|
I think we should have separate brackets for nondrugged players and players taking ritalin.
Even more interestingly, we should have a bracket without drugs, then rematches with the same players of every match-up and see how the results differ. How wonderful it'd be...I wonder what sorts of variables we'd have to measure. APM for sure, but that's spammable. Amount of time supply blocked is good, harvester production rate...
If this experiment were ever to be carried out (it probably won't sadly), we could really observe the effects of such drugs in a tournament, Starcraft II setting. Although the previously mentioned article does a good job of elucidating the effects of stimulants, it only applies to counterstrike, which arguably requires less multitasking and "focus" than Starcraft II.
|
I don't really care if its a prescription or not. If it's a prescription and you start having big money, that prescription aint so hard to get after all. At the end of the day if any league enforces it..their leagues their rules, deal with it. Its not discrimination when its an organization doing as they please. Its not a public organization.
|
I believe mind also took some drugs to help him focus in the finals against  Bisu a long time ago(read it in interview)
|
What do you expect them to do in online tournaments? Theres no way to test against that.
|
This is something I'm very much against. I know someone who's mentioned playing Sc2 with Adderal (but long story short he's still in Bronze so I don't think the drug does anything lol). Honestly, I think that the drug takes your edge off because it is very possible to be over energetic, making mistakes you wouldn't normally (misclicking, using bad judgment based on hyper analysis).
Play the game straight, play it right, and you'll get more respect. E-sports should serve as a good example for ethics!
|
As long as the drug itself is legal to purchase and use, i have no problems with it. Player should have the freedom to choose and if the drug has harmful sideeffects, it their choice. If you start restricting concentration drugs(which are legal) - how far will you go? Will you also start restricting sodas that players drink that contain caffeine or other energy drinks which are also arguably harmful to the body. What about a player who needs to smoke before a big match to carm his nerves?
|
On April 07 2011 01:26 AlBundy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 01:22 MichaelJLowell wrote:On April 07 2011 00:27 AlBundy wrote:On April 07 2011 00:14 underdawg wrote:On April 07 2011 00:11 AlBundy wrote:
First of all, when it comes to performance enhancing drugs, comparing REAL sports to esports is reallllllllllllllllly silly, for obvious reasons.
Sure, drugs might play a big role in games that require specific skill sets, such as Quake Live. But I don't think that performance enhancing drugs in starcraft 2 are game-changing. I mean, firstly it's all about strategy. Secondly it's not like you have to sustain 400 apm for 4 hours.
So unless someone somehow manages to process Sun Tzu's brain into small pills, I'm not worried. it would probably help a player a lot in maintaining marathon training sessions, not necessarily on the stage. and mechanics plays a lot in sc2, come on. even pros get supply blocked a lot, it's not like everyone's macro is perfect. So how come these players are at pro level, even though they make this kind of mistakes ??? I'll tell you: it's because mechanics play a lesser role overall and are much more forgiving. Strategy and tactics are the key to victory. That's why you can definitely play at pro level with 150 apm and unsound mechanics. I won't name any players but just take a look at some of the TSL3 players... edit; also I agree about the marathon training sessions Or maybe the player base isn't half as good at Starcraft II as they want to believe they are? I feel you on this point. People talk about the "volatile" aspect of Sc2, I'd say that the players' skill is certainly a major factor. Unfortunately this might be a bit off-topic, but overall you are right; current "top" players are definitely nowhere near the skill ceiling.
Eh, was the post that caught my attention. When players have been playing Starcraft II for four and five years, then people can talk about whether the skill cap has been reached.
On April 07 2011 01:37 underdawg wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 01:22 MichaelJLowell wrote:On April 07 2011 00:27 AlBundy wrote:On April 07 2011 00:14 underdawg wrote:On April 07 2011 00:11 AlBundy wrote:
First of all, when it comes to performance enhancing drugs, comparing REAL sports to esports is reallllllllllllllllly silly, for obvious reasons.
Sure, drugs might play a big role in games that require specific skill sets, such as Quake Live. But I don't think that performance enhancing drugs in starcraft 2 are game-changing. I mean, firstly it's all about strategy. Secondly it's not like you have to sustain 400 apm for 4 hours.
So unless someone somehow manages to process Sun Tzu's brain into small pills, I'm not worried. it would probably help a player a lot in maintaining marathon training sessions, not necessarily on the stage. and mechanics plays a lot in sc2, come on. even pros get supply blocked a lot, it's not like everyone's macro is perfect. So how come these players are at pro level, even though they make this kind of mistakes ??? I'll tell you: it's because mechanics play a lesser role overall and are much more forgiving. Strategy and tactics are the key to victory. That's why you can definitely play at pro level with 150 apm and unsound mechanics. I won't name any players but just take a look at some of the TSL3 players... edit; also I agree about the marathon training sessions Or maybe the player base isn't half as good at Starcraft II as they want to believe they are? hardly any pros will get supply blocked for no reason. most pros only get supply blocked for more than a second or two when there is other stuff going on on the map. and sometimes godly micro is indeed more important than a slight supply block.
I was addressing the post on the basis of its claim that mechanics currently don't play the same impact because the skill level isn't as high as it was towards the end of Brood War. Different mechanics, different game, new learning period. The strategy element of Brood War was much easier to get a competent hand around than mechanics, but competent decision-making is currently more important at that level of play. That's why strategy can propel sloppy mechanics to victory. Or something like that.
|
flodeskum explain why the USA has more ADHD prescriptions than the rest of the world put together? People self-diagnosing from places like wikipedia, going to the doctor and getting meds based on simply requesting them happens a lot more than you are suggesting. You speak to Americans people online, literally everyone knows someone on Adderall or has some experience with it. Here in the UK i know of one person total, a child, who is prescribed an ADHD drug. Everyone elses experience is with illicit amphetamines.
ADHD is probably real.. but every case of it? Far from it. Far far from it. People who genuinely have it can't think straight because their thoughts are racing so fast from subject to subject they literally CANNOT focus. This isn't the case for most of the people being prescribed meds for it though. Its just, 'Oh i have trouble studying' and bam there you go. Well who doesn't have trouble?
|
As other people have said already it's kind of impossible to ban performance enhancers from organized gaming tournaments, at least in the US and other countries where they can be obtained easily.
I myself have taken adderall and played Starcraft, and i found that it gave me amazing focus and boosted my apm by a bit (about 130-140 as opposed to 110-120). However it didn't really make me better at the game per se, just more determined.
Similiarly i just can't ladder without drinking coffee first. It just gives me an edge. I think if we take measures to ban performance enhancers then we're going to run into a lot of trouble and scandal because at major tournaments adderall/caffeine doping are almost universal.
|
On April 07 2011 01:51 flodeskum wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 01:39 Yukizilla wrote:
To add on to some of the things other people have said, regarding the GSL and Adderall usage-
In South Korea (and other Asian countries, Japan in particular) ADD and ADHD are NOT recognized as legitimate conditions; failure to focus on tasks and other symptoms commonly associated with these two conditions are just seen as parenting failure.
As such, as other users have noted, Adderall is illegal to possess or import in these countries, prescription or not, particularly because they're not going to honor a prescription for what they think is a made-up illness.
IMO, whether or not the drugs help significantly with SC2 performance or not is inconsequential in the face of the general illegality of the substance in South Korea. The part in bold is incorrect. Korea and indeed every fucking half-developed country in the world recognizes the DSM-IV. They do have different treatment methods but they sure as hell don't think it is a 'made-up illness'.
Way to ignore the point. Even conceding that the diagnosis is legitimate and that there are alternate treatment methods, Adderall itself is still an illegal substance in that country, much like the possession of crack cocaine is in the US. Yes, there are ways to get it, but there's no legal or legitimate reason for you to have it for competitive SC/SC2 in South Korea.
Also, since you are someone who denotes their country as Iceland, I believe that since most of Europe uses the ICD 10, not the DSM-IV, that statistically you would know that the DSM-IV qualifies something like 4 times the amount of cases for ADHD than the ICD 10 (which is, by the by, what South Korea officially recognizes, albeit modified). Please also read up on the social construct theory of ADHD.
Above paragraph still completely moot in the face of Adderall is not legal in South Korea, period. It's not just about the time and money it would take to test all the players, but please also consider the amount of trouble the leagues and teams would get in from the actual gov't for not at least attempting to monitor such drug abuse.
|
On April 07 2011 01:36 chonkyfire wrote:
Are there people actually trying to say amphetamine wouldn't make you play better?
Have you ever taken speed before? My guess is no. If I was a SC2 progamer, I sure he hell would be taking amphetamine in every tournament I played it. If your job is to win, why not take 20 mg of adderall? It will help you immensely.
Yes i've taken loads of it, and i do mean loads, and no i don't agree it doesn't make you play any better. You'll certainly think you are while you're playing though.
|
I think a major difference people are making with performance enhancing drugs, is that in starcraft, taking amphetamine based drugs will not instantly make you a better player, nor are they required to become a good player. In some sports, such as 100m or weightlifting, to win you pretty much have to cycle a steroid at some point in your career. Substances such as ephedrine or other amphetamine based drugs are legal in training, because the effects are minimal and limited. Starcraft players who take them on the other hand are only playing at their best. If I suddenly go 1gate expand in PvP, taking drugs is not going to help me hold the inevitable 4gate.
|
Well think about it this way.. in baseball / football / almost any other sport there are cheaters.. there are people who do Steroids I mean we aren't dumb there are people that take some type of drug to help them... Now with this there will be people taking drugs for gaming to make them play better, I can remember in CounterStrike 1.6 the fact was if I smoked a lil weed before I played, I played better I played almost unstoppable that is when CPL said well we are going to "drug" test people before they can play in the CPL. From what I know it was never enforced.. But The fact is we cant stop it.. I am sure someone is already doing it.. just to get an edge up i am sure of it. We cant stop that person... So it really donst matter.
|
On April 06 2011 23:57 ghostsquall wrote:
I personally can vouch for the fact that if you don't personally have ADHD and take adderall, you will become better at ANY game you are playing. I think whoever is denying this fact just doesn't want to un-legitimize some of the players- but look at HuK, in his interview at MLG you can see in his eyes he was clearly on something and isn't it kind of odd that in the GSL WC he was pretty damn bad and didn't seem focused at all? I think he might not have had what he needed...
BUT, I'm not trying to offend or make him look bad. I just think it would be very disappointing to find out the top players were doing this, because people like me that want to go pro don't do these things, and if the best people are, there will be no way to compete with them.
Holy wow dude....You claim to be able to see the pupil to iris ratio in HuKs eyes in his various interviews.
That alone just doesn't work sir, sorry. Also, you use his games vs MVP which he even explains in one of his interviews. He was scared of MVP as most people would be, didn't push in when he normally would cause it was MVP and metal blocks got in the way.
You and people like you, quick to judgement on 0 facts, only "feelings", and very vocal about how "bad" players are if they lose a single game or series. YOU are the cancer that is ruining this wonderful place.
Just leave.
|
usual TL response...
these kinds of drugs are pretty common and used by a wide variety of people. nothing to be on guard about. it doesnt effect mental capacity or skill. sorry brahz
|
I'm not against it if someone who doesn't like his testicles wants to show us some dope gameplay. But, we can't expect every single player to give up on their testicles just for the sake of equality. So, this is absolutely no. Still, they can do it outside tournaments if they want.
|
On April 07 2011 02:38 Djagulingu wrote:
I'm not against it if someone who doesn't like his testicles wants to show us some dope gameplay. But, we can't expect every single player to give up on their testicles just for the sake of equality. So, this is absolutely no. Still, they can do it outside tournaments if they want.
the thousands of dollars are definitely not incentive, its clearly just showing "dope gameplay" that people would dope for.
|
I'm curious as to why the GSL is mentioned in the OP, when TT1 has twice come out in this thread to clarify that it isn't the case. What's the deal? To garner more attention, or is TT1 backtracking?
Edit: not only mentioned, but underlined...
|
On April 06 2011 10:22 Mr. Nefarious wrote:
If it's prescribed to me, I'm taking it. The day MLG, GSL etc. are allowed to ban prescriptions is the day these organizations get sued for discrimination against the disabled. It's too bad your outlook on medication is limited to abuse, however I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of these players are not "doping" but rather following their doctors instructions. The idea that no player could possibly need Adderral outside the game is as foolish as it is shortsighted. Those that are prescribed Adderral are done so with the assumption and idea that it will put them on the same level of concentration as those that are lucky enough to be born with perfect genes.
+1 to this. from someone who needs and takes ritalin, and would not be able to function like a normal person without it. I guess it does sound bad that players take it at tourneys when they don't actually need it though.
|
On April 07 2011 02:11 infinity2k9 wrote:
flodeskum explain why the USA has more ADHD prescriptions than the rest of the world put together? People self-diagnosing from places like wikipedia, going to the doctor and getting meds based on simply requesting them happens a lot more than you are suggesting. You speak to Americans people online, literally everyone knows someone on Adderall or has some experience with it. Here in the UK i know of one person total, a child, who is prescribed an ADHD drug. Everyone elses experience is with illicit amphetamines.
ADHD is probably real.. but every case of it? Far from it. Far far from it. People who genuinely have it can't think straight because their thoughts are racing so fast from subject to subject they literally CANNOT focus. This isn't the case for most of the people being prescribed meds for it though. Its just, 'Oh i have trouble studying' and bam there you go. Well who doesn't have trouble?
I'd love for you to give me a source on the parts in bold.
It's well known that ADHD was (and probably still is) overdiagnosed in the US. Made possible by their unique health care system and their powerful drug industry. This doesn't affect the validity of the disorder in the slightest.
On April 07 2011 02:17 Yukizilla wrote:Way to ignore the point. Even conceding that the diagnosis is legitimate and that there are alternate treatment methods, Adderall itself is still an illegal substance in that country, much like the possession of crack cocaine is in the US. Yes, there are ways to get it, but there's no legal or legitimate reason for you to have it for competitive SC/SC2 in South Korea.
I only addressed the part in bold, I thought that much was clear when I said "The part in bold is incorrect".
And let's be honest here. The part in bold was not only incorrect but inflammatory bullshit.
Also, since you are someone who denotes their country as Iceland, I believe that since most of Europe uses the ICD 10, not the DSM-IV, that statistically you would know that the DSM-IV qualifies something like 4 times the amount of cases for ADHD than the ICD 10 (which is, by the by, what South Korea officially recognizes, albeit modified). Please also read up on the social construct theory of ADHD.
Above paragraph still completely moot in the face of Adderall is not legal in South Korea, period. It's not just about the time and money it would take to test all the players, but please also consider the amount of trouble the leagues and teams would get in from the actual gov't for not at least attempting to monitor such drug abuse.
You do realize that recognition of the DSM-IV and the ICD 10 are not mutually exclusive? For the actual practice of diagnosis sure, but the actual recognition certainly isn't.
And since I have a phd in psychology I'm simply more familiar with the DSM.
Please also read up on the social construct theory of ADHD.
I'm well aware of that theory. In fact, I'd love to hear what you think of it and why.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
