|
On May 09 2010 15:03 QuakerOats wrote:
I don't see how that's trolling; he has a pretty good point. What TL is officially saying is that the winner of the tournament actually lost in the quarterfinals. And yet you're still giving him the first place prize and title...
You've never seen unjustified penalties decide matches in soccer? :/
|
On May 09 2010 14:59 Tadzio wrote:
Dew: You do realize that what you're suggesting is that we correct our error (1 regame) by replaying the entire top half of the bracket (potentially 13 regames, semi-finals, finals, and 3rd/4th match)? Right?
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.
Yes. What I'm suggesting involves a best-of 3 and a best-of 5 series. Sure, you could include the 3rd/4th place match as well.
You don't think it's a plausible solution. It sounds perfectly plausible to me, but then again I play no part in orgalizing these things, so there's probably a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff that would make it trickier than it sounds. Nazgul has already expressed interest in playing additional games in the form of a showmatch, and while it may be trickier to arrange a redo I doubt it would be "implausible". It sounds perfectly fair to me, when players are given the ability to compete against the players who actually earned their way there.
Apologizing isn't the best fix. It's the easy fix and the lazy fix, assuming it fixes anything at all.
|
On May 09 2010 15:02 Tadzio wrote:
It has nothing to do with laziness, and everything to do with fairness. Stop trolling. Now.
How is it fair to award a guy who lost in the quarterfinals a championship?
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On May 09 2010 11:45 Kishime wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 11:37 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: We have offered Artosis a showmatch with the winner of TLI with prizes at stake. Unfortunately due to their 'personal differences' Artosis isn't interested in playing with Slush. That is absurd. He needs to grow up.
No, he feels like he was wronged (which he was), and slush had a chance to be a good sport (which Artosis pointed out in his conversation with slush), and slush didn't.
I think this is Artosis' way of holding his head up high, and if I were in his position I would refuse a showmatch as well.
|
On May 09 2010 15:06 dew wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 14:59 Tadzio wrote:
Dew: You do realize that what you're suggesting is that we correct our error (1 regame) by replaying the entire top half of the bracket (potentially 13 regames, semi-finals, finals, and 3rd/4th match)? Right?
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. Yes. What I'm suggesting involves a best-of 3 and a best-of 5 series. Sure, you could include the 3rd/4th place match as well. You don't think it's a plausible solution. It sounds perfectly plausible to me, but then again I play no part in orgalizing these things, so there's probably a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff that would make it trickier than it sounds. Nazgul has already expressed interest in playing additional games in the form of a showmatch, and while it may be trickier to arrange a redo I doubt it would be "implausible". It sounds perfectly fair to me, when players are given the ability to compete against the players who actually earned their way there. Apologizing isn't the best fix. It's the easy fix and the lazy fix, assuming it fixes anything at all.
I have to agree with what dew is saying here. I'm not trying to be overly critical to the people who were running the tournament--everyone makes mistakes. But I think dew's idea is the only truly fair thing to do.
|
Apparently Dew knows better than 200 years of organized sports' way of doing things.
|
On May 09 2010 15:08 dew wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 15:02 Tadzio wrote:
It has nothing to do with laziness, and everything to do with fairness. Stop trolling. Now. How is it fair to award a guy who lost in the quarterfinals a championship?
He didn't lose in the quarterfinals. He quite clearly won two games out of four.
|
On May 09 2010 14:19 dNo_O wrote:kudos to the tl staff for posting what is basically a news paper retraction. it doesn't change what happened, but it's still the right thing to do <3 tl.net Show nested quote +3. It was weird that Slush did not want to discuss the situation with Artosis. If you had a stance, and you really believed in that stance, you shouldn't be shying away from expressing that stance to someone else. The fact that Slush told refs that he felt like he had a chance but avoided expressing this and his reasons to Artosis shows that Slush did have questionable motives. If he had really build that he had a chance, fine. If he really wanted refs to decide b/c of this, then fine. But he shouldn't have told Artosis it's not my decision, pretty much "I don't want to talk about this with you, let the refs handle it." This was unsportmanlike if anything uhh... so because he doesn't say anything that could be interpreted as flaming by Artosis he's bm? you're assuming way too much in this whole section. the whole paragraph is baseless assumptions. he has questionable motives because they weren't questioned? or he didn't feel the need to justify them because they were (maybe, in his opinion) unquestionable? Anyone with league experience or tourney experience where decision trends tend to be in their favor, or similar situations that might be used as a basis for decision are assumed in your favor should understand that there's nothing to argue. do you really think people would think more favorably on slush if he had argued his side? there's no way him arguing would have helped his situation or where things are now.in my experience at tournaments if you know that generally what happened would default in a win for you or your team, there is no need for you to add fuel to flames. whenever admins are required to make decisions there are going to be people who are unsatisfied. that's why the admins are there in the first place. yes this time it was a mistake, but what you've said here in section 3 of your post... is directly contradicting what you say in section 5. Show nested quote +5. NO ONE IS BENT TO SCREW SOMEONE. If anyone seriously thinks that someone wanted to "dick" a player, he's just being immature and irrational. Everyone involved in this tournament only wanted the best for the invitation. Some things are subjective, and under the stress and pressure, it's difficult to make the right decision (which might not even exist in many cases). Enough bad-mouthing has been done already, more than enough to shake off emotions. Now people should cool down and try to cooperate with the victims to make things right again to make as many people as possible satisfied.
I'm saying that if Slush really believed that he had a chance, he wouldn't have avoided justifying his situation to Artosis.
The fact is that he told ref that he felt like he had a chance. But he wouldn't say it to Artosis. Why? Maybe b/c like you said, he felt like he didn't justify himself. But the truth is, he told Artosis: it's not my decision and it's not yours, I'm waiting for the decision from the refs. In actuality, Slush had the decision to say either "I have a chance, I want a regame" or "I lost the game" and he chose the latter (according to ET's explanations).
And Slush did not do anything to screw Artosis. If he behaved in a questionable manner, he did it b/c he wanted the best for himself, which unfortunately involved giving the better position to Slush in relation to Artosis.
|
On May 09 2010 15:06 dew wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 14:59 Tadzio wrote:
Dew: You do realize that what you're suggesting is that we correct our error (1 regame) by replaying the entire top half of the bracket (potentially 13 regames, semi-finals, finals, and 3rd/4th match)? Right?
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. Yes. What I'm suggesting involves a best-of 3 and a best-of 5 series. Sure, you could include the 3rd/4th place match as well. You don't think it's a plausible solution. It sounds perfectly plausible to me, but then again I play no part in orgalizing these things, so there's probably a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff that would make it trickier than it sounds. Nazgul has already expressed interest in playing additional games in the form of a showmatch, and while it may be trickier to arrange a redo I doubt it would be "implausible". It sounds perfectly fair to me, when players are given the ability to compete against the players who actually earned their way there. Apologizing isn't the best fix. It's the easy fix and the lazy fix, assuming it fixes anything at all.
Naw, the lazy fix is to say we're infallible and telling all dissatisfied spectators to fuck off, which is what practically every professional sports organization would do in our position. We're manly men, though, and actually care about this community because we're a group of volunteers that're by and for the community, and your 27 post self should probably stop stirring things up.
edit: oh good.
|
Baltimore, USA22259 Posts
On May 09 2010 15:09 Radical wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 15:06 dew wrote:On May 09 2010 14:59 Tadzio wrote:
Dew: You do realize that what you're suggesting is that we correct our error (1 regame) by replaying the entire top half of the bracket (potentially 13 regames, semi-finals, finals, and 3rd/4th match)? Right?
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. Yes. What I'm suggesting involves a best-of 3 and a best-of 5 series. Sure, you could include the 3rd/4th place match as well. You don't think it's a plausible solution. It sounds perfectly plausible to me, but then again I play no part in orgalizing these things, so there's probably a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff that would make it trickier than it sounds. Nazgul has already expressed interest in playing additional games in the form of a showmatch, and while it may be trickier to arrange a redo I doubt it would be "implausible". It sounds perfectly fair to me, when players are given the ability to compete against the players who actually earned their way there. Apologizing isn't the best fix. It's the easy fix and the lazy fix, assuming it fixes anything at all. I have to agree with what dew is saying here. I'm not trying to be overly critical to the people who were running the tournament--everyone makes mistakes. But I think dew's idea is the only truly fair thing to do.
Again, I want to point out the best post on this subject:
On May 09 2010 14:59 Tadzio wrote:
Dew: You do realize that what you're suggesting is that we correct our error (1 regame) by replaying the entire top half of the bracket (potentially 13 regames: semi-finals, finals, and 3rd/4th match)? Right?
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.
|
On May 09 2010 15:06 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 15:03 QuakerOats wrote:
I don't see how that's trolling; he has a pretty good point. What TL is officially saying is that the winner of the tournament actually lost in the quarterfinals. And yet you're still giving him the first place prize and title... You've never seen unjustified penalties decide matches in soccer? :/
Yeah, but that's different, because in that case you can't say that the other side FOR SURE won without the penalty. But here you're saying that the winner actually lost. I know replaying the whole thing isn't really a good option either, but this is a crappy situation all around that's not quite the same as France going through because of a handball, for instance.
|
You can't do anything about it. Decision was made and it's over and done. Do boxers get their win when the judges clearly need glasses and seem to miss the whole fight? Welcome to the world. It is run by people who are in fact imperfect. The TL team did a wonderful job and let people know they see that and in turn tried to do the right thing. All of you simple minded people wanting your Utopia need to grow up or maybe be out in the real world on your own for a while.
|
I don't anything should happen with TLI#2 from here on but to just move on, close this thread and set sight towards future event. What's done is done. Sadly no one is walking away happy from this and re-gaming the quarter finals matches will not fix the damage that has been done. Admins can only learn from their "mistake" (not everyone sees it as a mistake) so that they don't have this problem in the future. If all tournaments (esports and regular sport) would do a regame after a bad call was found after a game then tournaments will never end and would have to be replayed over and over again till everything was done flawless. We are all humans and we make mistake. Ohh and for some of you "Welcome to Esports"
|
On May 09 2010 15:12 EvilTeletubby wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 15:09 Radical wrote:On May 09 2010 15:06 dew wrote:On May 09 2010 14:59 Tadzio wrote:
Dew: You do realize that what you're suggesting is that we correct our error (1 regame) by replaying the entire top half of the bracket (potentially 13 regames, semi-finals, finals, and 3rd/4th match)? Right?
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. Yes. What I'm suggesting involves a best-of 3 and a best-of 5 series. Sure, you could include the 3rd/4th place match as well. You don't think it's a plausible solution. It sounds perfectly plausible to me, but then again I play no part in orgalizing these things, so there's probably a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff that would make it trickier than it sounds. Nazgul has already expressed interest in playing additional games in the form of a showmatch, and while it may be trickier to arrange a redo I doubt it would be "implausible". It sounds perfectly fair to me, when players are given the ability to compete against the players who actually earned their way there. Apologizing isn't the best fix. It's the easy fix and the lazy fix, assuming it fixes anything at all. I have to agree with what dew is saying here. I'm not trying to be overly critical to the people who were running the tournament--everyone makes mistakes. But I think dew's idea is the only truly fair thing to do. Again, I want to point out the best post on this subject: Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 14:59 Tadzio wrote:
Dew: You do realize that what you're suggesting is that we correct our error (1 regame) by replaying the entire top half of the bracket (potentially 13 regames: semi-finals, finals, and 3rd/4th match)? Right?
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.
Well I still disagree, but I have to say that you've handled this situation (after the regame) pretty well regardless. I can see how your way of looking at it would seem to be the right way, and I can see how dew's way of looking at it seems to be the right way. Sometimes there is no perfect solution I guess.
|
As for Artosis's reaction, I think one thing hasn't been brought up: his return to a competitive gaming team may have made him want this win more than in the past when he wasn't as active of a progamer, even if BW was his job. I think there's a bit more pressure on him to perform. I can't blame him for wanting the win, even if this was just for pride and not even for money. Sucks to work that hard on something and have it taken away from you.
I'll back up most of the posters: good manner, Naz and ET. You're making the best of a tough situation here.
|
United States22883 Posts
I'm really sorry for Artosis. It's really unfortunate, but at this point you just have to move on.
I don't think the hate on Slush is very fair. It's not as simple as being "honorable." You can't watch your own replay in the middle of a series and judge what your chances are. That's why you defer to admins and the rules that were set out before hand.
Sorry for the flack the TL admins are getting, but overall you ran a good tourney and I'm completely impressed with your response, Nazgul/TL. Human error is always going to happen, regardless of what checks are in place and what kind of experts you use (see the NBA thread if you don't think it happens in other sports), so I think what's most important is identifying the errors and correcting them. This statement is the first part of that, and it was a very thoughtful response.
|
On May 09 2010 14:05 charlesatan wrote:
On Slush: Slush, in my opinion, behaved conservatively. He left the decision to the judges. Which is his right as a player. When Artosis was attacking him in chat, he didn't give in to the rage and attacked Artosis.
To some of the fans, the ideal situation would have been for Slush to concede defeat. That, I think, would have boosted his rep. But he didn't and I don't think there's anything wrong when players defer the ruling to the judges/umpires (just like in regular sports--even if sometimes bad calls are made).
That's because he knew that he had lost, and in a way you could say he was provoking artosis by saying things like "you only have 3/2 hydras, I was about to win, NOT you."
He acted in such because he knew he had a good chance of getting a regame if he didn't do anything rash. Morally, it's a dick move, which is what Artosis pointed out. It's understandable Artosis was and is extremely upset.
I've played Magic: The Gathering at the highest tiers of play... When a player is hands down beat and the only chance they have is some kind of rules thing or technicality, they act in the exact same manner slush did. Again, it's a dick move, but it's a way to win so you can't really blame him for that.
Character vs. Winning
tough call. (no sarcasm).
|
This post isn't so much a contribution as it is a reflection of the TL staff. You guys must be fucking STRESSED out about this. I'm sorry it had to turn out this way. Best of luck to all involved, including Artosis and Slush.
|
Baltimore, USA22259 Posts
On May 09 2010 15:21 Broodwich wrote:
As for Artosis's reaction, I think one thing hasn't been brought up: his return to a competitive gaming team may have made him want this win more than in the past when he wasn't as active of a progamer, even if BW was his job. I think there's a bit more pressure on him to perform. I can't blame him for wanting the win, even if this was just for pride and not even for money.
That's where I hope Artosis takes some of this to heart... more important than the results IMO to his new team is how he handled himself here, which lacked a lot of class and professionalism, even if it was mostly justified.
As I said earlier, I would hate to see this incident taint his reputation as a hard working, very skilled gaming. I had the pleasure of watching him play first hand many years ago at a WCG prelim, and even then his dedication was top notch. I want to see his professionalism reflect, as I know he has shown in the past.
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 09 2010 15:34 Jugan wrote:
I've played Magic: The Gathering at the highest tiers of play... When a player is hands down beat and the only chance they have is some kind of rules thing or technicality, they act in the exact same manner slush did. Again, it's a dick move, but it's a way to win so you can't really blame him for that.
Character vs. Winning
tough call. (no sarcasm).
Agreed completely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
