EPTSlush vs Artosis - Page 12
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
sputnik.theory
Poland449 Posts
| ||
|
GiveMeFace
United Kingdom86 Posts
Apparently Artosis made a huge fuss about the regame. I am intrigued to why he eventually gave in? Just like people see him as childish for not accepting a grude match type scenario, he clearly would of acted differently if he won the regame? The original post would never of been made and there would of been absolutely no complaints, he probably would have laughed it off. It's very naive for everyone to question how each player really should of acted in this situation. If Artosis felt so strongly about what happened surely he should of not played in protest? Its just as bad mannered to pick up the arguement when its most beneficial to you, just like Slush clearly kept quiet in his interest of winning. Can you blame them? | ||
|
selboN
United States2523 Posts
On May 09 2010 15:48 GiveMeFace wrote: This is an extremely difficult situation. Throughout the post a lot of people have displayed their dislike of Slush's conduct and that Artosis has been 'wronged'. Apparently Artosis made a huge fuss about the regame. I am intrigued to why he eventually gave in? Just like people see him as childish for not accepting a grude match type scenario, he clearly would of acted differently if he won the regame? The original post would never of been made and there would of been absolutely no complaints, he probably would have laughed it off. It's very naive for everyone to question how each player really should of acted in this situation. If Artosis felt so strongly about what happened surely he should of not played in protest? Its just as bad mannered to pick up the arguement when its most beneficial to you, just like Slush clearly kept quiet in his interest of winning. Can you blame them? I don't think he played the regame, didn't he get DQ'd before even replaying? | ||
|
GiveMeFace
United Kingdom86 Posts
| ||
|
Jugan
United States1566 Posts
On May 09 2010 15:48 GiveMeFace wrote: This is an extremely difficult situation. Throughout the post a lot of people have displayed their dislike of Slush's conduct and that Artosis has been 'wronged'. A lot of people stand on the other side of the fence too On May 09 2010 15:48 GiveMeFace wrote: Apparently Artosis made a huge fuss about the regame. I am intrigued to why he eventually gave in? Just like people see him as childish for not accepting a grude match type scenario, he clearly would of acted differently if he won the regame? The original post would never of been made and there would of been absolutely no complaints, he probably would have laughed it off. If you had just played your guts out in an intense game and were 20 seconds away from your opponent typing out "GG" and an unfortunate series of events unfolded where you had to play again... WOULD YOU NOT BE UPSET? He gave in to the regame because he was going to be DQ'd if he didn't. Obviously he would have acted differently had he won the regame, but I assure you that he would still be upset, albeit not as much a fuss would have been made for it. On May 09 2010 15:48 GiveMeFace wrote: It's very naive for everyone to question how each player really should of acted in this situation. If Artosis felt so strongly about what happened surely he should of not played in protest? So you're also saying that Flash, despite being severely shaken mentally, and EXTREMELY upset, made a poor decision like artosis (as you claim), and should have just not played in protest of the ruling? (reference to the last MSL finals, the "blackout incident") | ||
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
please stop, he is not at fault. He Showed up, he played his games, he was advanced by the tourney admins. Artosis was the one who Disconnected, it is his computer malfunctions that are at fault. If you do not want to DC and have this risk, then go for a short walk in a country supposedly FILLED with pc bongs and play on one of those. When you DC in a situation as described , multiple bases vs multiple bases, with 3k minerals saved up. I would almost always go with regame for the simple fact it was was the person with the lead at fault in DCing + he had some chance at comeback. There are many many times where a person can win if they attack at that moment, but fail to hit this timing window and the opponent comes back. Also creating a thread and directing people's anger at Slush is far worse than the initial decision. This is really a huge mistake in creating this thread, maybe create the post, lock it and move on. Now you are directing peoples attention at the players and saying Slush should have been a better admin for YOUR tournament. Please leave the players out of this and direct the blame at the admins, if anywhere, they made the decision. If you want to put in the rules : TEamliquid tournament Rule #5 You will be responsible for admin decisions, if you fail to make a good decision while PLAYING in the tournament we will make a big thread about it and have Nony come in and talk about your "low character" for believing in your starcraft abilities. Also nony attacking Slush's character for being given a regame by tournament admins? | ||
|
Tadzio
3340 Posts
On May 09 2010 15:53 selboN wrote: I don't think he played the regame, didn't he get DQ'd before even replaying? No. He played it. | ||
|
Jugan
United States1566 Posts
On May 09 2010 15:57 dacthehork wrote: Also nony attacking Slush's character for being given a regame by tournament admins? Because Slush knew that he had lost, and was saying things like "My mutas will beat your 3/2 hydras". He is criticizing Slush's choice to put winning above doing the right thing (in his eyes). | ||
|
charlesatan
Philippines75 Posts
On May 09 2010 15:34 Jugan wrote: 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. Or maybe he said "you only have 3/2 hydras" because he thought he genuinely had a winning chance. The fact is, Slush obviously had a biased view of the game, so the best call to make is to let an unbiased observer (the referee) make the call. Obviously, we don't want it to descend into a Slush vs. Artosis debate where each one claiming "I would have won it" (and in this case, it rightfully goes to Artosis). The problem with your Magic: The Gathering example is not you didn't give a concrete example. Is it a case of the winning player not "tapping their land to gain mana" before casting their game-winning spell? Talented and skilled players have lost because of this technicality but it's the rules. Is this the kind of rules lawyering you're talking about? But a better analogy would be a best of three match. Let's say the winning player takes a bathroom break during his 60-minute alloted time for the match, and while in the bathroom, gets ambushed by thieves and knocks him out. Winning player recovers after the allotted time (say at 61 minutes). It was a situation out of his hands yet by the rules, the losing player would have won because the winning player didn't return to the game in time. Sure, the losing player can concede that the winning player would have won the match, but the winning player didn't show up, so by the rules, the losing player won. | ||
|
Atticus.axl
United States456 Posts
| ||
|
GiveMeFace
United Kingdom86 Posts
Of course he is going to be upset. From what I read from the conversation transcripts, if your going to be a martyr you have to die for the cause. What I can't agree with is agreeing to the regame then afterwards creating a huge aftermath after accepting the conditions after disconnect. This is just as conceited as Slush's silent tactics to have a chance of winning the game. | ||
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
On May 09 2010 15:59 Jugan wrote: Because Slush knew that he had lost, and was saying things like "My mutas will beat your 3/2 hydras". He is criticizing Slush's choice to put winning above doing the right thing (in his eyes). you are assuming Slush thought he had lost, he hadn't GGed yet, also it seems the ADMINS of the tournament agreed and gave him a re game. Huk vs Idra Game 3 of gosucoaching, there was a point where HuK took off from his base to attack Idra, this attack would have worked easily. If he dropped at the point the army was en route, and was awarded the win because his army would easily have crushed the 10 lings, it would be a mistake. On the way to attack he kept moving back and forth and did not take advantage of the window and lost. Having an advantage, and being able to win if you A move into the enemy base is not enough criteria for (he would 100% win). If so he better A move right then and there. The thing is the players DO NOT have 100% information, you are assuming the players make 0 mistakes which HAPPEN. Yes 10 zealots will beat 8 zealots. UNLESS mistakes happen, micro miracles, etc. These do happen a lot, people blow leads, people come back with hidden expos. If you don't believe in this stuff simply have the admins call the game and get rid of the GG system. Even in MMA, if a fighter who is winning knees the opponent (something illegal). They sometimes call the fight and award a win to a participant who really had barely any chance of winning. See Bones Jones vs Matt Hamill This whole idea of judges deciding who wins should be AVOIDED at all costs, unless it seems the loser is abusing DCs to get free wins. | ||
|
Skyze
Canada2324 Posts
It would probably be a non-issue/never spoke of again. The point is; Slush just did what the refs told him, which at the time was to replay the game. If they said Artosis won in the first place, there wouldnt be a problem. Dont get mad a slush, get mad at the refs. It just seems like Artosis is trying to play his "im Artosis" card, and get Slush to concede the match, yet Slush did NOT think he was dead yet. AND THE REFS SAID TO REMATCH~~~ That is KEY to this situation, if the refs said Artosis won, Slush would of dropped it, but since they decided to rematch, Its not Slush's fault he went with what they said. Hes not going to simply roll over because hes playing Artosis. | ||
|
zerglingsfolife
United States1694 Posts
On May 09 2010 16:05 dacthehork wrote: you are assuming Slush thought he had lost, he hadn't GGed yet, also it seems the ADMINS of the tournament agreed and gave him a re game. Huk vs Idra Game 3 of gosucoaching, there was a point where HuK took off from his base to attack Idra, this attack would have worked easily. If he dropped at the point the army was en route, and was awarded the win because his army would easily have crushed the 10 lings, it would be a mistake. On the way to attack he kept moving back and forth and did not take advantage of the window and lost. Having an advantage, and being able to win if you A move into the enemy base is not enough criteria for (he would 100% win). If so he better A move right then and there. The thing is the players DO NOT have 100% information, you are assuming the players make 0 mistakes which HAPPEN. Yes 10 zealots will beat 8 zealots. UNLESS mistakes happen, micro miracles, etc. These do happen a lot, people blow leads, people come back with hidden expos. If you don't believe in this stuff simply have the admins call the game and get rid of the GG system. Even in MMA, if a fighter who is winning knees the opponent (something illegal). They sometimes call the fight and award a win to a participant who really had barely any chance of winning. See Bones Jones vs Matt Hamill This whole idea of judges deciding who wins should be AVOIDED at all costs, unless it seems the loser is abusing DCs to get free wins. You should really watch the replay. TL already said there was 0% chance Slush could have won, I don't know who you are trying to argue with. People are hating on Slush cause he refused to look at any replays during this hour break and his "reasons" that he gave to support his claim or chance are ridiculous | ||
|
Disastorm
United States922 Posts
| ||
|
Shatter
United States1401 Posts
| ||
|
cartoon]x
United States606 Posts
The issue has nothing to do with Artosis's prestige in the community, it has to do with fairness.. so stop bringing up things that are irrelevant. This kind of thing happens in sports occassionally.. there was this one year where a fan grabbed a baseball out of the mit of an outfielder and the play was ruled a homerun, where it would of been an out. That decided the game and the winning team went to the world series | ||
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
On May 09 2010 16:20 cartoon]x wrote: Why didn't Slush refuse to continue in the tournament and admit defeat? That would of been the right thing to do. Artosis is a good player so I hope to see a showmatch of him .. Because the admins of the tournament also agreed he deserved a regame. Artosis is the one who DCed. In a tournament it is up the admins, that is their job, to decide what happens. I can look back on some decisions I made during TST cups, such as DQing Catz for DCing in multiple games, or deciding regame in a close but advantageous situation where the player DCed. There is NO responsibility on the players to make admin decisions. Artosis had DCed earlier in the tournament too, it is just a risk he has to accept if his computer is unstable. It's unfair to take away other players chances/ability to stage comebacks imo. It should almost never be decided by judges, unless it is a clear losing player that DCs. If he had such a sure advantage then why is he not destroying Slush and making him GG? | ||
|
Wargizmo
1237 Posts
On May 09 2010 16:16 Disastorm wrote: LOL when MSL got Power Outage when Jaedong was ahead, everyone was complaining there was no rematch. Now this game gets a d/c when Artosis is ahead and everyone is complaining that there WAS a rematch. wtf man? Two different matches in two different games in two different tournaments, probably neither of which you've seen the replays for. | ||
|
cartoon]x
United States606 Posts
On May 09 2010 16:26 dacthehork wrote: Because the admins of the tournament also agreed he deserved a regame. Artosis is the one who DCed. In a tournament it is up the admins, that is their job, to decide what happens. I can look back on some decisions I made during TST cups, such as DQing Catz for DCing in multiple games, or deciding regame in a close but advantageous situation where the player DCed. There is NO responsibility on the players to make admin decisions. Artosis had DCed earlier in the tournament too, it is just a risk he has to accept if his computer is unstable. It's unfair to take away other players chances/ability to stage comebacks imo. It should almost never be decided by judges, unless it is a clear losing player that DCs. If he had such a sure advantage then why is he not destroying Slush and making him GG? There may be no bureaucratic responsibility on Slush to concede, but I know if I had clearly lost a game and the opponent D/C'd I would drop out of the tournament. Good players know when a game is lost, and I know Slush knew he had no chance of coming back. | ||
| ||
