EPTMorrow and Sjow Matchfixing? - Page 34
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Telcontar
United Kingdom16710 Posts
| ||
|
Askesis
216 Posts
On December 22 2010 22:10 Cor Aut Mors wrote: they dont feel like they were doing anything wrong, imo the only reason they vaguely tried to hide it is cause they knew idiots would go on self righteous rants concerning a non-issue the jobs of these players is to maximize their profits through their profession they tried to think of the optimal way of doing this, questioned the officials as to the legality of the theoretical situation, then acted according to the answer there was no matchfixing, when told it was an illegal move one of them stepped out of the tournament as it would be pointless to spend his work time in a profitless endeavor the only reason the officials themselves are condemning the players is to give rise to the scandal, gain approval in the community, and gain a ton of free publicity I doubt they were originally going to punish the players for asking a question How do you have so much inside information on this situation? How do you you know exactly what happened, how they and the tournament staff got in contact about this situation, and the opinions of the players and the tournament staff? | ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
On December 22 2010 22:07 sleepingdog wrote: This thread really brings out the worst out of people Again to everybody out there: This is NOT....repeat this is NOT about splitting up the prize-money of a SINGLE event. The tournament host decided to give away a computer in case somebody manages to win 11 times out of 18. The tournament host OWNS the frickin computer it is his choice to either give it away or not. Now he decided to give it to a person who manages to WIN 11 tournaments. It's not like the winner of a single event gets 10 grand the loser nothing and both decide to split it up. It's amazing how people manage to not understand this very simple thing. Civilized societies have a word for this: fraud. Huh? Worst out of people? If the tournament system is so incredibly stupid that one person needs to win multiple tournaments, and even with a half-half split no one wins anything, it makes perfect sense that when both you and your friend make it to the finals, you'll let the same person win every time. I don't think there's anything wrong with that(assuming no coverage), and it wouldn't be a big deal in most other competitive games. SC scene just overreacts to this stuff, to me it's perfectly logical. | ||
|
TotalBiscuit
United Kingdom5437 Posts
This kind of bullshit harms the reputation of eSports and sets the cause of getting it taken seriously by sponsors, spectators and the world as a whole back. This same thing happened at the i41 finals. The two finalists agreed to split the pot, went random, played lazy games because there was no competitive drive there and made a mockery of the tournament. They did this for £5000, a larger prize than this laptop. The fact that there was not more of a stink thrown about it is ridiculous. There is a reason prizes are tiered, to ensure there is a strong incentive to play to the best of your ability in order to win the larger prize. If you are not willing to play in the spirit of the tournament, do not play at all. I personally find this behaviour extremely distasteful and harmful to the scene as a whole. The fact that people are siding with the players on this issue rather than the sponsors just goes to show how little people really understand about the synergy between sponsors and players, required to create a successful eSports scene. The behaviour of both players is deplorable, particularly in the language they used, it is embarrassing. It is good that one of them stepped out of the tournament but the fact that some people don't see the problem with this behaviour is mindboggling and shows a fairly clear bias towards the players, which has no rational basis. | ||
|
Cor Aut Mors
United States6 Posts
I don't get it. So basically, if Morrow lost to Sjow, he wouldn't get the PC. That's why Sjow isn't participating? What would Sjow lose if he won the tourney lol ? Or did Morrow 'pay' Sjow with his other prizes so Sjow wouldn't participate? basically, if they both play, neither can win if one plays, he will win big and if neither plays, no one wins again the basic prisoners dilemma so they tried to think of a way around it, so that both can profit and compete, were told no so sjowe just left, knowing it wouldnt profit him to play with morrow competing and now both are being flamed for it | ||
|
genai
Croatia78 Posts
On December 22 2010 22:06 Sewi wrote: Do you really think that? Would be interesting to know if any major tournament like MLG, IEM, GSL has something like "no matchfixing allowed" written in their rules. Seriously, it is just disrespectful to do something like that. And imo it is kinda obvious that matchfixing is NOT allowed at ANY tournament. yet it is in many other games, sports and tournaments? how is it so obviosly not allowed in sc? sure i understand if you are nr1 for sure, and if you lose your friend will be nr2 and you will both go thru the group, and some 3rd guy wont have a chance to go thru... but if my friend beat some guy, i beat some guy, we meet knockout phase, why cant i forfeit the game at MY OWN expanse to help some other player? if the tournament dragged on and i dont have time, i can forfeit and let someone go thru AT MY own expanse and clearly within the rules! how and why is that bad? i just dont get it... is there some higher unwritten god given rule where you are not allowed to do something that wont hurt anyone but yourself, and will actually help someone else??? and plz dont say i will hurt sponsors and tournament organisers, cause its just not thru... they created and allowed me to do so by putting themselves into lose-lose situation! if i go within the rules and let someone else win, they lose because they have to give the computer... yet if i decide not to participate, because participating will only hurt myself and my friend, they lose one big name in the tournament! its not profesionals duty to satisfy organisers and sponsors... they will usualy do whats best for them and within the rules! its on organiser to make sure to make rules that put both them and pro into win-win situation, so pros will come and organiers will profit from that, not to make rules to either turn away pros or lose more money on prizes and for pro is either lose money on prize or not play at all... retarded organisers and retarded people who blame pros for trying to be pro and maximise their gain in legal way | ||
|
sleepingdog
Austria6145 Posts
On December 22 2010 22:18 Shikyo wrote: Huh? Worst out of people? If the tournament system is so incredibly stupid that one person needs to win multiple tournaments, it makes perfect sense that when both you and your friend make it to the finals, you'll let the same person win every time. I don't think there's anything wrong with that(assuming no coverage), and it wouldn't be a big deal in most other competitive games. SC scene just overreacts to this stuff, to me it's perfectly logical. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAAF_Golden_League#Jackpot_winners Now go ahead and call the IAAF "incredibly stupid" for making a system where one person that wins multiple events gets a special jackpot. Would be perfectly ok if the best athletes agreed to let one win all the events and split up the big pot afterwards, wouldn't it? | ||
|
ParasitJonte
Sweden1768 Posts
On December 22 2010 21:53 hypercube wrote: It is different. Actually, it's so different that if you don't see it yourself it's impossible to explain the difference. Mostly because the implication is that you don't want to see it. Don't know what that is meant to imply. But I don't care about these two players at all. I mean, I have no bias toward them; I don't know them or anything. This is just my opinion. They're still colluding, cooperating, helping eachother in order to maximize their profits. They're just doing it using a kind of loophole. And there are several such loopholes that could be used. The other one being that one player only plays in 7 tournaments and leave the rest to the other player. That would actually be the best idea because then they would get all the other prizes as well. Now they will just get a computer. If you can't put the difference into words then why should I listen to you? | ||
|
aristarchus
United States652 Posts
On December 22 2010 22:10 noD wrote: The title and op is misleading, that is why people that generally don´t read anything are raging It should be something like 'Morrow and Sjow agreed with forfeiting their matches so they split prizes' Who's the one who doesn't read anything? They aren't splitting a prize they would collectively win anyway. They're talking about fixing things so that they can get a special bonus prize that the tournament only wanted to give out if someone was able to beat everyone else consistently. They also aren't forfeiting. The fact that they're worried about whether what they're saying can be read on the stream makes it pretty clear that they weren't going to be upfront and refuse to play the games - they were just going to pretend the same person always won. The thread title is totally accurate. | ||
|
IcyPringle
Canada210 Posts
Fixed games/free wins in BW. Why should SC2 be any different? I feel ashamed by both these players actions no matter the reason or "excuses" they have. Fixing anything, for any reason no matter the benefit, is wrong and should no be tolerated at all. lol at Morrow not turning off his stream...guess hes hurting for views or something... | ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
On December 22 2010 22:20 sleepingdog wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAAF_Golden_League#Jackpot_winners Now go ahead and call the IAAF "incredibly stupid" for making a system where one person that wins multiple events gets a special jackpot. Would be perfectly ok if the best athletes agreed to let one win all the events and split up the big pot afterwards, wouldn't it? No, because there's coverage. I think I covered this... If there's some sort of coverage you can't do these kinds of things for obvious reasons. If there is a stream or something similiar of the tournament, then feel free to ignore all my posts because coverage makes it so that you shouldn't do these kind of things. | ||
|
Cor Aut Mors
United States6 Posts
How do you have so much inside information on this situation? How do you you know exactly what happened, how they and the tournament staff got in contact about this situation, and the opinions of the players and the tournament staff? your right I dont and some is specualtion but is has been stated on here earlier that the players did approach the officials prior to the tournament regarding their plan and, we were shown that sjowe did not see anything wrong with what they were trying to do and that, originally, on WoW the official of the tournament didnt completely disregard the idea and didnt call for immediate banishment ya the feelings of each are specualtions by me, but based on the information given, it seems pretty accurate | ||
|
Zim23
United States1681 Posts
| ||
|
Lobotomist
United States1541 Posts
| ||
|
sleepingdog
Austria6145 Posts
On December 22 2010 22:23 Shikyo wrote: No, because there's coverage. I think I covered this... If there's some sort of coverage you can't do these kinds of things for obvious reasons. If there is a stream or something similiar of the tournament, then feel free to ignore all my posts because coverage makes it so that you shouldn't do these kind of things. This is ridiculous. Why on earth do you think are you "allowed" to scam a sponsor just because nobody watches? It's the money of the tournament host/sponsor (his frickin property), he can decide how he wants to give it away, or if at all. If he wants to make absurd rules, fine, it's his money, he can do whatever he wants with it. If he states that the special jackpot goes to the player who wins most games by 6-pooling, it's his damn right. You, on the other hand, are not forced to participate if you don't like it. Audience has nothing to do with this...like...at all. | ||
|
LittLeD
Sweden7973 Posts
This is not good people, not good... | ||
|
DND_Enkil
Sweden598 Posts
the only reason the officials themselves are condemning the players is to give rise to the scandal, gain approval in the community, and gain a ton of free publicity I doubt they were originally going to punish the players for asking a question Just want to point out that as far as i know the officials have not in any way condemed they players. The owner Budak made a statement that matchfixing was not allowed and players doing it would get banned when asked about it by Rakaka.se but he did not say anything at all about MoRRoW os Sjow. More like he was clarifying the rules for everyone. | ||
|
Askesis
216 Posts
On December 22 2010 22:18 TotalBiscuit wrote: I'm going to leave one post on this and one alone. This kind of bullshit harms the reputation of eSports and sets the cause of getting it taken seriously by sponsors, spectators and the world as a whole back. This same thing happened at the i41 finals. The two finalists agreed to split the pot, went random, played lazy games because there was no competitive drive there and made a mockery of the tournament. They did this for £5000, a larger prize than this laptop. The fact that there was not more of a stink thrown about it is ridiculous. There is a reason prizes are tiered, to ensure there is a strong incentive to play to the best of your ability in order to win the larger prize. If you are not willing to play in the spirit of the tournament, do not play at all. I personally find this behaviour extremely distasteful and harmful to the scene as a whole. The fact that people are siding with the players on this issue rather than the sponsors just goes to show how little people really understand about the synergy between sponsors and players, required to create a successful eSports scene. The behaviour of both players is deplorable, particularly in the language they used, it is embarrassing. It is good that one of them stepped out of the tournament but the fact that some people don't see the problem with this behaviour is mindboggling and shows a fairly clear bias towards the players, which has no rational basis. Well put. The thing that really gets to me is how so many of the people in the thread are siding with the players. Perhaps it's just the early sample size, but the proportion is alarming so far. | ||
|
Cor Aut Mors
United States6 Posts
Just want to point out that as far as i know the officials have not in any way condemed they players. The owner Budak made a statement that matchfixing was not allowed and players doing it would get banned when asked about it by Rakaka.se but he did not say anything at all about MoRRoW os Sjow. More like he was clarifying the rules for everyone. mmkay im wrong about that, jumped the gun a little | ||
|
VoirDire
Sweden1923 Posts
On December 22 2010 22:26 DND_Enkil wrote: Just want to point out that as far as i know the officials have not in any way condemed they players. The owner Budak made a statement that matchfixing was not allowed and players doing it would get banned when asked about it by Rakaka.se but he did not say anything at all about MoRRoW os Sjow. More like he was clarifying the rules for everyone. Rakaka.se interpreted Budaks statement with: Sjorrow-gate! They may get banned for life. EXTRA! Sjorrow-gate is condemned by Anton Budak. | ||
| ||
