EPTSlush vs Artosis - Page 10
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
phamou
Canada193 Posts
| ||
|
charlesatan
Philippines75 Posts
On May 09 2010 14:22 Ursad0n wrote: He did what gave him the best possible chance of advancing. If he just took the loss like a gentelman (instead of saying "i could have won" like an ass) then he would have 0% chance of winning. By allowing the referee to decide he gained the extra advantage of having someone with a little less knowledge of the situation, and with fairness (in terms of Artosis disconnecting) in mind. That's assuming you know that Slush thought he knew he had 0% chance of winning. Or that Slush had better insight to the game compared to the referees. Which isn't necessarily the case. Artosis, did nothing wrong in my opinion. He got the shitty end of the deal and e has a right to be mad. He lost out on an opportunity to get $300 because Slush is a douche bag and lied about thinking he could win. Artosis might have a right to get mad (as in the emotion) but he didn't have to take it out on Slush or the referees. | ||
|
Bear4188
United States1797 Posts
Also, since so many people in this thread seem to have never witnessed a competitive sporting event of any kind before here's a little rundown on officiating. Referees are asked to do the incredibly difficult task of moderating the rules of the game. In SC2, at least, most of the rules are built into the game engine so refs rarely need to take action. However, when they do they have to make a judgment call, which implies that there are arguments in either direction. Furthermore because of need for clear results in games (goal or no goal, KO or no KO, W or L) there is no room for middle ground or ambiguity so a ref MUST make a decision and that decision MUST be final, because the game must go on. It's a reality of games, and I hope all of you who are going to continue spectating or competing in any kind of game get used to it, because it's not going away. It's an unfortunate situation, but it is what it is. TL has gone above and beyond any obligation they had, in explaining that they believe they erred in their ruling in addition to offering the consolation of another match with a prize, which Artosis evidently turned down. At no point is any of this the fault of either player, they do not control the rules or the rulings, they only control their own actions. If anything could be improved for this situation in the future it is that the rules regarded disconnects et al. should be very clearly explained/available to all participants and referees, and that all referees should feel confident in their ability to fulfill that role. | ||
|
sputnik.theory
Poland449 Posts
On an only slightly unrelated subject, does anyone else feel that sc2 is going to make any sort of cross-continent play unnecessarily hard in the future? | ||
|
renshank
United States41 Posts
On May 09 2010 14:16 Tadzio wrote: There is no 'both ways' about it. The regame was a terrible error. You wanna know how terrible? The decision we made erased Artosis' win. It's gone. Vanished. Never happened. Make no mistake, Slush won his series against Artosis. It's important to recognize this. The game where Artosis disconnected did not count. That's the ramification of our error. That's what regame means. There is no having your cake and eating it too going on here. This is owning up and being responsible for what we did. If you've got a time-machine handy, lemme borrow it and we can fix the problem. Barring that possibility we'll just have to make amends some other way because we're not going to correct one mistake by making an even bigger one. I know that people will probably think that I am either insane or trolling or something, but from the way that people are treating the situation, I'd say that most of them probably don't understand metaphysics at all. I think Tadzio might actually understand metaphysics in just the correct way, which is why I quoted him while making this post. No one has a time machine, so trying to undo the past is just not possible. I actually personally believe that it is actually impossible to have a time machine because you can't undo the past, since that would result in a paradox, but that's a separate issue. I think that the posts by Nony is pretty harsh, as it really does not seem to reflect the temporal order of the actual (and not hypothetical/counterfactual) events that occurred, which Tadzio has now explained. The complete erasure of Artosis's win is what needs to be taken into consideration here, and the fact that Slush won the final game of their matchup, not the fact that the last game never should have happened. While I understand the disagreement about the relevant facts, the very fact that disagreement is possible shows that the situation is complicated, and that attempting to change the past might not be the best of plans. From a human (instead of Philosopher/Psychologist) perspective, I think that the last sentence of Tadzio's post is the most important one: "[The Team Liquid Staff is] not going to correct one mistake by making an even bigger one." I think that wrenching the last 3 hours of gaming out of everyone's hands, simply because of a bad call is just not tenable if you care about humans at all. On a (mostly) unrelated note, I think that everyone is treating Slush WAY too harshly, and that this in turn makes the entire affair suspect from a PR/complaining perspective. Either the admins made an additional mistake of not being clear about how the decision process occurred, or people are (possibly un)intentionally misrepresenting the situation in order to punish someone who didn't even do anything wrong, other than making an error of fact (that he had a chance to win the game). In closing, none of the Slush-bashing line of argumentation would even come close to standing up in a court of law, another sporting event, or in any intense argument you were having with your friends over a poker game. Judges made a call, it was wrong. If it is only realized this far after the fact that an incorrect decision was made, you cannot, as Tadzio makes clear, go back in your Delorian and change the past, which is what you would need to do in order to truly rectify the situation as most people seem to desire. I hope I haven't made anyone too angry, or said anything too out of place or confusing, but I really think it is important to think about the situation in a very detached manner in order to discern what is the right thing to do. | ||
|
dNo_O
United States233 Posts
On May 09 2010 14:35 sputnik.theory wrote: How smart does Idra look for realizing that computer problems might make TSI2 not be the best tournament for him to play in? On an only slightly unrelated subject, does anyone else feel that sc2 is going to make any sort of cross-continent play unnecessarily hard in the future? isn't it already doing that? | ||
|
Bear4188
United States1797 Posts
On May 09 2010 14:35 sputnik.theory wrote: On an only slightly unrelated subject, does anyone else feel that sc2 is going to make any sort of cross-continent play unnecessarily hard in the future? If Blizzard was truly interested in being rid of the problem of disconnects in esports they would implement a save feature and also one that would basically export a save from a timeframe in a replay (just before a disconnect). Of course you would also have to block access to the full replay from the players so they don't both get full scouting reports. | ||
|
Al Bundy
7257 Posts
| ||
|
EGLzGaMeR
United States1867 Posts
| ||
|
dew
United States59 Posts
On May 09 2010 14:16 Tadzio wrote: There is no 'both ways' about it. The regame was a terrible error. You wanna know how terrible? The decision we made erased Artosis' win. It's gone. Vanished. Never happened. Make no mistake, Slush won his series against Artosis. It's important to recognize this. The game where Artosis disconnected did not count. That's the ramification of our error. That's what regame means. There is no having your cake and eating it too going on here. This is owning up and being responsible for what we did. If you've got a time-machine handy, lemme borrow it and we can fix the problem. Barring that possibility we'll just have to make amends some other way because we're not going to correct one mistake by making an even bigger one. It doesn't take a time machine to pick up where you left off. This is not a complicated scenario. We know who won the quarterfinal series. We know that Artosis should have played Louder. We know that the winner of that game should have played CauthonLuck. It does not take a time machine to make that happen. Is it reasonable to go back to Slush and say "those games you won didn't count"? That all depends on your point of view. Yet it is an easy solution and the most fair solution. This isn't a situation where an umpire makes a bad call on a home run in the 7th inning. The game was literally over, and an umpire wrongfully sent it into OT where the wrong team won. It is a simple matter to rectify the mistake. You're saying that the game didn't happen. That's incorrect. It happened, the result was misinterpreted, and it was determined that Artosis won. To ignore the result, after going out of your way to call out the mistake and apologize for it, is the definition of trying to have it both ways. The fair way to handle this situation is to make a decision, not to say "this should have happened, this did happen, but we're not going to do anything about it because losing wouldn't be fair to the guy who should have lost". Either stick to your guns or do something about the mistake in a situation like this where it's simply easy to regame tomorrow. From a human (instead of Philosopher/Psychologist) perspective, I think that the last sentence of Tadzio's post is the most important one: "[The Team Liquid Staff is] not going to correct one mistake by making an even bigger one." I think that wrenching the last 3 hours of gaming out of everyone's hands, simply because of a bad call is just not tenable if you care about humans at all. I agree that it could certainly be considered unreasonable to regame it. My biggest problem is that they're going out of their way to say "he never should have been given the regame, he should have lost, sorry bout that" without replaying it with the players who belonged there. | ||
|
zizou21
United States3683 Posts
| ||
|
frumplejoon
United States129 Posts
On May 09 2010 14:38 Bear4188 wrote: If Blizzard was truly interested in being rid of the problem of disconnects in esports they would implement a save feature and also one that would basically export a save from a timeframe in a replay (just before a disconnect). Of course you would also have to block access to the full replay from the players so they don't both get full scouting reports. once the game's released, only the lan tourneys will matter. still need a rule for power outages tho! | ||
|
dNo_O
United States233 Posts
On May 09 2010 14:40 dew wrote: It doesn't take a time machine to pick up where you left off. This is not a complicated scenario. We know who won the quarterfinal series. We know that Artosis should have played Louder. We know that the winner of that game should have played CauthonLuck. It does not take a time machine to make that happen. Is it reasonable to go back to Slush and say "those games you won didn't count"? That all depends on your point of view. Yet it is an easy solution and the most fair solution. This isn't a situation where an umpire makes a bad call on a home run in the 7th inning. The game was literally over, and an umpire wrongfully sent it into OT where the wrong team won. It is a simple matter to rectify the mistake. You're saying that the game didn't happen. That's incorrect. It happened, the result was misinterpreted, and it was determined that Artosis won. To ignore the result, after going out of your way to call out the mistake and apologize for it, is the definition of trying to have it both ways. The fair way to handle this situation is to make a decision, not to say "this should have happened, this did happen, but we're not going to do anything about it because losing wouldn't be fair to the guy who should have lost". Either stick to your guns or do something about the mistake in a situation like this where it's simply easy to regame tomorrow. I agree that it could certainly be considered unreasonable to regame it. My biggest problem is that they're going out of their way to say "he never should have been given the regame, he should have lost, sorry bout that" without replaying it with the players who belonged there. it would be irresponsible if you were to print incorrect information in a respected news journal (because based on the sources you had it seemed reliable) and then later after you realized it was incorrect you didn't print a retraction. also, this sets precedent for future situations and they opened up the forum for suggestions on how they should handle them. (read the last line or two of nazgul's update to the first post) | ||
|
charlesatan
Philippines75 Posts
On May 09 2010 14:40 dew wrote: It doesn't take a time machine to pick up where you left off. This is not a complicated scenario. We know who won the quarterfinal series. We know that Artosis should have played Louder. We know that the winner of that game should have played CauthonLuck. It does not take a time machine to make that happen. Is it reasonable to go back to Slush and say "those games you won didn't count"? That all depends on your point of view. Yet it is an easy solution and the most fair solution. Not that simple. It doesn't take into account the psychological advantage/disadvantage the players had at the time. Also for Louder and CauthonLuck, it's going to be a complex state for them. They already played in this tournament and they have to repeat it? Granted, they could end up winning a higher slot, but why should they play again to make up for the mistake of someone else? And if they do win, how do they feel about that, that they won against Artosis but not the time-warped match against Slush? | ||
|
Tadzio
3340 Posts
That is not a plausible solution, nor is it fair to any of the other gamers involved. Believe me, a 'redo' is not the best fix for this. Apologizing and making amends is. | ||
|
dew
United States59 Posts
The point that seemingly everybody supports is that Artosis had game 3 100% locked up and won. No doubt about it. There's simply no point in saying something like that if you have no intention of lifting a finger to resolve the problem. It's a problem with an easy yet controversial solution. Take it or leave it, I don't really care, it's the playing it both ways side that I have a problem with. Everybody whose seen the replay knows that a mistake was made, but backing off your initial decision and calling it a mistake invalidates the result of the entire tournament, because your so-called champion, by all accounts, 100% lost in the quarterfinals. He lost the game, and while they realize and apologize about it, it would be inconvenient and controversial to attempt to resolve it in a fair way. | ||
|
Tadzio
3340 Posts
| ||
|
QuakerOats
United States1024 Posts
| ||
|
artanis2
United States732 Posts
| ||
|
Bear4188
United States1797 Posts
| ||
| ||
