EU CraftCup: what a joke - Page 9

On May 01 2010 07:22 PokePill wrote:


My predictions if the matches aren't played:

Game 1: Huk 4 gates all in, Huk Wins
Game 2: Huk 4 gates all in, Jinro Wins
Game 3: Huk 4 gates all in, Jinro Wins
Game 4: Huk 4 gates all in, Jinro Wins

Exciting Series!

On May 01 2010 08:15 FrozenArbiter wrote:

Hehe, there were no 4 gate all-ins being used at all actually! :D

Game 1: Huk 1 robo 3 gate (I think), Jinro goes thor drop, Jinro Wins
Game 2: Huk goes zeal/sentry + void ray, Jinro goes reaper -> thor+starport, Jinro wins
Game 3: Jinro goes 7 rax reaper, Huk defends, Huk wins
Game 4: Huk goes proxy gates, Jinro defends, Jinro wins

On May 01 2010 08:28 avilo wrote:


replays? ?

On May 01 2010 08:28 avilo wrote:


replays? ?

On May 01 2010 08:17 Erucious wrote:
Grats jinro on your win! I feel so sorry sometimes seeing you underperform in high pressure tourney situations (razer domi, HDH etc etc). Good to see you in form and taking control of the matches .

Moar tourney wins for you now! Also i like how you speak in 3rd person there


On topic:

Any update yet on this matter?

On May 01 2010 08:30 Maista wrote:
Here is the official CraftCup "Pressrelease". Same version as linked in the latest CraftCup news.

Super Short Summary:
2 guys having a Bnet bug. One guy refusing to play after bug is resolved. Same guy has to leave the tournament.

Circumstances:
During the tournament a B.net bug occured for many users, that we documented like this. It was possible for a User A not to see a User B, although both were online. At the exact same time a User C was able to see A but no B. So it was pretty much random and it happened to admins and players. Testimonial linked at the bottom. So this is true.

The full story:
Both players were online all the time. I have no doubts about that. Mountas (aka DeA on TL.net) was the first one to file a freewin request because in his eye, Nightend appeared offline. This is an obvious and correct reaction. He had the bug described above and didnt see Nightend. The ticket was worked out by the referee brotkohl. He went through the regular procedure, checked if Nightend was online or not, and based his decision on that. Rare case popped up: He also didn't see him online. So he obviously gave a freewin.

Based on two wrong facts which he wasn't aware of.

When I was personally contacted that something might be strange I tried to contact both Nightend and Mountas. And for me it was possible to contact both. Sadly Mountas was already playing his round 3 match at the time we noticed we were all suffering from a bug.

After winning that match I explained the bug to him and that the freewin that he got wasn't a decision base don the right facts. He instantly refused to "re-play" the match against Nightend. It was the fairest solution to me to decide that on the battlefield and not in a discussion. I even gave him a clear warning and explained it to him multiple times.

Also to be mentioned: Nightend did not follow the rules and contacted an admin for a freewin when he was waiting more than 15 minutes.

It is up to the reader to interpret this.

Rule background:
In Mountases argumentation he is talking about a missing background in the rules for such a case.
I just keep it simple: If something unforseeable happens, and there is a possibility for a game to be played, then it has to be played.
For me that feels so natural that i didnt even include it in the rules.

Bottom notes:
Testimonial of the bug by Frozenarbiter and Jdanzi:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5149486

Why did this press release take so long?
There are indicators that Mountas was ignoring messages from a friend of Nightend during the situation on purpose. We did not find evidence on that.

Also people complaining about favouritism: Guys, two weeks ago we kicked the maybe best American player right now out of a tournament.

Everybody who would like to discuss anything of this topic with me, you will be able to find my contact details on the CraftCup site or just PM me here.

On May 01 2010 08:30 Maista wrote:


Also to be mentioned: Nightend did not follow the rules and contacted an admin for a freewin when he was waiting more than 15 minutes.

On May 01 2010 08:30 Maista wrote:

Why did this press release take so long?
There are indicators that Mountas was ignoring messages from a friend of Nightend during the situation on purpose. We did not find evidence on that.

On May 01 2010 08:30 Maista wrote:
Here is the official CraftCup "Pressrelease". Same version as linked in the latest CraftCup news.

(snip)

Everybody who would like to discuss anything of this topic with me, you will be able to find my contact details on the CraftCup site or just PM me here.

On May 01 2010 08:45 ghostnuke1234 wrote:


No disrespect, but you need to learn from the airline industry on how to handle situations like this. The bug is not your fault, nor any of the players fault. However, two players were wronged by the actions of one of your admins.

What you should have done, was offer some type of incentive to one of the players, or both of the players. Possible incentives you could have offered the players:

1) Explain the bug to Nightend and offer Nightend a seeded placement in your next tournament if Nightend is willing to forgoe the current tournament. For instance, if you offered Nightend an automatic spot in the Ro8, or Ro4 at your next tournament, he probably would have accepted his disqualification fromt he current tournament.

2) Be willing to pay DeA portion of the tournament prize, if he agrees to a rematch with Nightend and loses. Or, perhaps seed DeA at the next tournament, if he is willing to go back to round 2. There needs to be some incentive for DeA to play Nightend, given the administrative mistsake on your end.



Either way, your admin team handled the situation poorly. You did not give an incentive to either player, and if I were DeA, I would feel cheated if I were forced to replay a round 2 match, after getting the clear from an admin to play round 3 and winning that round 3 match.

On May 01 2010 08:45 ghostnuke1234 wrote:


No disrespect, but you need to learn from the airline industry on how to handle situations like this. The bug is not your fault, nor any of the players fault. However, two players were wronged by the actions of one of your admins.

What you should have done, was offer some type of incentive to one of the players, or both of the players. Possible incentives you could have offered the players:

1) Explain the bug to Nightend and offer Nightend a seeded placement in your next tournament if Nightend is willing to forgoe the current tournament. For instance, if you offered Nightend an automatic spot in the Ro8, or Ro4 at your next tournament, he probably would have accepted his disqualification from the current tournament.

2) Be willing to pay DeA portion of the tournament prize, if he agrees to a rematch with Nightend and loses. Or, perhaps seed DeA at the next tournament, if he is willing to go back to round 2. There needs to be some incentive for DeA to play Nightend, given the administrative mistsake on your end.



Either way, your admin team handled the situation poorly. You did not give an incentive to either player, and if I were DeA, I would feel cheated if I were forced to replay a round 2 match, after getting the clear from an admin to play round 3 and winning that round 3 match.

On May 01 2010 08:43 cyclone25 wrote:


I can post the print screen I made with me asking DeA to play the game vs Nightend, but DeA already confirmed it earlier in this thread, that I messaged him, and that he didn't gave me any reply. No reason to post it ...