|
On September 02 2011 09:14 soullogik wrote:
i understand why they might do this but in the end, people put money up to create better games. any sort of dealing goes against us as viewers and should be looked upon as match fixing.
Why is it match fixing? You are basically looking on them for one of the most dastardly things one can commit in a sport because they are deal making to lock up equity to help pay their bills. This is obviously ridiculous, especially since this behavior has been standard in poker tournaments for ages. To call someone who made a deal a "match fixer" is a horrible way to construe some of these guys. The title is still the title. People still don't remember second place. Advertising and sponsorships still like publicity.
|
|
|
Someone should make a team-house where all practice games have a mandatory 10 dollar bet. If a practice game isn't for money the gamers won't even try.
|
On September 02 2011 09:12 ReignFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 09:07 HoldenR wrote:On September 02 2011 09:00 ReignFayth wrote:
how anyone can mix up match fixing and deal making completely baffles me How a "pro" can defend the concept of throwing games completely baffles me. You are extremely biased as a player. It is up to the spectators to decide whether this is matchmaking or not, not you. And let's face it, considering TT1 threw the game, it meets the very definition of matchmaking in this case. I think it should be handled on a case by case basis. This is obviously a case of blatant match fixing. Deal with it. dude players are usually both spectators and players, you see different players competing all the time, other pros watch them and NONE of them give a shit if they split the prize and let's assume TT1 threw 1 game, it wouldn't even be matchmaking, they didn't agree that TT1 would throw a game, he just decided to be a moron about it, I'm also assuming this wasn't a BO1 final, so people seem to have put aside the other games played, maybe this 1 base carrier build had worked previously
It doesn't matter if you're a spectator too. The fact that this could happen to you in person means you are heavily biased in favor. Sorry, no go.
And really, assume? He basically admitted it. That is matchmaking. Matchmaking is the process of deciding a match between two competitors before it happens, which this obviously did because there is no way he would go with that build if he hadn't made the agreement. And honestly, a pro defending this behavior by saying that a 1base carrier build "worked previously" honestly goes to show why your opinion isn't valid for this. Keep this practice in poker if you want, I could not give less of a damn. Do not bring it here.
|
On September 02 2011 09:12 Jinsho wrote:
This is absolutely legal, perfectly fine, and will absolutely never be proven or punished.
Tell that to the Super Smash Bros. players.
|
I think it's pretty sad, what's the point of having a final game if this goes on? Maybe tournaments should have equal prize money for the players who reach the final so the playing field becomes level again.
Isn't that what people want? Winners to be decided based on skill at the game, isn't that why so many people bang on about balance? This prize money splitting is just another complication that effects the way players play. Of course some people will try their best, but if you think 2 players will try the best every time when the prize money has already been decided then I think that's pretty naive.
I hope it's not as common as TT1 suggests.
|
On September 02 2011 09:09 zeru wrote:
Throwing games/Match fixing/Making deals: Wrong/Lame
Not splitting the money after making a deal/match fixing: Shady, but also serves the other person wrong for wanting/agreeing to match fix.
Bringing the subject up right when Fenix starts to shine and gets on the team with the best players in the world: Extreme jealousy.
jesus christ, deal making is NOT match fixing
|
On September 02 2011 09:00 ReignFayth wrote:
how anyone can mix up match fixing and deal making completely baffles me
You can blame TT1 for that one, the community only learned about deal making from him and he used as an example a game that he basically threw away (unless we believe 1-base carrier is a viable strategy). So that's an unfortunately association...
I don't think deal making is a bad thing, despite my visceral reaction to it. It's not much different than BW anyways where the teams took the majority of the prize winning and the players relied on salary (which was based in part on performance, so it seems to even out anyways).
I know the ST and Prime coach mentioned that Rainbow and MKP kept their teams afloat with their prize winnings in the early days of SC2, so it's not like players keep all the money anyways (not quite the same thing I know).
A lot of players actually complain about the GSL prize split (and presumably at other tournys too), so it doesn't surprise me that some of them would take it into their own hands.
If players keep their competitive spirit (which I believe most will, like MVP apologizing for not even letting his friend MKP get a win in GSL January), then deal-making actually makes for better games as it removes financial pressure/nerves from the equation.
|
On September 02 2011 09:14 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 08:47 IShowUMagic wrote:
Oh yeah, and any rule against it is completely unenforceable, so there's that. By 'unenforceable', do you mean won't hold up in Court or simply impossible to prove ? Because I can assure you that if entrants to a tournament contract to abide by tournament rules, and within those rules, this behavior is outlawed, the tourney can disqualify the players involved and no money paid to them. As far as proving it, if somebody (anyone with knowledge) opens their mouth about it, that can lead to proof.
If they do this after the fact, what you gonna do about it? You can't make someone sign a contract that forbids him from giving money to someone else sometime in the future.
God I shouldnt even argue this~
|
I don't think that it would harm the viewing experience. There are other driving forces like pride and fame (albeit weaker than money) that would still make every pro-gamer want to win in the finals of a big tournament. Additionally, the fame of winning a big final results indirectly to more money coming from better contracts and sponsorships.
Furthermore, I believe that the share of a final's winnings is a considerable amount of money for many pro-gamers, which would actually allow them to finance their lives from their gaming career, allowing them to dedicate more time to playing.
|
Two people can have a predetermined outcome and still put on a good show. There's a multimillion dollar industry based around this concept: professional wrestling. So I don't think it dilutes the spectator sport aspect. If the players choose not to put on a good show, they will lose fans, which means they'll lose money longterm.
However, the problem lies in gambling. I make a not-insignificant part of my living by betting on mixed martial arts. Like in SC2, mixed martial artists have teams (called camps or gyms), and occasionally they'll have to fight a teammate. If I've placed a bet on one of those fighters under the assumption that they will be fight to their full potential and follow the rules of the sport, I don't want back room deals taking place.
Now, I don't bet on SC2. It's too volatile at this point. I'm not even sure if I could bet on SC2 if I wanted. But in the future, if organizations want to include betting in their tournament structures, they will have to make sure that this sort of thing doesn't happen. The best way to do that is to create an environment for more competitive teams to be created, limiting the chance that teammates will meet.
tl;dr not that big of a deal until gambling is becomes a part of the scene.
|
|
|
On September 02 2011 09:16 HoldenR wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 09:12 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 09:07 HoldenR wrote:On September 02 2011 09:00 ReignFayth wrote:
how anyone can mix up match fixing and deal making completely baffles me How a "pro" can defend the concept of throwing games completely baffles me. You are extremely biased as a player. It is up to the spectators to decide whether this is matchmaking or not, not you. And let's face it, considering TT1 threw the game, it meets the very definition of matchmaking in this case. I think it should be handled on a case by case basis. This is obviously a case of blatant match fixing. Deal with it. dude players are usually both spectators and players, you see different players competing all the time, other pros watch them and NONE of them give a shit if they split the prize and let's assume TT1 threw 1 game, it wouldn't even be matchmaking, they didn't agree that TT1 would throw a game, he just decided to be a moron about it, I'm also assuming this wasn't a BO1 final, so people seem to have put aside the other games played, maybe this 1 base carrier build had worked previously It doesn't matter if you're a spectator too. The fact that this could happen to you in person means you are heavily biased in favor. Sorry, no go. And really, assume? He basically admitted it. That is matchmaking. Matchmaking is the process of deciding a match between two competitors before it happens, which this obviously did because there is no way he would go with that build if he hadn't made the agreement. And honestly, a pro defending this behavior by saying that a 1base carrier build "worked previously" honestly goes to show why your opinion isn't valid for this. Keep this practice in poker if you want, I could not give less of a damn. Do not bring it here.
no they haven't decided on the games, they decided to split the money period.
what happened then is TT1 decided to do a stupid strategy that may or may not have worked
you're mixing things up
|
On September 02 2011 09:17 insaneMicro wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 09:14 Kaitlin wrote:On September 02 2011 08:47 IShowUMagic wrote:
Oh yeah, and any rule against it is completely unenforceable, so there's that. By 'unenforceable', do you mean won't hold up in Court or simply impossible to prove ? Because I can assure you that if entrants to a tournament contract to abide by tournament rules, and within those rules, this behavior is outlawed, the tourney can disqualify the players involved and no money paid to them. As far as proving it, if somebody (anyone with knowledge) opens their mouth about it, that can lead to proof. If they do this after the fact, what you gonna do about it? You can't make someone sign a contract that forbids him from giving money to someone else sometime in the future. God I shouldnt even argue this~
There wouldn't be an issue then. It's like the difference between manslaughter and murder. It's all intent. And you have to prove it.
|
On September 02 2011 09:07 HoldenR wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 09:00 ReignFayth wrote:
how anyone can mix up match fixing and deal making completely baffles me How a "pro" can defend the concept of throwing games completely baffles me. You are extremely biased as a player. It is up to the spectators to decide whether this is matchmaking or not, not you. And let's face it, considering TT1 threw the game, it meets the very definition of matchmaking in this case. I think it should be handled on a case by case basis. This is obviously a case of blatant match fixing. Deal with it.
Be baffled no longer. The use of the word "pro" is quite loose in this context.
Can anyone confirm or post a link to whatever rules players agree to for tournaments, such as MLG ?
|
It's telling that despite all of this community's pretensions about e-sports, any time a comparison is to be made it's to poker.
|
There is no way to prevent it from happening, so it doesn't matter really.
|
On September 02 2011 09:16 Full.tilt wrote:
I think it's pretty sad, what's the point of having a final game if this goes on? Maybe tournaments should have equal prize money for the players who reach the final so the playing field becomes level again.
Isn't that what people want? Winners to be decided based on skill at the game, isn't that why so many people bang on about balance? This prize money splitting is just another complication that effects the way players play. Of course some people will try their best, but if you think 2 players will try the best every time when the prize money has already been decided then I think that's pretty naive.
I hope it's not as common as TT1 suggests.
it feels like someone just told you santa claus doesn't exist lol
|
1st place: $1,000,000
2nd place: 0
You have a 50% chance of winning. Do you split?
|
This is absurd. There's nothing wrong with prize-splitting agreements. For the sake of this (retarded) discussion, however, let's expand things a little bit.
Instead of two players, how about six? Would you say it's wrong for an entire team/clan to enter a tournament, with the agreement that all prize money won goes to the clan as a whole? It would actually be pretty smart for smaller organizations without top-tier players, because the chances of any individual winning big is slim, but when you consider that any ONE may just be "hot" that day/weekend...
To my understanding, that's already how some Korean teams work (to a much more limited degree), where players have to give a percentage of their tournament winnings to the team. I could be wrong, but I seem to recall that coming up during the EG/Puma thing.
Whatever. Like Fayth has already said, there's a lot more on the line than just the prize money - Wins bring attention, fans, and sponsors. And, of course, you have to take into account ego and a competitive drive - If you think anyone can compete in ANYTHING for a living without a huge competitive drive, and wanting to WIN, than you're just absurd. Every single pro player wants to WIN when they enter a tournament, no matter how much money is on the line. Prize splitting is not going to change that, although it may make them more willing to throw out a "goofy" strategy for entertainment value. But then, pro players have been known to do that anyway - How many times now has HuK mothership rushed in a tournament..?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
