|
On December 22 2010 18:28 BurningSera wrote:
rofl. is this about idra said he can never win a prized tourney lol
this is pathetic. and the person who said match fixing is fine, imagine that you are the no.1 high school student in your country but you wont get into the college/course you want because all the rich kids are 'fixed' to get those positions.
Yea , thank god its not happening now ... oh wait
|
On December 22 2010 18:27 decemberscalm wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 18:25 Whiladan wrote:On December 22 2010 18:21 decemberscalm wrote:On December 22 2010 18:16 Whiladan wrote:On December 22 2010 18:13 decemberscalm wrote:On December 22 2010 18:08 Whiladan wrote:On December 22 2010 18:03 decemberscalm wrote:On December 22 2010 17:53 Askesis wrote:On December 22 2010 17:32 decemberscalm wrote:On December 22 2010 17:28 Whiladan wrote:
[quote]
The only difference is one involves winnings from a third-party taking bets, and the other involves winnings from the tournament itself. The distinction isn't really noteworthy; neither have any place between honorable players of any competition
I love how RIGHT after your post is an example of a competition where it is deemed acceptable. It depends on the tournament. The tournament organizers could have just as easily sayed "Yeah, ok, you two DID win against your opponents, you can just click the surrender button, its your match." But in all seriousness, the tournament would most likely count on the higher tier prizes being advertisement and bait for bigger names while still minimizing the cost of the tournament by having lower actual prize money. Except that post RIGHT after his is talking about an entirely different situation. Chopping a prize pool heads up = fine (in poker, or in SC). Colluding to get a "frequent-winner" prize = not fine (in poker, or in SC) I was commenting on the sweeping generalization that was made "The only difference is one involves winnings from a third-party taking bets, and the other involves winnings from the tournament itself. The distinction isn't really noteworthy; neither have any place between honorable players of any competition" This is simply wrong. I would defiantly call the horse races honorable competition, in which case third parties ARE taking bets. That is all. The spring of arguments about why it is isn't entirely unethical to set matches is there for a reason. It depends on the rules. Consider the following: You realize you could make alot more money by forfeiting your matches against your buddy when they arise. Is it unethical to ask the tourney admins if this is allowed? Yeah, you misunderstand what you are quoting. Winnings gained by competitors through clever and/or unlawful usage of third parties taking bets. I.e. SaviOr scandal. NOT the mere act of betting through a third party. EDIT: Scenario: Hey, I bet on you just now. I'll throw the match and we'll split the winnings. NOT OKAY Scenario: Hey, I bet this guy is gonna win! $100 on him. OKAY Still, clearly sweeping generalizations. If I made the same format for this tournament and allowed team-mates to forfeit matches against their team mates, all of a sudden it becomes ethical!!! WOW! This is what happens when you apply objectivism to such a complex topic. Honorable competition is following the rules. As far as I am aware and anyone in this thread knows, Morrow and co have not broached the rules. Sure, if it clearly states in the rules that team mates (Morrow=Mouz, Sjow=Dignitas fyi) may forfeit matches against one another, that is one thing. But that is an entirely different situation and can't be applied at all. Also, I would hardly call anything you have said in this thread objective. Thats the point. People are putting objectivist views like fixing matches is always bad when there could be a tournament format that is ok with it. As far as we know they went to the admin and asked if they would be allowed to do it. The admin said no. The counter situation highlights that the admin could have just as easily said yes to promote people forming teams. Yes, you are right. It is possible that in some alternate dimension, this would be OK because the only difference between our universe and the other is that match fixing is allowed. I fail to see how this is relevant at all to our universe however, where match fixing is not allowed. This isn't some alternate universe. These are tournaments where team mates are allowed to share prize pools.
And yet here is where it is different:
Those rules do not apply to this tournament.
Morrow and Sjow are not team mates.
The prize pool is not fixed, it is intended to increase upon consistent performance, therefore it is immoral to increase it through illegitimate or otherwise unintended means rather than good performance (this is why EG members are not allowed to compete for the MSI notebook if they win Master's Cup).
|
Losing on purpose in a tournament in order to get better prizes is cheating. There's no justifying it.
|
BW fixing was hardcore stuff, implying betting from a 3rd party. That's not just wrong - it's a crime.
|
On December 22 2010 18:24 Askesis wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 18:03 decemberscalm wrote:On December 22 2010 17:53 Askesis wrote:On December 22 2010 17:32 decemberscalm wrote:On December 22 2010 17:28 Whiladan wrote: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 only difference is one involves winnings from a third-party taking bets, and the other involves winnings from the tournament itself. The distinction isn't really noteworthy; neither have any place between honorable players of any competition I love how RIGHT after your post is an example of a competition where it is deemed acceptable. It depends on the tournament. The tournament organizers could have just as easily sayed "Yeah, ok, you two DID win against your opponents, you can just click the surrender button, its your match." But in all seriousness, the tournament would most likely count on the higher tier prizes being advertisement and bait for bigger names while still minimizing the cost of the tournament by having lower actual prize money. Except that post RIGHT after his is talking about an entirely different situation. Chopping a prize pool heads up = fine (in poker, or in SC). Colluding to get a "frequent-winner" prize = not fine (in poker, or in SC) I was commenting on the sweeping generalization that was made "The only difference is one involves winnings from a third-party taking bets, and the other involves winnings from the tournament itself. The distinction isn't really noteworthy; neither have any place between honorable players of any competition" This is simply wrong. I would defiantly call the horse races honorable competition, in which case third parties ARE taking bets. That is all. The spring of arguments about why it is isn't entirely unethical to set matches is there for a reason. It depends on the rules. Consider the following: You realize you could make alot more money by forfeiting your matches against your buddy when they arise. Is it unethical to ask the tourney admins if this is allowed? No, it's not unethical to ask. However, take into account the facts of this scenario. There is a $6k Grand Prize given out to one person if he happens to dominate and win 11/18 tournaments. This is far from a guaranteed prize, and I would argue very unlikely to happen legitimately. Two players see this, and get the idea that they could guarantee winning that prize by colluding their matches against each other. At this point, there would be nothing unethical about them asking permission to do this. However, how can any rational person think there is any chance that the tournament would allow this? It's not just match-fixing, but fixing matches in order to win a prize that is not likely to be won by anybody. Perhaps I am wrong, but I picture Sjow and Morrow as intelligent individuals. I see them as knowing they were planning on fixing matches, and I would like to believe that they would know that if they asked if they were allowed to rig the tournament in order to win that special prize, they would not be allowed to do so. Perhaps they are just morons and actually thought what they were doing was ok and would be granted permission to do it from the tournament, but I give their intelligence more credit than that. Of course, we don't have the actual facts, and all we have are these little tidbits of information. And from the information I have put together, I feel it's much more likely that the tournament staff caught wind of what they were planning to do and asked about it, rather than them taking the initiative to go and ask the tournament if that was acceptable.
Well condemning people based off of theory crafting is never a good idea. I agree with what you say entirely. I am just skeptical at all the flak they are throwing when people don't know the facts for sure.
The one thing I disagree with is the likley hood of asking tournament organizers if they are allowed to forfeit matches against friends. In a small tournament like this they might not have anywhere near the extensive rules out. Plus, if you see a tournament structure for prizes like this, wouldn't you at least ask if it was possible to increase the prize pool by having a buddy do well too?
|
You guys honestly think SC2 eSport can survive with such blantant disregard for the viewers and the rest of the players? How many people would actually want to watch then?
Match fixing is never "okay" no matter, it undermines the whole competition, it becomes a farce. If the viewers arent here, then neither are the sponsors and that means you aint getting paid.
just out of the goodness of his heart so his friend would get a nice rig...Would that be ok?
I cannot believe you are even suggesting this, try to think of the actual product, the tournament they want to host, it becomes a gigantic joke as soon as someone does this.
What do you think would happen if someone did some match fixing in the NBA, UEFA or any other real sport? Fines, suspensions, scandals, and yet in eSport we should accept it becuase the guy has a golden heart?
Unbelieveable that there are people who want to defend it
|
On December 22 2010 18:24 Askesis wrote:
No, it's not unethical to ask. However, take into account the facts of this scenario. There is a $6k Grand Prize given out to one person if he happens to dominate and win 11/18 tournaments.
Do you have link to this?
After reading Sjows post the prize doesn't sound right to me, but I'll believe it if I see it.
|
On December 22 2010 18:20 TheBanana wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 17:51 Blondinbengt wrote:
Personally, I'm not going to take this seriously until the tournament itself releases some kind of statement saying that matchfixing did indeed occur. That will be quite hard seeing the tournament has not yet been played.
My bad, thought it started yesterday. But it's still doesn't change what I said really, I'm not going to take this seriously until some evidence of them actually matchfixing appears.
|
On December 22 2010 18:22 Impervious wrote:
If both work as hard as they can for the prize, in the process they prevent eachother from getting said prize.
It's a fucking ridiculous setup. How do you not see that?
It's the exact opposite of what is needed to spark competition..... And it's not the same to any sporting match where one team is able to improve their situation by winning while the other has nothing to win or lose..... It's not even close.....
What the hell?
If both work as hard as they can they improve their own chances of winning the prize. That is it. Its an individual competition. And clearly its meant to be very difficult to win the computer (possibly designed so the most likely outcome is no one gets it). Cheating to game the system at the LAN centre isn't cool. Even merely discussing the possibility of colluding is something people with low morals would do.
Its impossible to know whether or not they "asked" the LAN centre before/after it blew up into an issue, but having one of them withdraw from the tournament further solidifies their poor decision making here.
Also Sjow admitted he knows what they planned would be wrong if it was for a bigger tournament. Well newsflash, cheating or planning to cheat is still wrong regardless of the size of the tourney. Could be for $1 could be the GSL. Still scummy thing to do.
|
On December 22 2010 18:28 BurningSera wrote:
rofl. is this about idra said he can never win a prized tourney lol
this is pathetic. and the person who said match fixing is fine, imagine that you are the no.1 high school student in your country but you wont get into the college/course you want because all the rich kids are 'fixed' to get those positions.
Yeah right the college example is exactly the same thing  )...
So if your friend gets into college and you dont make it and you are 1st one below the admission line.. So then your friend says "Hey man im gonna give up my spot so you can get in cuz i got in 2 colleges anyways.."
Is that cheating?
|
It's hardly the same thing. Fixing matches in a tournament affects the other players as well. Your buddy giving you his spot for college- that involves only the two of you.
|
If there is any decent players there, morrow and sjow wont make it to the finals very often anyways .
|
I'm really surprised about the number of people thinking collission is allright in any form, regardless of the tournament format.
Collission is cheating and it doesn't matter if you're doing it to players, the audience or the tournament organisation. The idea is to play your best to win, not to fix matches to make more money than not fixing matches would bring you.
Even more surprised by the reaction of Sjow who sounds like he really doesn't see what's wrong with this and thinks it's allright because of the format!? Is he really that ignorant?
In my opinion this thread shows E-sports has a lot of growing up to do. Post a story like this on a poker form and there wouldn't even be a discussion about the fact whether collission is a form of cheating cause it's so blatantly obvious to people playing for money all the time.
|
On December 22 2010 18:28 BurningSera wrote:
rofl. is this about idra said he can never win a prized tourney lol
this is pathetic. and the person who said match fixing is fine, imagine that you are the no.1 high school student in your country but you wont get into the college/course you want because all the rich kids are 'fixed' to get those positions.
more like you're a below average high school student that can't get into college anyways, and is angry that the two smartest students decided to let one of them have a guarantied way into the best college that's otherwise uncertain for both of them. if you're gonna make analogies, at least think beforehand. "rofl"
|
On December 22 2010 18:09 VdH wrote:
On December 22 2010 18:06 Kimaker wrote:
This has clearly been blown out of proportion, but at the same time, come on now, spirit of competition should come first. Honor your own play, and that of those you face by always playing to your highest potential.
Honor tends to be a fool's tool nowadays in all aspects of life...
Yeah...I was afraid of that.
|
The organizers provide an incentive to do things like this
The only problem I see is that Morrow and SjoW shouldn't be stupid enough to talk about it in the open. But no one can really blame them for doing what is rational.
Here's the small change that supposedly changes everything:
- The prize money goes to the player that has won the most tournaments (and there is no increment in prize money if you win a certain number of tournaments).
What would be the result? They would probably just have agreed to share the prize pool. Or, they would never have agreed on anything. Basically, the organizers have brought this on themselves.
|
On December 22 2010 18:35 VdH wrote:
It's hardly the same thing. Fixing matches in a tournament affects the other players as well. Your buddy giving you his spot for college- that involves only the two of you.
It doesnt involve other players , because there wouldnt be any other players , because only morrow and sjow would be in finals . They arent blackmainling other player to quit turnament or something .
Only victim would be turnament organizers , who made this stupid system for this turnament .
|
This is pretty shady.... not sure what to think of Morrow now.
and LOL at my stream's low quality, they can't read what I'm typing.
|
Yes...foolish organizers thinking all the players would be fair about playing in such an exploitable format.
|
On December 22 2010 18:33 TheBanana wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2010 18:24 Askesis wrote:
No, it's not unethical to ask. However, take into account the facts of this scenario. There is a $6k Grand Prize given out to one person if he happens to dominate and win 11/18 tournaments.
Do you have link to this? After reading Sjows post the prize doesn't sound right to me, but I'll believe it if I see it.
I don't have a link from where the actual information was pulled from (probably the link in the OP?), but here's a quote from the OP
Swedish internet café holds 18 nightly events during the winter holidays. The prize payouts increase in an 11-step scale the more of the tournaments one single player wins, with the 11th win awarding a computer worth $6000.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
