t be made, but that is the role of any referee in any sport. The people making the calls will obviously have to have great insight into the game. Having a rule that says "hardware failure => rematch" is just too clumsy. It is bound to cause at least as much controversy as a bad ruling, and what happens to those games where there is a crash and the game is, in fact, obviously over but the player just hadn´t typed in gg yet? In this specific case, the decision had to be reasonable enough as fast as possible, which I believe it was. The uncertainty of not knowing what will happen is horrific and should be avoided as much as possible, for the sake of the players. Afterwards, many agree on that it was a reasonable ruling. It didn´t do complete justice to Flash, but as stated earlier, this was a situation without a fair solution. | ||
|
Evs
Philippines330 Posts
The game never reached the point where Flash thought it was best to gg so this win had to be "given" by Kespa instead of being "earned" by JD. Advantage != actual win unless you assume that both players would do so many things in the ideal manner which isn't the case 100% of the time. | ||
|
LostWraithSC
United States111 Posts
On January 24 2010 14:35 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: except then it relies on the discretion of the referee. here we have myself, idra, and several other trustable names saying flash could have won that game. we all agree its an advantage. games shouldn't be awarded for an advantage. how can kespa reliably assure that the ref will make the correct decision? is it really better to rely on the referee making the decision, when their game knowledge doesn't compare to the players, and the general public will without a doubt be torn over the decision? it puts unnecessary stress on the referee, and gives people a target on which to place the blame. it's a terrible system. In fact I completely believe that games ending due to unexpected stoppages should be awarded based on advantages, even not overwhelming ones. There are a few cases in baseball and soccer where matches were called at its current score before the final time due to circumstances that forbid further playing. There are distinct rules, official ones, that decide whether or not a game is called or canceled. Advantages are reason enough to call games because "potential comebacks" are speculative by nature, no more likely (probably less likely in fact), than the winning team simply continuing its superior performance and closing the game. If a soccer game is at 2:1 at the 70 minute mark and for some reason you can't play anymore (earthquake/tornado/etc), the game is CALLED and the leading team is declared the winner. These incidents are fortunately rare, but advantages are unambiguously translated into victory. As much as we would like to see the losing team score 2 goals in the last 20 minutes and win, that is no basis to nullify the result of the first 70 minutes of the game, which is a definitive lead and therefore superior performance by the leading team. To call a rematch is not fair in any means because it nullifies the performance of the canceled match. The leading team or winning player has played up to the point of stoppage and has proven to be the better performer in the game. Anything could happen IF the stoppage of play does not occur, but since it DID occur there is no way for us to predict the outcome. Therefore, it makes no difference whether or not the losing team has a good chance of coming back or not, they are losing now, they lost the game. If the Costa Rican soccer team played against Brazil, and scored a goal in the first minute, and then a meteor strikes the pitch and ruins the field, Costa Rica WINS. I don't care if Brazil is a far superior team (no offense to Costa Rica soccer fans, I'm Chinese and you guys beat us in the 2002 World Cup), and IF there was no meteor Brazil would've certainly won, it doesn't change the factor that after one minute of play, Costa Rica is winning, and since the game must end, Costa Rica wins the entire game. Stoppages suck, nobody wants them, but when they happen you can't change history. The decision should be the fairest possible, and rematch of anything other than a STRICT TIE is extremely unfair to the winning team. Even if it was a terrible player against Flash, and Flash SOMEHOW manages to put himself in a distinctive disadvantageous position at the point of stoppage, the no name player deserves the win because he has performed better up to the point of stoppage. Everything else beyond the stoppage is PURE SPECULATION and carries no weight whatsoever. Almost the entire starcraft community agrees that Jaedong had an advantage (overwhelming or not) at the blackout time. Therefore, regardless of "comeback potential" or "it's flash" or "it's jaedong", the leading team wins. That's how it works in all sports, and if the starcraft community wants to treat itself like a legit e-sport, it should follow the same logical convention. | ||
|
stk01001
United States786 Posts
| ||
|
sh02hp0869
Sweden460 Posts
On January 24 2010 15:17 stk01001 wrote: i'm curious if kespa ASKED jaedong if he wanted to re-game. and i wonder if given the choice, would jaedong have chosen to re-game rather than take a victory in this fashion. As a jaedong fan i'm a little dissapointed jaedong didn't stand up and refuse to take a win this way. I know he can't be 100% satisfied, i know as a fan I'm not 100% satisfied with this victory. but then i think of how I'd feel if he re-game'd and lost... i might feel kind of robbed then. but if jaedong really wanted to prove he was the best, i think he should have refused to take the win, beaten flash in the re-game, then went on to win the MSL in a really convincing fashion.. (or even if he lost the re-game he could of gone on to win game 4 & 5) Must disagree with u here. If Jaedong thougt he would win why give away a lead its not his fault. And Im against letting the player decide these ackward moment. It would be unfair switch the burden to the player and put him in a even harder spot. | ||
|
Spectacular
Canada312 Posts
I just saw the MSL finals. At the time of the black-out, Jaedong had the advantage. By the way guys, the MSL or MBC TV has nothing to do with this. The decision to give the game to Jaedong came from the Kespa, which rules over both the MSL and the OSL. The MSL won't lose credibility or sponsors because of this. Also, a power outage is usually very unlikely but it is something that happens, like rain at a baseball finals, or a major crash in a car race. Good players are those who can overcome this kind of event and prove to be mentally strong to continue forward. Flash played very bad in the last game and we could see he was totally overrun by the events. Jaedong kept his cool and beat him with a very standard play. I can compare this to a hockey game, when you lose 1-2 after 2 periods and you disagree with the referee's call. In that situation, a good team will cope with the situation and work in the third period to win 3-2. At some point you need to accept your situation even if you don't agree, and keep moving forward. I think Jaedong proved to be a big surprise since I think most people were expecting Flash to win. Jaedong was definitely the dominant player in all four games, except for Flash's double dropship at game 2 that did a ridiculous amount of damage. Props to Jaedong, and congratulations to Flash for 1st place in OSL and 2nd place in MSL! A rematch would be great too! - Claude (a.k.a. Cooltemplar) | ||
|
Geo.Rion
7377 Posts
| ||
|
Creationism
China505 Posts
On January 24 2010 14:41 blade55555 wrote: so if you were playing a 20 minute game in a tournament like this in game 3 on a terran favored map (70% correct?) and actually winning with a build that would only work once you wouldn't be pist if you had to do a rematch? Think about it Flash is just doing standard 1 rax fe as expected while jaedong did 3 hatch before pool into fast ultra which is way different and riskier. Do you really think if they rematched jaedong could/would do that same build? He would be at a disadvantage because he had that build specifically in mind for that game and would have been utter bullshit if they had to re it. Now while I was rooting for jaedong I unlike most people look at this through 2 different views. For starters I do know that for Flash he may have had a chance (a very small one mind you) but he still thought he had a chance or he was just hoping Jaedong would fuck up and he would be able to win who knows but it would be more devestating for jaedong if there was a re as what would he do? 2 hatch muta all in? Yeah thats awesome because of MBC's stupid computers Jaedong has to do that strategy or lose as what else can he do? He can't do that 3 hatch before pool Flash wouldn't allow that so again think of it in Jaedongs perspective as well not just flash's. While I do think this was the best decision I do hate how its a lose/lose either way as had they said Re I would be surprised if Jaedong somehow won considering the map and he would have to do some different strategy. That game was epic and I still after watching the end of the vod, the threads with why it looked like flash was going to lose I still hold to Kespa's decision. It just sucks it had to happen in game 3 why couldn't it have happened in game 1 or something its very ironic it happens in the best game of the series so far T_T. I can honestly say that I would not be pissed if Flash was winning n had to rematch due to a blackout and even LOSING the rematch. I would not be pissed at all. Actually, I would think thats proper competition. I don't think the spirit of competition is EVER to take away a person's ability to compete and fight. If JD can do it once, he can do it again. | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On January 24 2010 15:55 Creationism wrote: I can honestly say that I would not be pissed if Flash was winning n had to rematch due to a blackout and even LOSING the rematch. I would not be pissed at all. Actually, I would think thats proper competition. I don't think the spirit of competition is EVER to take away a person's ability to compete and fight. If JD can do it once, he can do it again. I didn't say if it was flash. I said if it was YOU in the position for xxx amount of money. I doubt you would say "yeah lets rematch even though now you know my build I just did so I have to do something more, sure its favored for my opponents race". No just no you wouldn't but since you will never be (nor me or anyone else here) you'll say "nah I would still rematch" but I bet if it happened you wouldn't if you were given the choice. On note to the guy who just saw the MSL I do have to say most people were saying Flash was going to 3-0 3-1 jaedong if jaedong was lucky. Its why I was really really hoping Jaedong would win just because people tend to forget how good Jaedong really is and I am glad he proves again why he is still considered the best player  | ||
|
tomatriedes
New Zealand5356 Posts
On January 24 2010 14:35 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: except then it relies on the discretion of the referee. here we have myself, idra, and several other trustable names saying flash could have won that game. we all agree its an advantage. games shouldn't be awarded for an advantage. how can kespa reliably assure that the ref will make the correct decision? is it really better to rely on the referee making the decision, when their game knowledge doesn't compare to the players, and the general public will without a doubt be torn over the decision? it puts unnecessary stress on the referee, and gives people a target on which to place the blame. it's a terrible system. In both baseball and cricket, when the games are rained out after they've passed a certain threshold the team with the advantage wins. To say that there should always be a rematch doesn't make sense at all. What if the power cut happened when one player had already lost his army, half his base and had no minerals left but was delaying his GG, while the other player had a huge army? Would it be more fair in that case for there to be a rematch rather than having the ref decide? Seriously, you try and claim some great authority for yourself on this issue but I don't buy it. You may be a mod but always had a huge pro-terran bias. I don't see you as being 'trustable' (sic) on this issue at all. | ||
|
SerpentFlame
415 Posts
It's flash's fault he caved in game 4 maybe, but the bo5 mental game is supposed to be based on the plays and the players, not on equipment failures or referee calls: he was put in a situation which no other player had to deal with before, and shouldn't have to deal with. i don't have any beef with the call (all the previous bisu v july and july v rainbow games should've been called ,in my opinion), but to say that the impact it had on game 4 is flash's fault, is pretty ridiculous. I'm interested to see what winner/loser interview has to say. | ||
|
.risingdragoon
United States3021 Posts
they should've gone creative and rule in jaedong's favor but make it a BO7 instead. that way pleases all parties. jaedong's. flash's. the fans. | ||
|
StarcraftMan
Canada507 Posts
On January 24 2010 16:05 tomatriedes wrote: In both baseball and cricket, when the games are rained out after they've passed a certain threshold the team with the advantage wins. To say that there should always be a rematch doesn't make sense at all. Again, you are misinformed about baseball - specifically, the MLB. MLB will play out the remainder of a game in the World Series and not "gift" a team that is leading after the 5th inning even if that game is cancelled, as Bud Selig, the commissioner of MLB has said: No shortened victory The game became an official game after the fifth inning. Had umpires stopped it there, with the Phillies leading 2-1, the Phils could have been awarded their trophy. Selig said that wouldn’t have happened. He said Game 5 will be a nine-inning game. “It’s not a way to end a World Series,” he said. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/sports/6081065.html | ||
motbob
United States12546 Posts
There's honestly no point in arguing with me about this. I'm actually a little pissed at you. :o | ||
|
tomatriedes
New Zealand5356 Posts
On January 24 2010 16:23 StarcraftMan wrote: Again, you are misinformed about baseball - specifically, the MLB. MLB will play out the remainder of a game in the World Series and not "gift" a team that is leading after the 5th inning even if that game is cancelled, as Bud Selig, the commissioner of MLB has said: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/sports/6081065.html OK i was misinformed about baseball. Cricket definitely has a rain stoppage rule though which uses a complicated system to determine which team had the advantage. In any case, you're avoiding my other point. If one player has no minerals, no army and half their base destroyed and is about to GG but a power stoppage happens first would be a rematch in this case be more fair? Because if you have a blanket always-rematch rule that scenario could happen. | ||
| ||
