EPTTasteless Statement
[Valor] Tasteless Statement
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
Artosis
United States2140 Posts
Tasteless Statement | ||
|
Showtime!
Canada2938 Posts
EDIT: Exactly as I expected: Lipton collects the reps and distributes them. You should have replayed the fucking game. This happens in WGTCL all the time. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
Except the decision to film it outside on the busy street. Would it have been really sketchy to film it in a quieter room? I think this should be the new controversy. | ||
|
RushWifDietCoke
United States488 Posts
| ||
|
houseurmusic
United States544 Posts
| ||
|
InToTheWannaB
United States4770 Posts
| ||
|
gokai
United States812 Posts
On July 01 2009 13:03 tree.hugger wrote: It all makes sense. Except the decision to film it outside on the busy street. Would it have been really sketchy to film it in a quieter room? I think this should be the new controversy. What are you talking about. I had no problems hearing what Tasteless said. | ||
|
usopsama
6502 Posts
| ||
|
StarBrift
Sweden1761 Posts
| ||
|
Sadistx
Zimbabwe5568 Posts
| ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
| ||
|
LG)Sabbath
Argentina3022 Posts
Tasteless is clearly doing his best for things to go smoothly and although I think he kind of missed the point that Strelok was trying to make, there is just no point in discussing it any further as we know that he would have made a good decision in the first place if he had been there. | ||
|
illu
Canada2531 Posts
| ||
|
Yaqoob
Canada3323 Posts
On July 01 2009 14:40 illu wrote: Can anyone explain the drama in words? Its explained in words in the video. Watch the video. | ||
JWD
United States12607 Posts
The gist of this video is that Tasteless denies that Lipton or Daniel Lee ever gave Strelok a "final decision". His implication is that Strelok either totally misinterpreted Lipton and Daniel Lee, or that Strelok understood their decision was not final and was simply lying in his OP here. I'm not sure how to reconcile this with the fact that both Strelok (biased) and Artosis (unbiased) wrote that Lipton / "admins" had issued a "decision" on the disconnect. | ||
|
Husky
United States3362 Posts
| ||
|
Etherone
United States1898 Posts
If they agree that SDM and Lipton do not have the know how or authority to make a tournament decision such as this they should have simply asked both players to bear with them and wait till Tasteless was available to make a verdict. this was not the case afaik. I also agree that the standard would be to replay the game of the disconnect as opposed to the entire match, but once SDM stated the entire set would be replayed, independently of whether or not he said "final decision", it is exactly that, unless clearly stated otherwise. I thank tasteless for giving us his side of it, and i understand he is in a difficult position of deciding whether to retract what the others decided (wrongly), or to do what should have been done in the first place, but in the process retracting their authority. | ||
|
ZeitgeistMovie
144 Posts
| ||
|
Idle
Korea (South)124 Posts
| ||
|
Kyuki
Sweden1867 Posts
On July 01 2009 15:06 JWD wrote: First off, props to Tasteless for giving us his side of this story. The gist of this video is that Tasteless denies that Lipton or Daniel Lee ever gave Strelok a "final decision". His implication is that Strelok either totally misinterpreted Lipton and Daniel Lee, or that Strelok understood their decision was not final and was simply lying in his OP here. I'm not sure how to reconcile this with the fact that both Strelok (biased) and Artosis (unbiased) wrote that Lipton / "admins" had issued a "decision" on the disconnect. Tasteless stressed "Final" quite a few times, obviously there were initial decisions that had to be done (i.e Lipton making a decision on the spot with X help) and after further discussion it would lead to a Final Decision. It's been a communication problem from the start, and I cant see how one shouldnt take this as a learning experience, and just brush it off and play the fucking game from now on. | ||
|
Strelok.
Ukraine42 Posts
Date: 6/26/09 13:19 SDM's final ruling: Replay both game 1 and game 2. So go ahead and tell Fenix, I just emailed him too. Do you see word final here or it's only mine vision? 2. During the game vs Fenix we had very many issues i didn't want to talk previously, since i didn't want to discuss that game, but about which i talk now: a) We couldn't arrrange games during more then 2 weeks. b) He wanted to play only between 23:00 CET and 04:00 CET. He coudldn't play other time due to his univercity. This time was unacceptable for me, because i usually sleep this time. Admin didn't do anything to deal with the problem. c) When we, at last, met - we got straight lag in both games (even Fenix talked about that in the replay). Drop table appeared several times, so that is why i said the games are EVEN. Because if i dropped him game N1 when he got lead, he would have complainted either. d) the last thing is about this game. I don't want to break out Valor rules, so i won't post replay here. Anyway i will just point out on our final position. If they cast replay you will see it yourself. - upgrades. i have 1-1, he has 1-0. Both making 2 more. - limits. I have 170, protoss has 142. - high tech. His arbiter still not out, though his storms should be ready in 10 seconds. - number of bases. I had 3 and 4-th just incoming. He had 3 and 2 just incoming. Though he had problems with probes, so some bases wouldn't work properly anyways. - final point. In just 1 minute i collect 185 limit and go straight to 8 and 7 o clock bases. He would have had maximum 160-165 limit at this time, no statis, 3 stormers. It's not enough to hold such push. He can't counter with recall. Ofc such limit is not enough to counter just by ground. The game would be finished in 3 or 5 mins maximum i'm pretty sure about that. So just... watch replay, make your own opinion. and LG)Sabbath Argentina. July 01 2009 13:52. Posts 2268 I won't return to the tournament even if they give me 1-0 lead or autowin. I already made decision. | ||
|
LG)Sabbath
Argentina3022 Posts
ps. strelok i wanted to see you win ;( so that's why i said that | ||
|
Thug[ro]
Romania340 Posts
| ||
|
mcgriddle
United States253 Posts
 , , , , | ||
|
Chanted
Norway1001 Posts
Clearly Tasteless should have talked to SDM before making a video to "clear" things up I understand Strelok in this situation, and the more this developes, the more it seems to be a larger error done by GOM. Now they cant only blame Lipton, who I can understand isnt a starcraft player or admin, but SDM should know how things work. Then Tasteless releasing a video making Him (Valor) look good, and Strelok look bad, and yet he doesnt include the facts. Good job | ||
|
Etherone
United States1898 Posts
On July 01 2009 16:11 Strelok. wrote: + Show Spoiler + 1. Subject: Re: btw Date: 6/26/09 13:19 SDM's final ruling: Replay both game 1 and game 2. So go ahead and tell Fenix, I just emailed him too. Do you see word final here or it's only mine vision? 2. During the game vs Fenix we had very many issues i didn't want to talk previously, since i didn't want to discuss that game, but about which i talk now: a) We couldn't arrrange games during more then 2 weeks. b) He wanted to play only between 23:00 CET and 04:00 CET. He coudldn't play other time due to his univercity. This time was unacceptable for me, because i usually sleep this time. Admin didn't do anything to deal with the problem. c) When we, at last, met - we got straight lag in both games (even Fenix talked about that in the replay). Drop table appeared several times, so that is why i said the games are EVEN. Because if i dropped him game N1 when he got lead, he would have complainted either. d) the last thing is about this game. I don't want to break out Valor rules, so i won't post replay here. Anyway i will just point out on our final position. If they cast replay you will see it yourself. - upgrades. i have 1-1, he has 1-0. Both making 2 more. - limits. I have 170, protoss has 142. - high tech. His arbiter still not out, though his storms should be ready in 10 seconds. - number of bases. I had 3 and 4-th just incoming. He had 3 and 2 just incoming. Though he had problems with probes, so some bases wouldn't work properly anyways. - final point. In just 1 minute i collect 185 limit and go straight to 8 and 7 o clock bases. He would have had maximum 160-165 limit at this time, no statis, 3 stormers. It's not enough to hold such push. He can't counter with recall. Ofc such limit is not enough to counter just by ground. The game would be finished in 3 or 5 mins maximum i'm pretty sure about that. So just... watch replay, make your own opinion. and LG)Sabbath Argentina. July 01 2009 13:52. Posts 2268 I won't return to the tournament even if they give me 1-0 lead or autowin. I already made decision. pretty much what i expected, thank you for clarifying. Valor staff dropped the ball imo, and sadly although i know tasteless was trying to do what should have been done in the first place, he never should have retracted SDM's decision, even if it was the wrong one. all they can do now, is apologize to both players for the debacle and make sure this never happens again, or work something out with both players, although highly unlikely. | ||
|
Liquid`Nazgul
22427 Posts
At the same time I'm definitely of the opinion that when you make a bad decision, final ruling or not, you HAVE to overturn it. That's how we do things on TL without having an ego too big to admit our mistakes. Lesser sites and tournaments identify themselves with big egos and standing by dumbass decisions even when proven wrong. If you can set something right you set it right. The first decision was clearly wrong and utmost respect for overturning it. I really do not understand Streloks decision on quitting the tournament after they reached the best decision possible. Of course it's not good for Valor to over-turn decision but I firmly believe it is much worse to stand by your bad ones. | ||
|
Ilvy
Germany2445 Posts
On July 01 2009 17:09 Etherone wrote: pretty much what i expected, thank you for clarifying. Valor staff dropped the ball imo, and sadly although i know tasteless was trying to do what should have been done in the first place, he never should have retracted SDM's decision, even if it was the wrong one. all they can do now, is apologize to both players for the debacle and make sure this never happens again, or work something out with both players, although highly unlikely. and never ever chose a admin that got noooooooooo idea about the game he is supposed to refree... | ||
|
Sosha
United States749 Posts
I'm sure he's had to deal w/ this problem, as has everyone i'm sure at one point or another. It makes pretty easy sense. If you win game 1 - 1-0. Game 2 is conducted, yet disconnect occurs and a winner isn't clear (regardless of score), so game 2 has to be replayed and go from there. Kinda senseless to have to either a) go from 1-1 and go to game 3 or b) start at 0-0 and re-do the whole series. Should be simple to determine that its just still 1-0 for Fenix and go from there. Apparently it was just confusion which lead to this, or w/e.. but it is kinda weird for Strelok to drop out of the tournament after making it to RO8.. he was in good running for being in the finals or winner of Valor. Like tasteless said - it was his choice. Tasteless, you rock! gL w/ the rest of valor!! gL | ||
|
Djin)ftw(
Germany3357 Posts
On July 01 2009 13:03 tree.hugger wrote: It all makes sense. Except the decision to film it outside on the busy street. Would it have been really sketchy to film it in a quieter room? I think this should be the new controversy. rofl :D i like tasteless. im sorry that this happened, i mean he and SDM put a lot of work into it, sucks. on the other hand, who is lipton and why dont they let someone collect the replays who can actually use his brain when something like this comes up? go on to game 3 or replay the first is just stupid sry, i will nver understand how he could suggest that lol €: whoops, just read streloks post. lol ok now i can understand strelok, but still u should have just replayed the match. nice dodge with the fnal decision though, yeah | ||
|
Ingenol
United States1328 Posts
On July 01 2009 17:29 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: That was a pretty weak video. It subtly makes Strelok out to be a liar on the 'final ruling' subject even though he is not, and doesn't mention anything about Daniels decision. Talks as if Lipton is doing a fine job being appointed to run a tournament without any refereeing skills when I would consider that maybe _the_ most important attribute of his whole job. At the same time I'm definitely of the opinion that when you make a bad decision, final ruling or not, you HAVE to overturn it. That's how we do things on TL without having an ego too big to admit our mistakes. Lesser sites and tournaments identify themselves with big egos and standing by dumbass decisions even when proven wrong. If you can set something right you set it right. The first decision was clearly wrong and utmost respect for overturning it. I really do not understand Streloks decision on quitting the tournament after they reached the best decision possible. Of course it's not good for Valor to over-turn decision but I firmly believe it is much worse to stand by your bad ones. Agree completely on all these points. Tasteless' video doesn't really explain the situation and pretty much leaves out the fact that SDM made an initial ruling as well that was then changed. This is precisely why the person admining a tournament absolutely MUST have game knowledge/referee experience (sadly I'm aware that even with events as large as national WCG qualifiers this is not the case). If Strelok quit because of the scheduling/lag problems which he felt were not being addressed, that's one thing, but I also agree that he should respect the fact that in the end the most equitable decision was reached and go from there. | ||
|
Etherone
United States1898 Posts
On July 01 2009 17:29 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: + Show Spoiler + That was a pretty weak video. It subtly makes Strelok out to be a liar on the 'final ruling' subject even though he is not, and doesn't mention anything about Daniels decision. Talks as if Lipton is doing a fine job being appointed to run a tournament without any refereeing skills when I would consider that maybe _the_ most important attribute of his whole job. At the same time I'm definitely of the opinion that when you make a bad decision, final ruling or not, you HAVE to overturn it. That's how we do things on TL without having an ego too big to admit our mistakes. Lesser sites and tournaments identify themselves with big egos and standing by dumbass decisions even when proven wrong. If you can set something right you set it right. The first decision was clearly wrong and utmost respect for overturning it. I really do not understand Streloks decision on quitting the tournament after they reached the best decision possible. Of course it's not good for Valor to over-turn decision but I firmly believe it is much worse to stand by your bad ones. I disagree to a certain extent, the second SDM someone who is presented as qualified to make these decisions does so he should be held 100% accountable for them. I also believe that if he is to keep his status in this tournament as someone who can make these calls it imperative that they not overturn the decision. Seeing as they clearly did overturn it, Valor staff should then have apologized publicly and appointed someone who is capable of making these decisions to that task, and tried to reach an understanding with strelok. This was not done ( they, in fact, did the opposite) I understand the second Tasteless saw the ruling he had to overturn it, simply because it was embarrassing at best to have them replay the whole series based on one d/c, but he did not address the lag and time issues, which was probably the basis for SDM to decide the whole series be replayed. honestly i have to side with strelok, this has been a fiasco although i really appreciate all the work being put in by tasteless, SDM, Lipton etc. it does not change the fact that this was and still is being handled the wrong way. tl;dr Big mistake, badly handled, they should apologize, try to work it over with the players and stick with Tasteless's new ruling. | ||
|
structuralinertia
Australia1426 Posts
It is generally entirely legitimate in any organised setting to reverse previous decisions, even decisions that have been 'finalised', as long as the new decision is the correct one and the old one was wrong. It is unjust to preserve bad arrangements/decisions just on the grounds that they were 'finalised', if indeed they were finalised. Thus you can appeal court decisions, the laws of a country can be changed, and so forth. I am not overly familiar with sporting organisation but the same principle should apply. The procedures might have appeared disorganised, but I prefer disorganised justice to organised injustice. | ||
|
Drazzzt
Germany999 Posts
On July 01 2009 17:29 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: That was a pretty weak video. It subtly makes Strelok out to be a liar on the 'final ruling' subject even though he is not, and doesn't mention anything about Daniels decision. Talks as if Lipton is doing a fine job being appointed to run a tournament without any refereeing skills when I would consider that maybe _the_ most important attribute of his whole job. At the same time I'm definitely of the opinion that when you make a bad decision, final ruling or not, you HAVE to overturn it. That's how we do things on TL without having an ego too big to admit our mistakes. Lesser sites and tournaments identify themselves with big egos and standing by dumbass decisions even when proven wrong. If you can set something right you set it right. The first decision was clearly wrong and utmost respect for overturning it. I really do not understand Streloks decision on quitting the tournament after they reached the best decision possible. Of course it's not good for Valor to over-turn decision but I firmly believe it is much worse to stand by your bad ones. Well written, I fully agree. The video was more than weak and totally unprofessional. At LEAST, an apology would have been appropriate. No one is perfect, so just admit it. Nevertheless, I would suggest Strelok to re-join the tournament (an apology would probably help?). Last but not least: Artosis's role in this whole plot is rather unfortunate. | ||
|
PhilGood2DaY
Germany7424 Posts
It all depends on what the game looked like right after the disc.. | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
| ||
|
SmokeMaxX
United States17 Posts
Also, who sent the email saying "SDM's Final Decision"? SDM? Or the admin? | ||
|
groro
67 Posts
On June 30 2009 09:56 Liquid`NonY wrote: the whole idea that there is some magical moral property to a "final decision" that everyone must stick to is ridiculous. mistakes can be made. situations can be re-evaluated. i'm surprised that eSports fans get upset when a tournament is willing to admit they messed up on their final decision so that they can do what's best for the tournament. if anyone should get upset, it'd be someone like a businessman in his suit and tie who is sponsoring it and cares more about reputation than fair play. the mistake which i see in this case is that it should be clear which policy you follow from the beginning to the end and in this case you should not use the word "final" and let players rely on that if you dont mean "final". you can follow the tournament policy/paragraph: - there will never be something like a final decision. the judges and organizers keep the right reserved to anytime change a decision (if you think this fits more the spirit of esport) or - there will be a final decision and you got to live and adapt to the consequences. e.g. letting other people be the referee if there are to many bad decisions etc. and you gotta accept this if you play in the tournament. but saying yes and no or no and yes in terms of the policy you handle the tournament while it already begun sux imo. but mistakes are normal to happen and np if you adapt. i think everybody knows that neither tasteless, artrosis or sdm have bad intentions or are biased to one of the players. i am thankful to the contributions they make to this community. | ||
|
LG)Sabbath
Argentina3022 Posts
On July 01 2009 17:29 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: At the same time I'm definitely of the opinion that when you make a bad decision, final ruling or not, you HAVE to overturn it. That's how we do things on TL without having an ego too big to admit our mistakes. Lesser sites and tournaments identify themselves with big egos and standing by dumbass decisions even when proven wrong. If you can set something right you set it right. The first decision was clearly wrong and utmost respect for overturning it. I really do not understand Streloks decision on quitting the tournament after they reached the best decision possible. Of course it's not good for Valor to over-turn decision but I firmly believe it is much worse to stand by your bad ones. The overturning of decisions is just a display of lack of integrity as an organization, where you don't have a rule that covers the case and you're evaluating on a case-by-case basis, which can result in bias. You can overturn it, and you probably have to, but the damage to your reputation is already done, and that was the whole point of Strelok's thread. Some people still think it was about the games, even after he said he wouldn't return even if they gave him the wins for free. So the promise of a professional tournament run by a professional organization was clearly broken... it is understandable that Strelok is disappointed. Maybe he's just not in for the money, maybe he just wanted to be part of the pro scene for a while here and, the tournament being not what was promised, he had no reason to continue, as the prestige of winning it would be mostly if not completely gone. | ||
|
Too_MuchZerg
Finland2818 Posts
On July 01 2009 17:29 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: That was a pretty weak video. It subtly makes Strelok out to be a liar on the 'final ruling' subject even though he is not, and doesn't mention anything about Daniels decision. Talks as if Lipton is doing a fine job being appointed to run a tournament without any refereeing skills when I would consider that maybe _the_ most important attribute of his whole job. At the same time I'm definitely of the opinion that when you make a bad decision, final ruling or not, you HAVE to overturn it. That's how we do things on TL without having an ego too big to admit our mistakes. Lesser sites and tournaments identify themselves with big egos and standing by dumbass decisions even when proven wrong. If you can set something right you set it right. The first decision was clearly wrong and utmost respect for overturning it. I really do not understand Streloks decision on quitting the tournament after they reached the best decision possible. Of course it's not good for Valor to over-turn decision but I firmly believe it is much worse to stand by your bad ones. It should have gone like this way: - After SDM decision games 1 and 2 should have played again (whatever happens to final score, be it Fenix or Strelok winning) - Then if player complains about it later on (usually losing player to admin -> tasteless or SDM), tournament admins apologies later on publicly not players. - If they don't then players get mad and there will be boycotts/rumors about tournament, even public accusisations (what happened this case). - In short, make decision, stick to it and if its bad make statement where you say it was bad and its going to be fixed for next time/season. This way players do not lose their reputation. | ||
|
SmokeMaxX
United States17 Posts
I have nothing against Strelok and he seems like a good guy, but inaction is sometimes just as bad as performing the wrong action. He should know in a competitive tournament that the best possible action for him to do would be to accept a Game 2 rematch or offer one. However, I can't pretend like he wouldn't be justified into feeling lucky that what was believed to be a "ref" ruled in his favor and gave him equal grounding to restart the series. But still, there is no point in later complaining about the changing of rulings. There was a frustrating beginning, which is understandable. There was lag, which is understandable. There was a decision made that seemed to be the best thing to happen in the series for Strelok, which was later overturned (irritating and understandable). However, also understandable is that upon a disconnect, the game should be replayed as long as there is no clear winner. True, there may be some abuse of this, but is it worse to penalize a player that doesn't deserve it or let a few instances of potentially abusing the system through? Also, I think the latest FBH vs. Flash game should show that even a game where one player has a "clear advantage" doesn't always result in a way for said player. | ||
|
Shauni
4077 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Nazgul
22427 Posts
The overturning of decisions is just a display of lack of integrity as an organization, where you don't have a rule that covers the case and you're evaluating on a case-by-case basis, which can result in bias. You can overturn it, and you probably have to, but the damage to your reputation is already done, and that was the whole point of Strelok's thread. Some people still think it was about the games, even after he said he wouldn't return even if they gave him the wins for free. I'm not sure you get what happened but you really have got it backwards. Keeping the original decision shows clear 'bias', for Strelok (from going by the video interview). Overturning it shows objectivity. My argument is that your reputation will be better by overturning a bad decision instead of keeping it. I think you will find noone disagreeing that not making mistakes is the best. Fenix was the lagger, Strelok had a huge advantage. Even if he didn't the one disconnecting should lose by default imo. That is just an arbitrary rule set by mass-orgs such as Blizzard/WGTour etc because it is impossible to judge every game. In a well-ran smaller tournament that is definitely the worst solution. If you know which person disced, then that person should never get the win but that's about as far as it goes. | ||
|
Too_MuchZerg
Finland2818 Posts
On July 01 2009 20:24 SmokeMaxX wrote: Disagree. As a tournament, there are two interests in mind: entertaining the audience and respecting the competitors with a fair atmosphere. I'm sure the audience could care less what happened in this game as long as they saw good starcraft. However, out of all the possible outcomes, the most fair is that Game 2 be replayed. Regardless of anything else. As a competitor, you always want a good game. It's understandable if things are frustrating, but nobody deserves a free win unless rules are broken. To accept or even argue for a free win isn't right. I have nothing against Strelok and he seems like a good guy, but inaction is sometimes just as bad as performing the wrong action. He should know in a competitive tournament that the best possible action for him to do would be to accept a Game 2 rematch or offer one. However, I can't pretend like he wouldn't be justified into feeling lucky that what was believed to be a "ref" ruled in his favor and gave him equal grounding to restart the series. But still, there is no point in later complaining about the changing of rulings. There was a frustrating beginning, which is understandable. There was lag, which is understandable. There was a decision made that seemed to be the best thing to happen in the series for Strelok, which was later overturned (irritating and understandable). However, also understandable is that upon a disconnect, the game should be replayed as long as there is no clear winner. True, there may be some abuse of this, but is it worse to penalize a player that doesn't deserve it or let a few instances of potentially abusing the system through? Also, I think the latest FBH vs. Flash game should show that even a game where one player has a "clear advantage" doesn't always result in a way for said player. This is why, for example, Backho vs Firefist incident was ruled badly. Why? They started to chat with players and asking their ruling. Obviously they (players) have reputation to care about and Firefist couldn't request win for him. If KeSPA would have ruled win for Firefist and then later on said that they are changing rules to not let these things happen again, it would have been proper way to handle that situation because nobody could have blame players anymore. | ||
|
foeffa
Belgium2115 Posts
 | ||
|
Danka
Peru1018 Posts
On July 01 2009 20:33 Shauni wrote: Fenix was the lagger, Strelok had a huge advantage. Even if he didn't the one disconnecting should lose by default imo. where are you getting these facts? I'm curious because they directly contradict what Tasteless said: "that there was no clear indication of who was going to win the game" | ||
|
Shauni
4077 Posts
On July 01 2009 20:46 Danka wrote: where are you getting these facts? I'm curious because they directly contradict what Tasteless said: "that there was no clear indication of who was going to win the game" That is just playing with words. There is never a clear indication until its OVER. He just didn't say Strelok had an advantage because that'd make his statement a bit diffuse. From Strelok's own post it is clear that he had a big advantage, but he had not made the finishing move yet. | ||
|
Universalmedia
United States32 Posts
| ||
|
LG)Sabbath
Argentina3022 Posts
On July 01 2009 20:44 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: I'm not sure you get what happened but you really have got it backwards. Keeping the original decision shows clear 'bias', for Strelok (from going by the video interview). Overturning it shows objectivity. My argument is that your reputation will be better by overturning a bad decision instead of keeping it. I think you will find noone disagreeing that not making mistakes is the best. I'm not saying that the overturning makes it biased, I'm saying that if you're overturning a decision, then you didn't have a rule to cover the case in the first place, so you were deciding on a case-by-case basis, which would have allowed for bias to appear. Later in the same post I agreed that overturning it would be best, but that the damage is done already anyway and you're already looking bad... you overturn the decision in an attempt to not look even worse as time goes by and the decision is analyzed by more and more people. | ||
|
rei
United States3594 Posts
On July 01 2009 19:25 LG)Sabbath wrote: The overturning of decisions is just a display of lack of integrity as an organization, where you don't have a rule that covers the case and you're evaluating on a case-by-case basis, which can result in bias. You can overturn it, and you probably have to, but the damage to your reputation is already done, and that was the whole point of Strelok's thread. Some people still think it was about the games, even after he said he wouldn't return even if they gave him the wins for free. So the promise of a professional tournament run by a professional organization was clearly broken... it is understandable that Strelok is disappointed. Maybe he's just not in for the money, maybe he just wanted to be part of the pro scene for a while here and, the tournament being not what was promised, he had no reason to continue, as the prestige of winning it would be mostly if not completely gone. What is integrity? is it fairness? lack of integrity as an organization means lacking in fairness? What are rules? is it to protect fair play in the context of games? rules of iccup for not allowing maphack is to protect fair play right? rules of iccup for now allowing people to abuse the ladder is to protect fair play right? When savior got reset by iccup because he played the same dude 20times in one day was because admins were following the rules to protect fair play. The admins would be right if savior had the need to abuse to get #1 rank on iccup. When Gorush typed ppp instead of pp and the rule says that's a disqualification. What rule was applied here? the same rule that trying to protect fair play right? typing all game long to distract the other guy is not fair play, and hence there is a need of no typing rules. What happens when the very same rule we created trying to protect fair play themselves are impeding fair play? the very same reason we created them in the first place? We should fucking ignore the rules. Rules are created by people, they are just guidelines in which the true value lies on the reason of why we needed the rules, not the rules themselves. Integrity is something along the line of holding high standard on fairness, not sticking to the decision even knowing it is wrong. I hope you learned something for my effort | ||
|
hacpee
United States752 Posts
Obviously, Tasteless and Daniel thought they made the correct decision, and I personally agree with them, but the video response did nothing to help the situation. It just fanned the flames TBH. | ||
|
Severedevil
United States4838 Posts
| ||
|
LG)Sabbath
Argentina3022 Posts
On July 01 2009 21:25 rei wrote: What happens when the very same rule we created trying to protect fair play themselves are impeding fair play? the very same reason we created them in the first place? We should fucking ignore the rules. Rules are created by people, they are just guidelines in which the true value lies on the reason of why we needed the rules, not the rules themselves. No, you should change the rules, but not in the middle of the tournament. After it's over, before the next one. In this context I would consider "integrity" as applying the same rule equally for everyone. If the rule gets a pro gamer banned from the ladder, then you should probably change it. This isn't really a complex situation, either you have a rule that says that disc = instant loss, or one that says that disc = replay the game, or whatever, but you don't make the rule up when the situation appears, you need to have it in place before the tournament begins. If you don't, then don't call yourself an experienced tournament admin or a pro-gaming organization or anything like that. | ||
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
| ||
|
Foucault
Sweden2826 Posts
On July 02 2009 00:27 floor exercise wrote: I still don't understand why this demanded a video be made instead of just writing an explanation perhaps because tasteless likes to be in the limelight just talking about anything. I think Tasteless should stick to commentating and not be a judge, because he seems a bit whimsy. | ||
|
JWD
United States12607 Posts
On July 02 2009 00:27 floor exercise wrote: I still don't understand why this demanded a video be made instead of just writing an explanation Videos are more entertaining than text. Why would you bash Tasteless for making one? That said, I agree with Nazgul that the explanation Tasteless gave in the video was really unsatisfying. "Final decision" versus "decision" is semantics. It would have been much more tactful and honest for Tasteless simply to acknowledge that a decision (mistake) was made and then corrected. | ||
|
PaeZ
Mexico1627 Posts
On July 02 2009 00:30 Foucault wrote: perhaps because tasteless likes to be in the limelight just talking about anything. I think Tasteless should stick to commentating and not be a judge, because he seems a bit whimsy. Cant believe you said this crap.. | ||
|
Ilvy
Germany2445 Posts
On July 01 2009 21:25 rei wrote: What is integrity? is it fairness? lack of integrity as an organization means lacking in fairness? What are rules? is it to protect fair play in the context of games? rules of iccup for not allowing maphack is to protect fair play right? rules of iccup for now allowing people to abuse the ladder is to protect fair play right? When savior got reset by iccup because he played the same dude 20times in one day was because admins were following the rules to protect fair play. The admins would be right if savior had the need to abuse to get #1 rank on iccup. When Gorush typed ppp instead of pp and the rule says that's a disqualification. What rule was applied here? the same rule that trying to protect fair play right? typing all game long to distract the other guy is not fair play, and hence there is a need of no typing rules. What happens when the very same rule we created trying to protect fair play themselves are impeding fair play? the very same reason we created them in the first place? We should fucking ignore the rules. Rules are created by people, they are just guidelines in which the true value lies on the reason of why we needed the rules, not the rules themselves. Integrity is something along the line of holding high standard on fairness, not sticking to the decision even knowing it is wrong. I hope you learned something for my effort So wrong, you just said that if Gorush could abuse and play same person 20 times because its obvious that he is too good and doesn´t need to "abuse" but other ppl are not allowed to do same because they are not that good and it would help them so its a "real abuse"? Rules do not work like that, you either got rules should apply for everyone same way, no matter who he is, who are you that you take out the right to judge who needs to follow them and who not? So the value of every good tournament are the rules and the admins that follows them 100%. Oh and the admin should have at least a knowledge about the game/sport whatever he works with. | ||
|
Geo.Rion
7377 Posts
On July 01 2009 17:09 Etherone wrote: pretty much what i expected, thank you for clarifying. Valor staff dropped the ball imo, and sadly although i know tasteless was trying to do what should have been done in the first place, he never should have retracted SDM's decision, even if it was the wrong one. all they can do now, is apologize to both players for the debacle and make sure this never happens again, or work something out with both players, although highly unlikely. that's pretty much what i wanted to say | ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
On July 02 2009 01:32 Ilvy wrote: So wrong, you just said that if Gorush could abuse and play same person 20 times because its obvious that he is too good and doesn´t need to "abuse" but other ppl are not allowed to do same because they are not that good and it would help them so its a "real abuse"? Rules do not work like that, you either got rules should apply for everyone same way, no matter who he is, who are you that you take out the right to judge who needs to follow them and who not? So the value of every good tournament are the rules and the admins that follows them 100%. Oh and the admin should have at least a knowledge about the game/sport whatever he works with. he is not saying that rules shouldnt apply to some people, hes saying that the rule should be applied intelligently to everyone. rules cannot be written to address every specific situation, that is why we have referees and judges and administrators, to judge how a rule should be applied under various circumstances. the game limit on iccup is to prevent players from cheating the system and gaining points without earning them. but when 2 high ranked players play each other 20 times in a row and go 10-10 its obviously not abuse, just practice. so they are technically violating the rule, but anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that they arent violating the purpose of the rule and so should not be punished. rules are not perfect, they are guidelines. you cannot follow them 100% and expect to have a well run tournament. | ||
|
Ilvy
Germany2445 Posts
On July 02 2009 00:30 Foucault wrote: perhaps because tasteless likes to be in the limelight just talking about anything. I think Tasteless should stick to commentating and not be a judge, because he seems a bit whimsy. You don´t know him right? He is one of the guys that always are in good mood, funny and nice, he is not whimsy at all, he rather is up to solve problems in a nice way | ||
|
Ilvy
Germany2445 Posts
On July 02 2009 01:49 IdrA wrote: he is not saying that rules shouldnt apply to some people, hes saying that the rule should be applied intelligently to everyone. rules cannot be written to address every specific situation, that is why we have referees and judges and administrators, to judge how a rule should be applied under various circumstances. the game limit on iccup is to prevent players from cheating the system and gaining points without earning them. but when 2 high ranked players play each other 20 times in a row and go 10-10 its obviously not abuse, just practice. so they are technically violating the rule, but anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that they arent violating the purpose of the rule and so should not be punished. rules are not perfect, they are guidelines. you cannot follow them 100% and expect to have a well run tournament. I do not agree on that, if you want to just practice with one and the same partner you could easily do that without playing laddergames, this should not be a reason to violate the rules. Even koreans are able to read rules and follow them... | ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
| ||
|
Eben
United States769 Posts
| ||
|
Zzoram
Canada7115 Posts
What's important here is that Tasteless said they WILL be airing the disconnect game and casting it. That means everyone will be able to see for themselves how big an advantage Strelok had, and then judge if giving Strelok a win, replaying the whole series, or replaying game 2 alone, would be the best call. | ||
|
Ilvy
Germany2445 Posts
On July 02 2009 02:05 IdrA wrote: well no wonder wgt was so well administered for all those years! thanks, i never had a problem in administrating tournaments, the only one was WDT but thats a old, old story ^^ | ||
|
rei
United States3594 Posts
On July 02 2009 01:32 Ilvy wrote: So wrong, you just said that if Gorush could abuse and play same person 20 times because its obvious that he is too good and doesn´t need to "abuse" but other ppl are not allowed to do same because they are not that good and it would help them so its a "real abuse"? Rules do not work like that, you either got rules should apply for everyone same way, no matter who he is, who are you that you take out the right to judge who needs to follow them and who not? So the value of every good tournament are the rules and the admins that follows them 100%. Oh and the admin should have at least a knowledge about the game/sport whatever he works with. “I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand.” – Confucius. a hint on how to interrupt Confucius in this context: by merely telling you the logics in this context is not enough, because our words are not getting through your preconceived notions. "unfortunately, no one can be told what the matrix is"--- Morpheus you have to see examples of how people in life abuse the rules to their benefit, in order to remember why there are rules. Do you want a tough Judge or do you want a fair judge? have you experience the difference of the two judges? "You have to see it for yourself, this is your last chance, after this there is no turning back, you take the blue pill, the story ends. you wake up and believe whatever you want to believe. you take the red pill you stay in wonderland and i show you just how deep the rabbit hole goes."-Morpheus and finally once you are able to critically think about this for yourself then you can understand. With out the Doing of critical thinking, you will not be able to understand. | ||
|
Zzoram
Canada7115 Posts
| ||
|
fanatacist
10319 Posts
As for Strelok, although I understand his frustration and decision to drop out, I think that there could be a less dramatic more peaceful outcome. However, decision is his like Tasteless said, and like I just said, I think all of us would be upset if someone handed us a prize then took it away because the person giving the prize wasn't as qualified as they should be when running a tournament. Strelok always seemed like a very gm guy in other issues and games, so I can't say that this hurts his reputation in my eyes. Good luck to Valor competitors, staff and organizers. Thanks for giving the foreign community more opportunities to have head-to-head battles that are shown internationally - this brings us that much closer to Korea's proscene. On July 02 2009 02:29 Zzoram wrote: I do understand why Strelok would be frustrated with Fenix though. He only has a 2 hour window where he wants to play, which is when Strelok is sleeping. Also, he lags, and disconnected when Strelok felt he was winning. This too. Although you can't take anything away from Fenix, it's probably not under his control when he can play, and no one can stop the Earth from rotating so that they have a more comfortable gaming environment. | ||
|
A3iL3r0n
United States2196 Posts
| ||
|
Sadistx
Zimbabwe5568 Posts
Now it's going to be aoOa (Advokate) vs Fenix in the lower bracket and in top it's going to be Brat_OK vs winner of ( Idra v Castro) Can someone confirm or deny this? | ||
|
Itachii
Poland12466 Posts
On July 02 2009 04:49 Sadistx wrote: I'm so confused by the brackets on the Valor site. Now it's going to be aoOa (Advokate) vs Fenix in the lower bracket and in top it's going to be Brat_OK vs winner of ( Idra v Castro) Can someone confirm or deny this? On July 01 2009 23:20 Lipton wrote: Tune in Friday guys: Idra vs Castro Fenix vs Strelok (including the game 2 disconnect) Special Match: White.ra vs Baby! http://gomtv.net/valor http://valor.starfeeder.com/finals | ||
|
errol1001
454 Posts
Decision may have been in Strelok's favor at first, but changed to being in Fenix's favor. Neither one is neutral. Maybe neutral by standards of 'this is what we do when this happens', but that's all. But then again, people may remember Nony being awarded a game against F91 when there was a disconnect (with a similar advantage before the disconnect). So, TL staff would've gone with the first decision, by past history.. At first I wasn't sure, but now, I understand why Strelok is upset. | ||
|
Bebop Berserker
United States246 Posts
| ||
|
Yamoth
United States315 Posts
The stupid solution: Follow the rule to the letter even though the outcome is the exact opposite of what the rule intended to protect and never change the rule. (This is the reason why many time good people go to jail while asshole with million dollars lawyer able to go free cause of some stupid technicality in the wording of the law) The egotistic solution: It's pretty much the same as the stupid solution since they rather save face and not admitting they screw the pooch, but knowing they screwed up and change the rule to prevent similar situation in the future from happening. The just solution: Apply the intent of the rule instead of the literal interpretation of it and change it to prevent similar situation in the future from happening. Sure this situation is a mess. Sure poor judgment were made by couple of people. Sure the even organizer should of foreseen this and prevent this kind of situation from happening in the first place. But that still no really not to fixed the mistake that was made in the first place and most definitely not a good reason favor person or another just because that person feel they were being cheated. | ||
|
errol1001
454 Posts
On July 02 2009 05:53 Bebop Berserker wrote: They should restart best of three and allow them to replay with Strelok at 1-1. How is that not fair? They both basically won one game. Just play the last game. Fuck it. Let Fenix pick one of the maps out of a map pool for game 3 if he feel so cheated. Fenix man...sometimes life isn't fair, but thats no reason to quit. Just take the 1-1 restart. If your the better player you will win.(See: Jaedong vs Fantasy '09...one of them was simply the better player.) I can do this too.. (ed: just so it's clear, i 'fixed' the above) | ||
Rekrul
Korea (South)17174 Posts
| ||
|
Leath
Canada1724 Posts
| ||
|
errol1001
454 Posts
On July 02 2009 10:43 Rekrul wrote: can i make my own video statement please I actually do want to put a face to Rekrul when I think about it.. any photos? | ||
|
pubbanana
United States3063 Posts
On July 02 2009 11:40 errol1001 wrote: I actually do want to put a face to Rekrul when I think about it.. any photos? How about clicking his profile? | ||
|
derbz
Canada87 Posts
ggpz strelok | ||
|
KhaosKreator
Canada145 Posts
On July 01 2009 16:11 Strelok. wrote: 1. Subject: Re: btw Date: 6/26/09 13:19 SDM's final ruling: Replay both game 1 and game 2. So go ahead and tell Fenix, I just emailed him too. Do you see word final here or it's only mine vision? 2. During the game vs Fenix we had very many issues i didn't want to talk previously, since i didn't want to discuss that game, but about which i talk now: a) We couldn't arrrange games during more then 2 weeks. b) He wanted to play only between 23:00 CET and 04:00 CET. He coudldn't play other time due to his univercity. This time was unacceptable for me, because i usually sleep this time. Admin didn't do anything to deal with the problem. c) When we, at last, met - we got straight lag in both games (even Fenix talked about that in the replay). Drop table appeared several times, so that is why i said the games are EVEN. Because if i dropped him game N1 when he got lead, he would have complainted either. d) the last thing is about this game. I don't want to break out Valor rules, so i won't post replay here. Anyway i will just point out on our final position. If they cast replay you will see it yourself. - upgrades. i have 1-1, he has 1-0. Both making 2 more. - limits. I have 170, protoss has 142. - high tech. His arbiter still not out, though his storms should be ready in 10 seconds. - number of bases. I had 3 and 4-th just incoming. He had 3 and 2 just incoming. Though he had problems with probes, so some bases wouldn't work properly anyways. - final point. In just 1 minute i collect 185 limit and go straight to 8 and 7 o clock bases. He would have had maximum 160-165 limit at this time, no statis, 3 stormers. It's not enough to hold such push. He can't counter with recall. Ofc such limit is not enough to counter just by ground. The game would be finished in 3 or 5 mins maximum i'm pretty sure about that. So just... watch replay, make your own opinion. and LG)Sabbath Argentina. July 01 2009 13:52. Posts 2268 I won't return to the tournament even if they give me 1-0 lead or autowin. I already made decision. I think it's hilarious that you actually want to replay both game one and game two. That's completely unfair and you know it. And don't give me this "final decision" nonsense. The final decision is the last decision. Hurr. I also find it hilarious that you said you wouldn't go into details about the game, and yet here you are, going into details. Also, congrats to Fenix for winning the Bo1 and advancing to the next round! | ||
|
LxRogue
United States1415 Posts
Lipton may be a great guy, and you can't blame him, but it's pretty essential to have somebody who can act as a knowledgeable admin on-hand. Even if they aren't observing the game, they should be in contact. I think Strelok could have been more understanding after the DC. Apparently there never was a decision made on whether to start over from game 1, or to go to game 3. So even if the phrase "final decision" was used, it doesn't look like they were ready to start the next game. | ||
|
Schnake
Germany2819 Posts
On July 02 2009 15:20 KhaosKreator wrote: I think it's hilarious that you actually want to replay both game one and game two. That's completely unfair and you know it. And don't give me this "final decision" nonsense. The final decision is the last decision. Hurr. I also find it hilarious that you said you wouldn't go into details about the game, and yet here you are, going into details. Also, congrats to Fenix for winning the Bo1 and advancing to the next round! Strelok does not want to replay both games in the sense that he demands it, this decision was made by SDM / Lipton as you can see under 1.). Strelok, however, wants them to stand by their final decision to replay both games, which I do not agree with, because it was a stupid decision that should not have been done in the first place. In general, final decisions should be final decisions to prevent arbitrariness but in this case it was obvious that the decision was bad and needed to be reconsidered. | ||
|
errol1001
454 Posts
Oh, thanks. | ||
|
nttea
Sweden4353 Posts
| ||
|
QuoC
United States724 Posts
| ||
|
thopol
Japan4560 Posts
| ||
|
Merano
Austria105 Posts
how about a best-of-7 between streklok and fenix that is funded by donations of the community here or some sponsors; this would be much more entertaining | ||
|
Lycaeus
United States1420 Posts
IMO: Strelok's game vs fenix was fairly even, If I had to put my money on the players, I would still place it on toss. | ||
| ||
