|
On September 02 2011 13:08 Tektos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:06 FawkingGoomba wrote:On September 02 2011 13:04 Tektos wrote:On September 02 2011 13:03 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 12:59 Tektos wrote:On September 02 2011 12:56 FawkingGoomba wrote:On September 02 2011 12:52 Tektos wrote:On September 02 2011 12:51 FawkingGoomba wrote:
If you're in the finals of an MLG and suddenly there's no prizepool. You're still going to try your hardest because winning an MLG has benefits other than the slight prizepool difference.
"Oh no! I'm not getting any prize money! Time to throw the game!" <---- This doesn't fucking happen. If MLG offered no prize money people wouldn't show up in the first place. The prize is tiny, and almost irrelevant to many players. How many people do you think would show up to 2012 MLGs if they announced they're removing all prize money from the tournament? Internationals wouldn't show up because they have to invest money to travel, for zero return on investment. With no Europeans or Koreans showing up the level of competition would severely diminish and the tournament would quickly fall out of the limelight. On September 02 2011 12:55 babylon wrote:On September 02 2011 12:52 Tektos wrote:On September 02 2011 12:51 FawkingGoomba wrote:
If you're in the finals of an MLG and suddenly there's no prizepool. You're still going to try your hardest because winning an MLG has benefits other than the slight prizepool difference.
"Oh no! I'm not getting any prize money! Time to throw the game!" <---- This doesn't fucking happen. If MLG offered no prize money people wouldn't show up in the first place. First place is $5k. It's already a tiny prize. The reason why that place is so coveted is because of the exposure. $5k for 3 days effort is pretty good, not too many occupations offer that kind of income. sadly it's impossible to see it like that, nobody is gonna win everytime he shows up Yes but the exposure the tournament offers would not be there if the prize was $0. You get exposure even if you don't win. If people still watched, the prizepool could be a carrot and players would still show. If the prizepool was a carrot not as many people would watch though. Remember there is also the playoffs which are worth a lot more than each individual MLG, they're playing for the points to get into the playoffs.
lol really? you watch the tourney because the first prize is a whoopin 5000$ ? lolol
I watch because there are good players playing and good casters casting and to cheer for my friends
|
On September 02 2011 13:07 anrimayu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:06 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:04 Medrea wrote:On September 02 2011 13:00 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 12:59 Medrea wrote:On September 02 2011 12:57 FawkingGoomba wrote:On September 02 2011 12:55 Medrea wrote:On September 02 2011 12:54 ReignFayth wrote:read carefully, they didn't just split the prize pool, someone forfeited matches so it was match fixing really It's really easy to blur that line. Not really. As long as every party involved consents, it's not match fixing. Yeah but then some people want in halfway, some people want out, some people dont go through with it and so forth. It gets really ugly. why do you think fenix got kicked out of Fnatic Then great. Fenix is better off without Fnatic anyway and Fnatic can have the rest of there awesome team. Which is who by the way? Rain and who else? TT1, KawaiiRice, Nightend, Iefnaij... maybe I forgot someone they are all talented players, none of them really below fenix Is that with or without deal making? Because I don't think Fenix did an 1 base carrier all in to beat oGs.
just a reminder that tt1 beat nada in the global invite thing
|
I really don't see the problem if 2 parties agree beforehand that splitting the prize would be in both their best interests. Just keep it between themselves and their managers and play to win. I'm sure that winning is still important to the player whether they are going to be enjoying a few extra thousand if they win or not.
|
On September 02 2011 13:10 intrigue wrote:
hmm... okay here's how i see it:
1. assured of having 50% of the winnings, both players can play more confidently and with less nerves. downside is that without pressure, we don't get to see the real "champion" who performs under stress.
2. even with split winnings, first place has definite benefits that second does not (fame, seedings, fulfilling fans' expectations) - it's extremely unlikely that a progamer (who exists purely because he is extremely competitive) will play much below their peak level. that would only happen if progamers were motivated 100% by money, which would be stupid. you can make more than the average pro working a minimum wage job.
3. specifically in the case of fenix and tt1, i can't see much fault in it. being on the same team means you train together a lot, encourage each other, and get very close (apparently not as close as i'd think though LOL)!!!! given the same situation i would definitely offer/take a split myself.
Basically agree. Although my argument is that the effect of #1 is essentially zero. I can't really think of any progamer that is in this to make the big $$. The stress and nerves are still there.
|
Well, let's imagine this, if Nestea and MC were to be in the GSL finals, and they decided to split the money before hand. I'm sure people who pay to attend the event or to buy the stream tickets would be utterly disgusted. On a larger scale, "deal making" would definitely be amplified.
For eSports to grow, we cannot have this happening. eSports will never be taken seriously.
|
On September 02 2011 13:11 Le BucheRON wrote:
I really don't see the problem if 2 parties agree beforehand that splitting the prize would be in both their best interests. Just keep it between themselves and their managers and play to win. I'm sure that winning is still important to the player whether they are going to be enjoying a few extra thousand if they win or not.
If it's something you have to hide from the world, how sportsmanship-like can it be?
|
I can see how teammates would want to do this, but it also makes the finals a bit less exciting for me as a spectator if I know it's going on. That said, any rule against it would be practically unenforceable, so I don't think any tourneys/leagues should bother.
|
Takes the whole excitement out of the game. This has to be made illegal
|
On September 02 2011 13:13 MudkipSEA` wrote:
Well, let's imagine this, if Nestea and MC were to be in the GSL finals, and they decided to split the money before hand. I'm sure people who pay to attend the event or to buy the stream tickets would be utterly disgusted. On a larger scale, "deal making" would definitely be amplified.
For eSports to grow, we cannot have this happening. eSports will never be taken seriously.
They're not on the same team, so that's utterly ridiculous.
MVP vs. NesTea in a GSL finals, though. I would not be surprised if they split 60/40.
|
On September 02 2011 13:14 curtdisis wrote:
Takes the whole excitement out of the game. This has to be made illegal
How does it take the excitement out of it? Both players are still trying their best to win.
|
On September 02 2011 13:10 ReignFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:08 Tektos wrote:On September 02 2011 13:06 FawkingGoomba wrote:On September 02 2011 13:04 Tektos wrote:On September 02 2011 13:03 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 12:59 Tektos wrote:On September 02 2011 12:56 FawkingGoomba wrote:On September 02 2011 12:52 Tektos wrote:On September 02 2011 12:51 FawkingGoomba wrote:
If you're in the finals of an MLG and suddenly there's no prizepool. You're still going to try your hardest because winning an MLG has benefits other than the slight prizepool difference.
"Oh no! I'm not getting any prize money! Time to throw the game!" <---- This doesn't fucking happen. If MLG offered no prize money people wouldn't show up in the first place. The prize is tiny, and almost irrelevant to many players. How many people do you think would show up to 2012 MLGs if they announced they're removing all prize money from the tournament? Internationals wouldn't show up because they have to invest money to travel, for zero return on investment. With no Europeans or Koreans showing up the level of competition would severely diminish and the tournament would quickly fall out of the limelight. On September 02 2011 12:55 babylon wrote:On September 02 2011 12:52 Tektos wrote:On September 02 2011 12:51 FawkingGoomba wrote:
If you're in the finals of an MLG and suddenly there's no prizepool. You're still going to try your hardest because winning an MLG has benefits other than the slight prizepool difference.
"Oh no! I'm not getting any prize money! Time to throw the game!" <---- This doesn't fucking happen. If MLG offered no prize money people wouldn't show up in the first place. First place is $5k. It's already a tiny prize. The reason why that place is so coveted is because of the exposure. $5k for 3 days effort is pretty good, not too many occupations offer that kind of income. sadly it's impossible to see it like that, nobody is gonna win everytime he shows up Yes but the exposure the tournament offers would not be there if the prize was $0. You get exposure even if you don't win. If people still watched, the prizepool could be a carrot and players would still show. If the prizepool was a carrot not as many people would watch though. Remember there is also the playoffs which are worth a lot more than each individual MLG, they're playing for the points to get into the playoffs. lol really? you watch the tourney because the first prize is a whoopin 5000$ ? lolol I watch because there are good players playing and good casters casting and to cheer for my friends
It is a circular argument though, because I say not as many good players would show up if there was 0 prize. Not as many good players showing up = less viewers. Less viewers = less prestige for winning. Less prestige for winning = even less players showing up. etc. until tournament dies.
|
On September 02 2011 13:10 intrigue wrote:
hmm... okay here's how i see it:
1. assured of having 50% of the winnings, both players can play more confidently and with less nerves. downside is that without pressure, we don't get to see the real "champion" who performs under stress.
2. even with split winnings, first place has definite benefits that second does not (fame, seedings, fulfilling fans' expectations) - it's extremely unlikely that a progamer (who exists purely because he is extremely competitive) will play much below their peak level. that would only happen if progamers were motivated 100% by money, which would be stupid. you can make more than the average pro working a minimum wage job.
3. specifically in the case of fenix and tt1, i can't see much fault in it. being on the same team means you train together a lot, encourage each other, and get very close (apparently not as close as i'd think though LOL)!!!! given the same situation i would definitely offer/take a split myself.
#1 is my biggest issue really, the part about no pressure
i'm all fine with players having equal monetary gains but I and i'd imagine most spectators would want to see the real champion win
if there were two players with equal skill, but one who can play well under pressure and one who can't, the one who can play under pressure should be the winner. however, when chopping the prize, this doesn't happen..
|
On September 02 2011 13:13 MudkipSEA` wrote:
Well, let's imagine this, if Nestea and MC were to be in the GSL finals, and they decided to split the money before hand. I'm sure people who pay to attend the event or to buy the stream tickets would be utterly disgusted. On a larger scale, "deal making" would definitely be amplified.
For eSports to grow, we cannot have this happening. eSports will never be taken seriously.
This happens in real sports all the time. Good thing real sports never got taken seriously, then there might be groups of people killing other people over something that happened in a match of two people trying to kick a ball into a net.
|
On September 02 2011 13:15 Namu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:10 intrigue wrote:
hmm... okay here's how i see it:
1. assured of having 50% of the winnings, both players can play more confidently and with less nerves. downside is that without pressure, we don't get to see the real "champion" who performs under stress.
2. even with split winnings, first place has definite benefits that second does not (fame, seedings, fulfilling fans' expectations) - it's extremely unlikely that a progamer (who exists purely because he is extremely competitive) will play much below their peak level. that would only happen if progamers were motivated 100% by money, which would be stupid. you can make more than the average pro working a minimum wage job.
3. specifically in the case of fenix and tt1, i can't see much fault in it. being on the same team means you train together a lot, encourage each other, and get very close (apparently not as close as i'd think though LOL)!!!! given the same situation i would definitely offer/take a split myself. #1 is my biggest issue really, the part about no pressure i'm all fine with players having equal monetary gains but I and i'd imagine most spectators would want to see the real champion win if there were two players with equal skill, but one who can play well under pressure and one who can't, the one who can play under pressure should be the winner. however, when chopping the prize, this doesn't happen..
It does happen. You both still want to win and will try your best. In the case of MLG, I'm pretty sure every single progamer would rather win the title than win the $5000.
|
On September 02 2011 13:13 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:11 Le BucheRON wrote:
I really don't see the problem if 2 parties agree beforehand that splitting the prize would be in both their best interests. Just keep it between themselves and their managers and play to win. I'm sure that winning is still important to the player whether they are going to be enjoying a few extra thousand if they win or not. If it's something you have to hide from the world, how sportsmanship-like can it be?
I dunno, we still don't know player's salaries. Somethings are just best kept to need-to-know basis.
|
On September 02 2011 13:14 FawkingGoomba wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:14 curtdisis wrote:
Takes the whole excitement out of the game. This has to be made illegal How does it take the excitement out of it? Both players are still trying their best to win.
Obviously carrier builds = trying their best?
|
On September 02 2011 13:16 FawkingGoomba wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:15 Namu wrote:On September 02 2011 13:10 intrigue wrote:
hmm... okay here's how i see it:
1. assured of having 50% of the winnings, both players can play more confidently and with less nerves. downside is that without pressure, we don't get to see the real "champion" who performs under stress.
2. even with split winnings, first place has definite benefits that second does not (fame, seedings, fulfilling fans' expectations) - it's extremely unlikely that a progamer (who exists purely because he is extremely competitive) will play much below their peak level. that would only happen if progamers were motivated 100% by money, which would be stupid. you can make more than the average pro working a minimum wage job.
3. specifically in the case of fenix and tt1, i can't see much fault in it. being on the same team means you train together a lot, encourage each other, and get very close (apparently not as close as i'd think though LOL)!!!! given the same situation i would definitely offer/take a split myself. #1 is my biggest issue really, the part about no pressure i'm all fine with players having equal monetary gains but I and i'd imagine most spectators would want to see the real champion win if there were two players with equal skill, but one who can play well under pressure and one who can't, the one who can play under pressure should be the winner. however, when chopping the prize, this doesn't happen.. It does happen. You both still want to win and will try your best. In the case of MLG, I'm pretty sure every single progamer would rather win the title than win the $5000.
this isn't just confined to MLG
imagine NASL or other big money tournaments
and you're missing my point, the pressure isn't there
yes they'll both try their best (or close to it) 99% of the time i'd imagine
but the pressure criterion is STILL missing
just take my example of the two players
|
On September 02 2011 13:17 Le BucheRON wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:13 Medrea wrote:On September 02 2011 13:11 Le BucheRON wrote:
I really don't see the problem if 2 parties agree beforehand that splitting the prize would be in both their best interests. Just keep it between themselves and their managers and play to win. I'm sure that winning is still important to the player whether they are going to be enjoying a few extra thousand if they win or not. If it's something you have to hide from the world, how sportsmanship-like can it be? I dunno, we still don't know player's salaries. Somethings are just best kept to need-to-know basis.
Public salaries are really common in the sports scene. Maybe its time to consider it.
|
On September 02 2011 13:17 Namu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:16 FawkingGoomba wrote:On September 02 2011 13:15 Namu wrote:On September 02 2011 13:10 intrigue wrote:
hmm... okay here's how i see it:
1. assured of having 50% of the winnings, both players can play more confidently and with less nerves. downside is that without pressure, we don't get to see the real "champion" who performs under stress.
2. even with split winnings, first place has definite benefits that second does not (fame, seedings, fulfilling fans' expectations) - it's extremely unlikely that a progamer (who exists purely because he is extremely competitive) will play much below their peak level. that would only happen if progamers were motivated 100% by money, which would be stupid. you can make more than the average pro working a minimum wage job.
3. specifically in the case of fenix and tt1, i can't see much fault in it. being on the same team means you train together a lot, encourage each other, and get very close (apparently not as close as i'd think though LOL)!!!! given the same situation i would definitely offer/take a split myself. #1 is my biggest issue really, the part about no pressure i'm all fine with players having equal monetary gains but I and i'd imagine most spectators would want to see the real champion win if there were two players with equal skill, but one who can play well under pressure and one who can't, the one who can play under pressure should be the winner. however, when chopping the prize, this doesn't happen.. It does happen. You both still want to win and will try your best. In the case of MLG, I'm pretty sure every single progamer would rather win the title than win the $5000. this isn't just confined to MLG imagine NASL or other big money tournaments and you're missing my point, the pressure isn't there yes they'll both try their best (or close to it) 99% of the time i'd imagine but the pressure criterion is STILL missing
How is it still missing? I'm progamer "X" and I agree to split with my teammate. Am I suddenly less motivated to win the finals?
|
Should just make it no even chops. And leave something worth playing for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
