|
On September 02 2011 11:11 Kaitlin wrote:
If players are willing to "make deals", and the winner of the match doesn't matter, as long as they "play their best", what's to stand in the way of earning some side cash by throwing (as a heavily favored player) a match so some gambler and win a bunch of bets and give the player a cut ? If the discrepancy of the prize pool is taken out of the equation, and it's only the "fame" or whatever from winning vs. losing, then why not throw the games for even more cash ?
Because taking money to intentionally lose is match fixing, and you will get your ass banned permanently for doing it. >.>
It's an entirely different animal than splitting the winnings and playing your best game.
|
On September 02 2011 11:15 MyNameWuzBoB wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 11:11 Kaitlin wrote:
If players are willing to "make deals", and the winner of the match doesn't matter, as long as they "play their best", what's to stand in the way of earning some side cash by throwing (as a heavily favored player) a match so some gambler and win a bunch of bets and give the player a cut ? If the discrepancy of the prize pool is taken out of the equation, and it's only the "fame" or whatever from winning vs. losing, then why not throw the games for even more cash ? Can't see too many big gamblers interested in Starcraft, just for the reasons you stated alone. Too prone to rigging.
Don't we have professional gamblers (although I guess poker isn't gambling ? ) playing SC2 professionally, and even posting in this very thread ? Hmm, insider gamblers ... This whole "deal making" idea is looking full of integrity.
|
heres how i feel about it
the problem becomes when so much money is made from the industry that the competitors can dealmake to the point where there is no competition and everythings just a showmatch. a extreme example of this is WWE.
i do however recognize the truth that there certainly isnt enough money being made from pro sc2 scene to compare to the WWE, and i recognize that this dealmaking problem most likely only occurs in tournament finals and nowhere else.
GSL finals have a great aura of being the most competitive BOX possible in a long time.
GSL finals have the highest ratings because people tune in to expect the highest level of competition
if two players in the GSL finals are not truly fighting for that grand prize it loses alot of its importance. A player truly isnt trying his hardest to win.
I think a great solution to this problem would be to make hidden match deals a bannable offense from leagues on that leagues own rules but only make it a 5month ban or something imo but the leagues can decide their own rules
thats only for hidden match deals
in the end, its a leagues job to run their league in a way that garners the most fans and viewers. as such this is really a job for the league owners to work out and decide what they feel is the best way to handle it
with that said, heres a good idea imo
i believe tournaments should be run normally to the finals, but once the finals are reached if the two finalists are friends they should simply be public about it and say we are going to do a match deal with our money if the split isnt changed.
next the tournament can make a deal with the finalists to pay them 60-40 or 65-35 split winnings or whatever the finalists feel is their desired percentage split (higher going to the winner).
This way the teammates have the tournament officially splitting the money in a way they feel truly can produce a competitive finals and the audience can be told before the finals start "these 2 players have agreed to do a 60-40 split because they are friends". this can be told to the audience DIRECTLY before the finals start which means someone who planned to watch the finals probably wont be able to make different plans for the night and will probably just keep watching the finals even if he doesnt like the split.
Also this will add a bit of suspense and probably cause more viewers to tune in so they can find out asap whether or not the finalists are doing a split or not (it will cause some drama and drama brings viewers)
Also because both players set the split to what they thought was fair, as long as its not 50-50 they both try to win and with the system a player couldnt lie and say "sure ill split with you" then actually try to win and win and take all the money for himself
Also, i think it would be very very very very rare for two friends to actually agree on a 50-50 split. If anything they will probably want it at 60-40. And BOTH members must agree to the split. If one finalist has a change of heart before the finals and he decides he doesnt want to agree to a split, then the other finalist just has to deal with it and the first/second prize money will be unchanged and it will be announced before the finals there is no split occurring.
Heck, i think this split system before a finals would actually be beneficial to tournaments, fans, and the players. it would generate more viewers because of the suspense added to a finals "will there be a split? will there not be a split?"
it would let the players be able to split as they desire but because its only announced at the last second, it makes the fans not care about it but at least they still know about it
its good for the players because they can decide which split they think is fair
and its good for fans because were not in the dark and it does provide a but of a suspense/entertainment element
also i just realized something at how different sc2 is from a super big sport like basketball / NBA. in the NBA finals the prize money doesnt matter, the only thing the players care about is the glory and winning the finals.
its funny how in sc2, the finals are important for a player because of glory and getting his paycheck
in the NBA, the finals are only important to a player for the glory. they dont care about getting money from it.
however i guess its also true if a player wins plenty NBA finals he will most likely get more sponsorship deals and bigger paychecks for his skill
|
On September 02 2011 11:20 epikAnglory wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 11:19 Medrea wrote:On September 02 2011 11:16 epikAnglory wrote:
Lmao if both players agree then the finalists must fucking suck so bad to the point where they are not confident of winning. I doubt this crap is for friendly matches and environment, just both players are insecure in winning.
I couldn't care less if it was illegal or not, but if this is what SC2 finalists are doing then I am disappointed. Gamble $5000? Excuse me what that is what a tournament is for, you reward the better player, AKA the championship of the tournament, not the finalists. Sorry but this is a competitive environment and if you feel insecure about "gambling", please get out of the professional competition scene. Gambling is different. When it affects the play of the players. We have a problem. When players get involved, it breaks the game entirely. Look at baseball. Baseball nearly died to match fixing because gamblers got a hold of that sport. I was quoting the OP of gambling, if you noticed the quotation marks it shows I don't agree with that term as well.
I know, I thought I'd maybe add to it. it was a good point!
|
On September 02 2011 11:21 OlorinTheWise wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 11:11 Kaitlin wrote:
If players are willing to "make deals", and the winner of the match doesn't matter, as long as they "play their best", what's to stand in the way of earning some side cash by throwing (as a heavily favored player) a match so some gambler and win a bunch of bets and give the player a cut ? If the discrepancy of the prize pool is taken out of the equation, and it's only the "fame" or whatever from winning vs. losing, then why not throw the games for even more cash ? Because taking money to intentionally lose is match fixing, and you will get your ass banned permanently for doing it. >.> It's an entirely different animal than splitting the winnings and playing your best game.
Players have been banned from MLG for "deal making".
|
On September 02 2011 11:13 Airship wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 11:02 billyX333 wrote:On September 02 2011 10:57 DonKey_ wrote:On September 02 2011 10:55 billyX333 wrote:On September 02 2011 10:51 Airship wrote:On September 02 2011 10:50 billyX333 wrote:On September 02 2011 10:49 Airship wrote:On September 02 2011 10:47 billyX333 wrote:
I kind of understand the fear that it will hurt the stakes and hype of the tournament finals, but I disagree.
I've got a question for those who are against this, do you think cash prizes would help basketball or football sporting events? I don't think so. Part of the appeal of college sports is that we can be sure most of them are doing it for the passion for competition because they are amateurs who aren't getting paid salaries. I'd get significantly more emotional for the guy who is tearing up on the main stage because he finally gets a major championship title rather than a sick pay check.
Also, from what I understand, players like huk and idra make significantly more money from salaries than they do from tournament winnings. The value of a championship is not in the prize itself but the glory, fame, marketability, and negotiating leverage a player gets for future teams and sponsors. Even if the prize disparity between 1st and 2nd is significantly reduced behind closed doors, the incentive to win is still there. I'd much rather see emotions running high because of the championship title and not the big cash payout. When TT1 threw his game against Fenix your entire argument was proven invalid and it was proven that it can and has effected play sorry You didn't understand the argument then sorry I understand that you think progamers will play their hearts out regardless of money and that TT1 proved you wrong. I am not missing anything. My primary point is that the incentive to win is there not because of the prizepool. Bringing up a case to the contrary doesn't invalidate any argument. I'm making an argument for what is the case for most progamers. But he provides evidence for his post, when you present none for your own. Evidence for my argument? My argument was that the incentive to win is there regardless of prize pool. Why the fuck would anybody compete in MLG. The only players who will on average net a profit from flying cross country to MLG would be the 4 koreans put in group play. Everyone else is playing for love for the game, competition, or for sponsors. Just because players like TT1 ignores all incentives except for cash prizes doesn't invalidate any argument. All it does is prove there are idiots out there who don't give a shit about the game or competition. TT1 proved that a long time ago. Thats why TT1 will probably never have fans and that's also why he should go find a new job anyway if all he wants is cash Tell me this, then. When players plan on splitting the money, why don't they announce it before the match rather than try to keep it quiet? I suggest it's because they realise it looks shady as fuck. Or, maybe they know the fans will be enraged. So they either know they are disappointing their fans when they do it, or they consider it a dishonest action. What chivalry. Ironically*, total transparency of their intentions before the match is played would be a sign of a clean conscience, and the silence will be taken for an admission of guilt. (*disclaimer: not actual irony) I'm sure this point can be argued. What are you going to come up with?
Because they don't have to. Any other stupid questions? The tournament isn't chopping the prize, the players are after receiving the money. Theres nothing dirty or "shady as fuck" going on
|
On September 02 2011 10:45 puzzl wrote:
TT1: clearly you never even had any intention of winning, since you undeniably threw the game. As far as we know, you intentionally tried to broker a deal that would net you greater overall profit, since you felt you had little chance of beating your (clearly superior) teammate. With this knowledge, you decided to deceitfully pretend like it was fair if you "split the winnings" so you could guarantee your $2500 rather than getting stuck with the $500 you deserved.
It should also be noted that not only was there no guarantee that Fenix would accept the money had you won—many people culturally agree to these situations as a formality with no intention to act on either end—but that we'll never know if you would have even paid out either, especially considering you planned ahead of time to lose on purpose.
I can't believe some people are dumb enough to back fenix in this situation, it's FLAT OUT WRONG
you agreed to a fucking deal, you respect your end of the deal, the deal was: WE SPLIT 50/50 IN THE FINALS
seriously, how is fenix reputation not destroyed right now is beyond me, lots of shady people on TL
|
On September 02 2011 11:22 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 11:21 OlorinTheWise wrote:On September 02 2011 11:11 Kaitlin wrote:
If players are willing to "make deals", and the winner of the match doesn't matter, as long as they "play their best", what's to stand in the way of earning some side cash by throwing (as a heavily favored player) a match so some gambler and win a bunch of bets and give the player a cut ? If the discrepancy of the prize pool is taken out of the equation, and it's only the "fame" or whatever from winning vs. losing, then why not throw the games for even more cash ? Because taking money to intentionally lose is match fixing, and you will get your ass banned permanently for doing it. >.> It's an entirely different animal than splitting the winnings and playing your best game. Players have been banned from MLG for "deal making".
Then I'm following the same line of logic. I'm no longer a fan of pro's who have made deals.
So who has done this? That we know? ToD Grubby TT1?
|
On September 02 2011 11:16 epikAnglory wrote:
Lmao if both players agree then the finalists must fucking suck so bad to the point where they are not confident of winning. I doubt this crap is for friendly matches and environment, just both players are insecure in winning.
I couldn't care less if it was illegal or not, but if this is what SC2 finalists are doing then I am disappointed. Gamble $5000? Excuse me what that is what a tournament is for, you reward the better player, AKA the championship of the tournament, not the finalists. Sorry but this is a competitive environment and if you feel insecure about "gambling", please get out of the professional competition scene.
Also cut the fallacies assuming the players will still try their best.
It's not about their confidence. It's just they might not make the finals very often and they would rather guarantee themselves a split prize rather than go for the route with the higher variance. Even if a player feels he will win 6 of 10 games vs. another he may still go for the split just so he doesn't get screwed on a few games.
|
On September 02 2011 11:17 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 11:15 Steel wrote:
If it's two teammates in the finals and they want to split prizes, no problem. I think they still have to play the game and try to give a good show though. But that's against the grain of competition. I don't wanna be watching SC2 in the future and all the finals are just people worker rushing eachother every game because they already have a backroom deal where they get paid the same. The hammer must be brought down.
But there is so much more on the line than the prizemoney. Winning the tournament will benefit the fame, future contracts, career, ego..
So I'd assume, that most progamers would still play the best they can, even if the money gets shared.
|
On September 02 2011 11:23 ReignFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 10:45 puzzl wrote:
TT1: clearly you never even had any intention of winning, since you undeniably threw the game. As far as we know, you intentionally tried to broker a deal that would net you greater overall profit, since you felt you had little chance of beating your (clearly superior) teammate. With this knowledge, you decided to deceitfully pretend like it was fair if you "split the winnings" so you could guarantee your $2500 rather than getting stuck with the $500 you deserved.
It should also be noted that not only was there no guarantee that Fenix would accept the money had you won—many people culturally agree to these situations as a formality with no intention to act on either end—but that we'll never know if you would have even paid out either, especially considering you planned ahead of time to lose on purpose. I can't believe some people are dumb enough to back fenix in this situation, it's FLAT OUT WRONG you agreed to a fucking deal, you respect your end of the deal, the deal was: WE SPLIT 50/50 IN THE FINALS seriously, how is fenix reputation not destroyed right now is beyond me, lots of shady people on TL
Because as dumb as match fixing/deal making is he didn't go through with it.
|
On September 02 2011 11:23 ReignFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 10:45 puzzl wrote:
TT1: clearly you never even had any intention of winning, since you undeniably threw the game. As far as we know, you intentionally tried to broker a deal that would net you greater overall profit, since you felt you had little chance of beating your (clearly superior) teammate. With this knowledge, you decided to deceitfully pretend like it was fair if you "split the winnings" so you could guarantee your $2500 rather than getting stuck with the $500 you deserved.
It should also be noted that not only was there no guarantee that Fenix would accept the money had you won—many people culturally agree to these situations as a formality with no intention to act on either end—but that we'll never know if you would have even paid out either, especially considering you planned ahead of time to lose on purpose. I can't believe some people are dumb enough to back fenix in this situation, it's FLAT OUT WRONG you agreed to a fucking deal, you respect your end of the deal, the deal was: WE SPLIT 50/50 IN THE FINALS seriously, how is fenix reputation not destroyed right now is beyond me, lots of shady people on TL
I'm pretty sure fenix' reputation is getting destroyed, but TT1's reputation in TL is so godawful that it's getting overshadowed...
|
On September 02 2011 11:22 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 11:21 OlorinTheWise wrote:On September 02 2011 11:11 Kaitlin wrote:
If players are willing to "make deals", and the winner of the match doesn't matter, as long as they "play their best", what's to stand in the way of earning some side cash by throwing (as a heavily favored player) a match so some gambler and win a bunch of bets and give the player a cut ? If the discrepancy of the prize pool is taken out of the equation, and it's only the "fame" or whatever from winning vs. losing, then why not throw the games for even more cash ? Because taking money to intentionally lose is match fixing, and you will get your ass banned permanently for doing it. >.> It's an entirely different animal than splitting the winnings and playing your best game. Players have been banned from MLG for "deal making".
Pretty sure that was different from what is being talked about. Do you have links/evidence?
|
On September 02 2011 10:56 Reborn8u wrote:
This is HORRIBLE, I can't think of anything worse for Esports. This IS by definition MATCH FIXING.... I see no difference from this and the scandal that rocked BW, except these are in the FINALS, throwing matches for profit is the worst possible thing for the growth of this industry. I will NEVER be a fan of or bother watching any games by people who do this. Furthermore, I think anyone who is proven to do this should be banned from any respectable league.
oh dear mother of god....
I hope you meant to say this is by definition NOT match making
|
On September 02 2011 11:26 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 11:23 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 10:45 puzzl wrote:
TT1: clearly you never even had any intention of winning, since you undeniably threw the game. As far as we know, you intentionally tried to broker a deal that would net you greater overall profit, since you felt you had little chance of beating your (clearly superior) teammate. With this knowledge, you decided to deceitfully pretend like it was fair if you "split the winnings" so you could guarantee your $2500 rather than getting stuck with the $500 you deserved.
It should also be noted that not only was there no guarantee that Fenix would accept the money had you won—many people culturally agree to these situations as a formality with no intention to act on either end—but that we'll never know if you would have even paid out either, especially considering you planned ahead of time to lose on purpose. I can't believe some people are dumb enough to back fenix in this situation, it's FLAT OUT WRONG you agreed to a fucking deal, you respect your end of the deal, the deal was: WE SPLIT 50/50 IN THE FINALS seriously, how is fenix reputation not destroyed right now is beyond me, lots of shady people on TL Because as dumb as match fixing/deal making is he didn't go through with it.
it's the SAME thing as agreeing to a 5000$ bet with someone and then backing off when you lose saying it never happened
|
Posted this in the Fenix to IM thread, but decided it was probably more appropriate here:
What Fenix did was a dick move, but I'm kinda happy it worked out like that. If TT1 really did throw away a couple of those games, then he deserved it. Agreements like these completely ruin the spirit of competition, and is a huge middle-finger to the fans that waited to see two deserving players duke it out for all the marbles.
Hopefully in the future, players will learn not to make these underhanded agreements. TT1 got his comeuppance, and it'll be funny to see if Fenix gets a taste of karma in the future.
|
On September 02 2011 11:24 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 11:22 Kaitlin wrote:On September 02 2011 11:21 OlorinTheWise wrote:On September 02 2011 11:11 Kaitlin wrote:
If players are willing to "make deals", and the winner of the match doesn't matter, as long as they "play their best", what's to stand in the way of earning some side cash by throwing (as a heavily favored player) a match so some gambler and win a bunch of bets and give the player a cut ? If the discrepancy of the prize pool is taken out of the equation, and it's only the "fame" or whatever from winning vs. losing, then why not throw the games for even more cash ? Because taking money to intentionally lose is match fixing, and you will get your ass banned permanently for doing it. >.> It's an entirely different animal than splitting the winnings and playing your best game. Players have been banned from MLG for "deal making". Then I'm following the same line of logic. I'm no longer a fan of pro's who have made deals. So who has done this? That we know? ToD Grubby TT1?
ToD, Grubby, TT1, Fenix (reneging on the deal doesn't change the fact that he initially made it), and according to Fayth, the teams Reign, EG, mouz, Dignitas, and SlayerS.
Have fun, dude.
|
im actually more of a fan of FENIX after hearing what he did
fenix did what needs to be done. if tournaments dont fix dealmaking by changing their rules or how the tournaments are run, then players themselves should use dealmaking to their advantage. fenix told TT1 he would do a deal, then he won the finals because of that advantage, and kept all the money for himself and laughed at TT1
hahahaha. alls fair in love and war boys. kudos to fenix and i support him more as a fan for his brilliant actions.
|
On September 02 2011 11:22 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 11:21 OlorinTheWise wrote:On September 02 2011 11:11 Kaitlin wrote:
If players are willing to "make deals", and the winner of the match doesn't matter, as long as they "play their best", what's to stand in the way of earning some side cash by throwing (as a heavily favored player) a match so some gambler and win a bunch of bets and give the player a cut ? If the discrepancy of the prize pool is taken out of the equation, and it's only the "fame" or whatever from winning vs. losing, then why not throw the games for even more cash ? Because taking money to intentionally lose is match fixing, and you will get your ass banned permanently for doing it. >.> It's an entirely different animal than splitting the winnings and playing your best game. Players have been banned from MLG for "deal making".
No, they were banned for match fixing. They claimed afterwards that they were just splitting, and didn't actually fix the match.
|
On September 02 2011 11:30 babylon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 11:24 Medrea wrote:On September 02 2011 11:22 Kaitlin wrote:On September 02 2011 11:21 OlorinTheWise wrote:On September 02 2011 11:11 Kaitlin wrote:
If players are willing to "make deals", and the winner of the match doesn't matter, as long as they "play their best", what's to stand in the way of earning some side cash by throwing (as a heavily favored player) a match so some gambler and win a bunch of bets and give the player a cut ? If the discrepancy of the prize pool is taken out of the equation, and it's only the "fame" or whatever from winning vs. losing, then why not throw the games for even more cash ? Because taking money to intentionally lose is match fixing, and you will get your ass banned permanently for doing it. >.> It's an entirely different animal than splitting the winnings and playing your best game. Players have been banned from MLG for "deal making". Then I'm following the same line of logic. I'm no longer a fan of pro's who have made deals. So who has done this? That we know? ToD Grubby TT1? ToD, Grubby, TT1, Fenix (reneging on the deal doesn't change the fact that he initially made it), and according to Fayth, the teams Reign, EG, mouz, Dignitas, and SlayerS. Have fun, dude.
You Forgot IM
-EDIT-
I dont see what the big deal is of course players play there hardest in the finals B/c that 1st place win might be the difference between there contract getting renewed or not
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
