|
Let's ban stork for actively trying to come second in his wcg group a while back.
Stuff like this is never fun but it's bound to happen with this kind of a tournament setup, it's not even a 3rd party giving them the opportunity, it's the damn tournament itself.
It's exactly like someone said earlier: Imagine gsl finals where a 4-0 (comp) nets a total of 100k prizemoney to the two contenders but a 4-3 merely 35k (3.5/10 comp*), do you really think you wouldn't at least get tempted and explore some options? Here the final conclusion is as if they found a clause where if one playerforfeits the match the winner get's 90k (comp 9/10 times*) and decided that was good enough.
...and people need to remember the clause:
Innocent until proven guilty
Since if that were not needed you could basically condemn everyone since "well they might have".
*comp chances are best when both participate as the same player, less when only one competes but still way better than if both do and the comp becomes an unlikely prospect.
|
On a more general note I can understand the frustration. It's not like sc2-players have a union that can help out or call a strike if tournament organizers etc are unfair.
That said they should have realized that this way of doing it wrong.
On a separate note, what kind of weird tournament is this where the quality of players is so low so that sjow and morrow, albeit good of course, believes that they will make the finals, both of them, in most of 18 tournaments?
|
We missed something, SjoWs reaction when the news got up.
* [17:39] <+dignitasSjoW> vi ska samarbeta på IO
* [17:39] <+dignitasSjoW> jag o morrow
* [17:39] <+dignitasSjoW> och dom här bögarna börjar whina
Translated:
* [17:39] <+dignitasSjoW>We're gonna cooperate on IO
* [17:39] <+dignitasSjoW> me and morrow
* [17:39] <+dignitasSjoW> And these fags starts to whine
Just sayin'.
|
On December 22 2010 17:33 freeto wrote:
i just honestly dont see why we care.
one of them is basically guaranteed to win the prize anyway, because theyre the 2 best players, so its not ruining anyone elses chances of winning
and the final isnt streamed or even in front of an audience so theyre not cheating any viewers out of good games
Some people are going to care because it shows the type of person the players are. From the look of things these two are in for the money rather than competition. It's like a slippery slope that could lead to match fixing. It all starts with greed overshadowing the spirit of competition.
|
I once fixed a whack a mole contest in amusement park so my 4 year old niece would win a cuddly teddy bear.
Should I be guillotined?
Get a perspective on the size and outlay of the tournament.
|
On December 22 2010 17:40 TheBanana wrote:
I once fixed a whack a mole contest in amusement park so my 4 year old niece would win a cuddly teddy bear.
Should I be guillotined?
Get a perspective on the size and outlay of the tournament.
If you are willing to do that then you might be willing to go bigger next time (when coupled with your other posts here). Shame on you...
|
On December 22 2010 17:34 JoeSchmoe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 17:25 decemberscalm wrote:On December 22 2010 17:19 CanucksJC wrote:
Meanwhile in Korea,
Savior: Hey Luxury, I betted $1,000 on you to lose tonight, so you should throw away the game.
Luxury: Only if I get half share.
Savior: Ok, deal.
Now this,
SjoW: Hey Morrow, one of us gets a computer if we fix matches, so let's do it.
Morrow: Only if you throw the games and I get computer.
SjoW: Ok, pay me back later.
What's so different? I don't even understand how some people are actually defending these assholes. Competition is a competition, and they tried to fix it, now everyone knows, so they drop the plan. Pathetic. Thats an entirely different scenario. No outside gambling is taking place. They even asked the admins about it. As far as we know they weren't caught, but rather they asked. The silly format of the tournament promotes this. Too lazy to find the post, but someone remarked on how the tournament format would be like the GSL only rewarding players who 4-0'ed their opponents. Thats utter ridiculousness. And SERIOUSLY, chill until you know if they were going to secretively do it, everything seems just like speculation right now. The important factor is knowing if they were going to do it WITHOUT asking the tournament admins first. Otherwise thats seriously just players asking if they can make the ridiculous prize format less ridiculous. the whole point is if you want e-sports to grow, this type of negativity needs to be kept at a minimal regardless of the "severity" of the action involved. one person does it, people start getting ideas like oh what don't I do it too? Of course the argument goes back "well this scenario is completely different, it's not THAT big of a deal", blah blah but the point is if you don't do this, the problem and this whole mess and the endless arguing would not exist in the first place. (eg this thread)
You just cant have such broad strokes for everything. There is absolutely a huge difference between something like this and what Savior did. Different tournament formats will change the nature of the game and how it should play out. Some can encourage team play, others dont. We dont even know if they did anything wrong yet until we get a detailed account of what exactly happened.
|
mountain out of a mole hill comes to mind...
|
On December 22 2010 17:29 Boblion wrote:
It reminds me of poker tourneys, when finalists agree to split the prizes.
I have seen that in Sc2 too. DeMuslim and SarenS off racing each other ( i think it was a Go4Sc2 but i'm not sure ).
Except, this wasn't "splitting prizes" that those two players are eligible for at the point. It was colluding to reach a prize they probably not have reached without the collusion.
To put it in poker terms, think of FullTilt's Daily Double tournaments. If you don't know what that is, all you need to know is that it's two tournaments that start at the same time, and if you happen to win them both, you get a huge bonus prize on top of the prize pools in each tournament. So if you win the first tournament, and reach the final two in the second one, and have your opponent intentionally lose to you (giving you the huge bonus) for a portion of that bonus.
If the final two players chop what's left in the prize pool, that's fine. If two players collude in order to get a bonus prize that they are not eligible for, then that's not fine. And that is what was trying to be done here.
|
If they both reach the finals legally I dont give a fuck if the other one is forfeiting for the others cause.
|
On December 22 2010 17:30 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 17:26 Impervious wrote:On December 22 2010 17:15 -Archangel- wrote:On December 22 2010 16:50 garbanzo wrote:On December 22 2010 16:34 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
I wish people would read, and then in addition to reading try to understand what they read...
I'm very glad that Sjow came in here to clear up what actually ended up happening, and my opinion of neither player has been lowered.
If anything, I think this is a result of the cafe being greedy and putting on an event which discourages competition between the best players. If they were evenly matched, and they split the tournaments 9-9, then neither would get the large prize, but if one of them forfeited only 2 or the finals of the tournaments, then one could actually attain the large prize.
The cafe put up a very good prize with the expectation that no one would realistically be able to win it. I actually find that worse than what Morrow and Sjow were planning. They simply wanted to draw more people into their cafe, make more money, and then keep the prize.
It's really a very stupid format. It's like if for the GSL you won 100,000$ if you 5-0ed your opponent in the finals, but it would be split 2,000$ and 1,000$ if you did anything else... I'm all for the competitiveness of eSports and the spirit of competition, but at the end of the day it's professional gaming. They need to make money, hence the word professional. If anything, I think this reflects a need for more tournaments, sponsors, and larger prize pools, so progamers can actually make money and not need to find ways to maximize profit from the small amount of tournaments available. Assuming that the following assumptions are true: 1) you have to win 11/18 tournaments to get the "grand prize", 2) players have to pay to play in the tournament, 3) there are no spectators, then what you're saying is exactly correct. What they were planning is cheating, but they are cheating the house. They're not cheating you, the community or other players. They're just trying to beat the house. It's exactly cheating in the same way that card counting in blackjack at a casino is cheating. The house just wanted their money. The tournament structure ensures that if two equally skilled players competed then neither will win the grand prize and the house becomes richer. This is not the type of environment to develop healthy competition. Sjow and MorroW just wanted to game the system that was biased to begin with. I think they made the right decision by only having one of them compete in the end. + Show Spoiler +Of course I'm hoping that they realize this is the case and know the difference between this and other competition. Key difference lies in the 3 assumptions above. Wtf? So you are saying it is OK to cheat the house? Any tournament has rules, if you do not like those rules do not join the tournament (of if those rules break some law report them). By this statement of yours I would guess you also do not want to pay taxes as that is ONLY cheating the "house"?! They have more to gain by working together than by playing against eachother. If they are playing for the reward at the end, and they would actually make more by working together, then it's a poorly setup system..... Tbh, I don't see anything wrong with it - it's kinda like how many types of auto-racing near the end of the season will often work..... One teammate purposely does worse than he could have done, so the other can maximize his points, as well as doing better in the constructors championships, and hopefully move up the standings/secure a better position; and as a whole, the team does better than they would have otherwise. It's just a poorly designed prize system. If it was "you have to win the most tournaments to get the "grand prize"" instead, then yes, there would be a problem with them working together, because there is no real benefit of it. All they seem to be doing is taking advantage of some clever marketing scheme designed to prevent the "grand prize" from being won. When part of your motivation to take part in the tournament is the money you'd make from it, they're definitely making the right choice. Your rationalization is all cool and well but it is still cheating. It is because of this way of thinking corruption is present in all parts of life. Get your head straight before you grow up and move to a real world or you might end up caught with your hand in a cookie jar and end up doing time.
What the hell are they playing for then? What the fuck is the point of holding a competition, where it would actually be better for them to work together?
Seriously. When you play a sport like Football, or Hockey, or whatever, the big fucking prize is that trophy you get for first. And the recognition for being first. Among other things. Most "sports" are about that final, deciding game. This tourney structure doesn't even have that. It's pretty fucking clever marketing, that's all. It's dangling a prize above the players, but they don't want to give it away.
I can't even articulate how fucking dumb the tourney setup is. I'm glad they at least tried to get the best result possible.
|
Way to take everything out of context and blow it out of proportion OP.
|
Also, why do you invite people to a tournament knowing theyre so much better than anyone else?
Ok, it's fun to watch them play. But expect them to be 100% sure to win the prize.
These 2 guys are so sure of winning that they share the prize even before they started playing. I'd do the same if i were as skilled.
|
On December 22 2010 17:40 TheBanana wrote:
I once fixed a whack a mole contest in amusement park so my 4 year old niece would win a cuddly teddy bear.
Should I be guillotined?
Get a perspective on the size and outlay of the tournament.
Ok.
They were trying to scam a prize worth six thousand dollars.
Now that that's cleared up, what's the verdict?
|
I'll give White-Ra a call,
he will settle this 
|
On December 22 2010 17:19 CanucksJC wrote:
What's so different? I don't even understand how some people are actually defending these assholes. Competition is a competition, and they tried to fix it, now everyone knows, so they drop the plan. Pathetic.
This. It's not so much the "actual" attempt of match-fixing that worries me, but the huge pile of completely stupid posts that try to justify it.
If a sponsor says "I give a grandprize only to the person who wins 11 out of 18 tournaments", then an agreement between two players that one should intentionally lose is nothing else but (attempted; in this case) fraud. Why the hell does everybody think the sponsor is "supposed" to give away the computer to match-fixers? That's certainly not how it was intended.
In athletic sports there are often grand prizes for those who win many events in a season or in a row - obviously it could get the athletes banned from the scene if they were caught fixing this stuff.
Perfect way to drive away sponsors from e-sports, why the hell would anybody sponsor anything like that? The fact that apparently half of teamliquid thinks this is ok anyways because it is not streamed (WTF?) is disgusting.
|
On December 22 2010 17:46 Askesis wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 17:40 TheBanana wrote:
I once fixed a whack a mole contest in amusement park so my 4 year old niece would win a cuddly teddy bear.
Should I be guillotined?
Get a perspective on the size and outlay of the tournament. Ok. They were trying to scam a prize worth six thousand dollars. Now that that's cleared up, what's the verdict?
Scam? You don't know that. All we know is that they wanted to be able to get a bigger prize by having one player pre lose matches to the other in order to gain more monies. Its cheating if they kept it under wraps and actually went through with it without asking permission. Its not if they asked the admin about it first to see if they could. COMPLETELY different. We dont know which one of those it is yet.
|
Tournament hosts should avoid making formats that reward matchfixing. This incident was only discovered due to carelessness from the players, so I'm not very hopeful about being able to enforce rules against match fixing. We just have to accept that team mates and friends will not always bring their A game to a match. I would say the offense itself is about at the same magnitude as the ladder abuses in the TSL. They both involve gaming a bad system.
|
On December 22 2010 17:44 Impervious wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 17:30 -Archangel- wrote:On December 22 2010 17:26 Impervious wrote:On December 22 2010 17:15 -Archangel- wrote:On December 22 2010 16:50 garbanzo wrote:On December 22 2010 16:34 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
I wish people would read, and then in addition to reading try to understand what they read...
I'm very glad that Sjow came in here to clear up what actually ended up happening, and my opinion of neither player has been lowered.
If anything, I think this is a result of the cafe being greedy and putting on an event which discourages competition between the best players. If they were evenly matched, and they split the tournaments 9-9, then neither would get the large prize, but if one of them forfeited only 2 or the finals of the tournaments, then one could actually attain the large prize.
The cafe put up a very good prize with the expectation that no one would realistically be able to win it. I actually find that worse than what Morrow and Sjow were planning. They simply wanted to draw more people into their cafe, make more money, and then keep the prize.
It's really a very stupid format. It's like if for the GSL you won 100,000$ if you 5-0ed your opponent in the finals, but it would be split 2,000$ and 1,000$ if you did anything else... I'm all for the competitiveness of eSports and the spirit of competition, but at the end of the day it's professional gaming. They need to make money, hence the word professional. If anything, I think this reflects a need for more tournaments, sponsors, and larger prize pools, so progamers can actually make money and not need to find ways to maximize profit from the small amount of tournaments available. Assuming that the following assumptions are true: 1) you have to win 11/18 tournaments to get the "grand prize", 2) players have to pay to play in the tournament, 3) there are no spectators, then what you're saying is exactly correct. What they were planning is cheating, but they are cheating the house. They're not cheating you, the community or other players. They're just trying to beat the house. It's exactly cheating in the same way that card counting in blackjack at a casino is cheating. The house just wanted their money. The tournament structure ensures that if two equally skilled players competed then neither will win the grand prize and the house becomes richer. This is not the type of environment to develop healthy competition. Sjow and MorroW just wanted to game the system that was biased to begin with. I think they made the right decision by only having one of them compete in the end. + Show Spoiler +Of course I'm hoping that they realize this is the case and know the difference between this and other competition. Key difference lies in the 3 assumptions above. Wtf? So you are saying it is OK to cheat the house? Any tournament has rules, if you do not like those rules do not join the tournament (of if those rules break some law report them). By this statement of yours I would guess you also do not want to pay taxes as that is ONLY cheating the "house"?! They have more to gain by working together than by playing against eachother. If they are playing for the reward at the end, and they would actually make more by working together, then it's a poorly setup system..... Tbh, I don't see anything wrong with it - it's kinda like how many types of auto-racing near the end of the season will often work..... One teammate purposely does worse than he could have done, so the other can maximize his points, as well as doing better in the constructors championships, and hopefully move up the standings/secure a better position; and as a whole, the team does better than they would have otherwise. It's just a poorly designed prize system. If it was "you have to win the most tournaments to get the "grand prize"" instead, then yes, there would be a problem with them working together, because there is no real benefit of it. All they seem to be doing is taking advantage of some clever marketing scheme designed to prevent the "grand prize" from being won. When part of your motivation to take part in the tournament is the money you'd make from it, they're definitely making the right choice. Your rationalization is all cool and well but it is still cheating. It is because of this way of thinking corruption is present in all parts of life. Get your head straight before you grow up and move to a real world or you might end up caught with your hand in a cookie jar and end up doing time. What the hell are they playing for then? What the fuck is the point of holding a competition, where it would actually be better for them to work together? Seriously. When you play a sport like Football, or Hockey, or whatever, the big fucking prize is that trophy you get for first. And the recognition for being first. Among other things. Most "sports" are about that final, deciding game. This tourney structure doesn't even have that. It's pretty fucking clever marketing, that's all. It's dangling a prize above the players, but they don't want to give it away. I can't even articulate how fucking dumb the tourney setup is. I'm glad they at least tried to get the best result possible.
Seriously man. Just stop. Learn morals. Ask you parents or your teachers. It is not too late.
|
I don't understand what people are still arguing about, the only thing that would be of any interest to know (atleast for me) is if they approached admins before the tournament/finals and asked if their ''plan'' was allowed or if they tried to sneak it by and failed, which seems unlikely considering they weren't banned from the tournament (atleast from what I've understood).
If they were open about it with the tournament admins I really don't see what people are going crazy about, if they weren't then the tournament will ban them and I would assume maybe future tournaments aswell.
Making a thread implying that they have been caught matchfixing without providing actual evidence that they did doesn't seem fair to Sjow and Morrow to be honest.
Personally, I'm not going to take this seriously until the tournament itself releases some kind of statement saying that matchfixing did indeed occur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
