|
I think that this kind of deal should be allowed, but only if it is done the same way as poker. That is, it is done through the tournament admins, and there is some amount of the prize pool left for the winner, so that the games will still have meaning and be exciting.
|
Well I don't see how you can argue against it being match fixing, but why don't they just both play it out and try to win and just split the cash at the end and not pre arrange who the winner is.
Regardless I don't think it should be illegal, players should have the freedom of choice of whether to do it or not, definitely should be illegal to coerce or pressure someone to who isn't willing though.
|
If people are going to make deals, make them public in advance, so i can know in advance not to tune into your tainted matches. Thanks.
|
On September 02 2011 13:10 babylon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:05 anrimayu wrote:On September 02 2011 13:02 Medrea wrote:On September 02 2011 12:59 FawkingGoomba wrote:On September 02 2011 12:57 Medrea 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. MLG is a well run tournament on all sides. I do believe more prizemoney is warranted. But so far the real gem is community support. Not the prize. Its a big gem too, foreigner scene really likes MLG so far. Right, so when player from team 'X' splits with his teammate in the finals, do you think they're not going to try their hardest to win the finals? I think this issue is better directed at smaller tournaments to be honest, where the viewership is large enough where it is interesting, but not syndicated. For MLG, the benefits of exposure is so high it kind of mutes the prize earnings. Well, major tournaments like MLG will have Koreans and top notch foreigners who will play their best and win like a pro gamer should. Those greedy "pros" that are just in it for the money will never win anything with that kind of mindset. For minor tournaments where they can actually match fix, noone will take those seriously and the sponsors will bail. Earlier in the thread, ToD said that he viewed deal-cutting as a standard between teammates. He cut a deal back in his WC3 days with Grubby for a $30k first prize. He won and split it, as was agreed. Saying that ToD or Grubby were "in it for the money" and "never [won] anything" is idiotic at best. I hope you know about the dangers of generalizing now. Also, saying that Kiwi is in SC2 for the money is laughable.
Saying something is "idiotic at best" and "laughable" shows that you have an opinion that you're not willing to discuss or argue. I can also reply to that by saying your comments are idiotic and laughable, and there won't be anything to talk about. How would I know Kiwi isn't playing for money? He never talked to me about his reason of becoming a pro gamer.
I put the word "pro" in quotation mark because thats not how professionals should act. They're not just couple of friends playing some game for fun. They're playing in front of paying audience backed up by sponsors. What they're doing is bitch slapping the fans, sponsors, and other players who were eliminated.
Being a pro gamer is about performing under pressure. It's a completely different game when money isn't involved. How can you compare playing blackjack for fun on iPhone vs playing at Vegas for real money? Most people will choke under pressure, so much that they'll use DT rush 4 times in a row even though it will never work because they can't think clearly. That's what competition is.
|
On September 02 2011 13:36 ReignFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:33 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:31 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:29 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:10 ReignFayth wrote:
I watch because there are good players playing and good casters casting and to cheer for my friends I am guessing that if this kind of thing upset enough fans that it affected sponsorships, or simply upset sponsors, then steps would be taken to prevent it (why would a sponsor want to put their brand's name on the line for a fixed match?). You really cannot enforce it without monitoring players' bank accounts, but if there is an appearance that the match was not "real" then sponsors could definitely get angry. Agreements suggest that the players will not play as hard (regardless of whether it's true or not). In my opinion, it's basically like betting against yourself to win (you are betting a share of your winnings that you will lose the match, e.g., Pete Rose). once again you are mixing up matchfixing and deal-making 2 distinct things, you need to learn to make the difference The difference is in your mind, not in ours. To an outsider they look the same, but to the person making the deal they are different. Deal-making gives the appearance of matchfixing. That is the issue I see with it. lol no it's clearly not only in my mind, just like 2+2=4 match fixing is when the winner is decided beforehand, the matches are rigged, deal making is really just someone giving money to someone else and nothing about the upcoming match has been decided they're still gonna play to the best of their ability
I know what they are. This is not a problem of definitions. To someone making the arrangement, they are very, very different. To an outsider, watching the transaction, they have to take you at your word. Someone who pays another player to lose can simply say they made a deal. They look exactly the same from the outside.
|
On September 02 2011 13:36 Phenny wrote:
Well I don't see how you can argue against it being match fixing, but why don't they just both play it out and try to win and just split the cash at the end and not pre arrange who the winner is.
Regardless I don't think it should be illegal, players should have the freedom of choice of whether to do it or not, definitely should be illegal to coerce or pressure someone to who isn't willing though.
That's exactly what they do? They don't agree on a winner beforehand. They both play their best and then just split at the end.
|
On September 02 2011 13:29 ReignFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:27 MudkipSEA` wrote:On September 02 2011 13:16 Arisen wrote: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. Well, I don't know what kind of sports you watch. But the point is it is not accepted by the community is it? Tell me how would people feel if all Federer and Nadal decided to split their earnings of all the Grand Slam finals they attended. Would they have this epic rivalry? The point I'm trying to make here is that how can we, as a community accept that they make deals before the tournament. they DEFINITELY would have this epic rivarly, their rivarly goes far beyond prize money
No, I'm not implying that the prize money is the most important. BUT, to say that prize money is not one reason to justify their hard work is nonsensical. Then how would they learn a living?
Read what I'm trying to notion, and don't pick a sentence out of the point I'm trying to make.
Hypothetically, if deal making is the norm in eSports. As a progamer, I would make deals with everyone.
And as a spectator/ aspiring player/ a commentator or anyone involved in that sport for that matter, would I be really interested in this sport if I know that they are not really putting in effort to become the best that they can? But rather, choose to earn as much money as possible while putting in the least effort that they need to?
Edit: Grammar ><
|
On September 02 2011 13:33 Tektos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:30 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:28 Tektos wrote:On September 02 2011 13:26 [GiTM]-Ace wrote:On September 02 2011 13:21 Tektos wrote:
If it is still so prestigious to win an event regardless of prize money why don't all tournaments just offer 1st and 2nd place prizes to be the same? b/c not everyone thinks that way. For a poker example , when I used to play tourneys I loved poker but I 100% wanted to win the money. After it taking so long and putting in hard work by the time I made it to final 2 there was no way I was splitting I wanted first I worked too hard for it.
After a while though you might just be content with the money. All about the persons perspective at the time Exactly my point, the person who earned the money should get the money. and he's free to then give money to his friend isn't he? If it is agreed AFTER the tournament by all means yes! What a generous person. If they make an agreement BEFORE the games are played there is the possibility of it changing the matches, so no.
Yes, if they agreed after it is okie! But if it is before, it really defeats the purpose of sportsmanship.
|
On September 02 2011 13:38 FawkingGoomba wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:36 Phenny wrote:
Well I don't see how you can argue against it being match fixing, but why don't they just both play it out and try to win and just split the cash at the end and not pre arrange who the winner is.
Regardless I don't think it should be illegal, players should have the freedom of choice of whether to do it or not, definitely should be illegal to coerce or pressure someone to who isn't willing though. That's exactly what they do? They don't agree on a winner beforehand. They both play their best and then just split at the end.
Oh my mistake, well then I have no issue with it at all.
|
On September 02 2011 13:38 price wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:36 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:33 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:31 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:29 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:10 ReignFayth wrote:
I watch because there are good players playing and good casters casting and to cheer for my friends I am guessing that if this kind of thing upset enough fans that it affected sponsorships, or simply upset sponsors, then steps would be taken to prevent it (why would a sponsor want to put their brand's name on the line for a fixed match?). You really cannot enforce it without monitoring players' bank accounts, but if there is an appearance that the match was not "real" then sponsors could definitely get angry. Agreements suggest that the players will not play as hard (regardless of whether it's true or not). In my opinion, it's basically like betting against yourself to win (you are betting a share of your winnings that you will lose the match, e.g., Pete Rose). once again you are mixing up matchfixing and deal-making 2 distinct things, you need to learn to make the difference The difference is in your mind, not in ours. To an outsider they look the same, but to the person making the deal they are different. Deal-making gives the appearance of matchfixing. That is the issue I see with it. lol no it's clearly not only in my mind, just like 2+2=4 match fixing is when the winner is decided beforehand, the matches are rigged, deal making is really just someone giving money to someone else and nothing about the upcoming match has been decided they're still gonna play to the best of their ability I know what they are. This is not a problem of definitions. To someone making the arrangement, they are very, very different. To an outsider, watching the transaction, they have to take you at your word. Someone who pays another player to lose can simply say they made a deal. They look exactly the same from the outside.
nobody is paying anyone, nobody knows who is going to win or lose though, I fail to see how people could perceive it that way, the only thing they tell each other is "hey let's modify the prizes"
it really is not the spectator's business
|
On September 02 2011 13:38 MudkipSEA` wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:29 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:27 MudkipSEA` wrote:On September 02 2011 13:16 Arisen wrote: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. Well, I don't know what kind of sports you watch. But the point is it is not accepted by the community is it? Tell me how would people feel if all Federer and Nadal decided to split their earnings of all the Grand Slam finals they attended. Would they have this epic rivalry? The point I'm trying to make here is that how can we, as a community accept that they make deals before the tournament. they DEFINITELY would have this epic rivarly, their rivarly goes far beyond prize money No, I'm not implying that the prize money is the most important. BUT, to say that prize money is not one reason to justify their hard work is nonsensical. Then how would they learn a living? Read what I'm trying to notion, and don't pick a sentence out of the point I'm trying to make. Hypothetically, if deal making is the norm in eSports. As a progamer, I would make deals with everyone. And as a spectator/ aspiring player/ a commentator or anyone involved in that sport for that matter, would I be really interested in this sport if I know that they are not really putting in effort to become the best that they can be? But rather, choose to earn as much money as possible while putting in the least effort that I need to?
how would someone go about making the top 2 of a large prize pool tournament without putting in a boatload of time and effort? all this is about is reducing variance, which is extremely high when you have infrequent large prize pool tournaments.
|
On September 02 2011 13:32 FawkingGoomba wrote:
If you are watching video games because you want to see people battle it out over money, you're watching the wrong thing. Prize money is only there to allows people to dedicate more time to what they love.
In that case it should all go to the team and be redistributed according to team policies. Or are you now going to argue that only players who're in the money deserve to be able to dedicate more time for what they love, but evening out variance for team mates in order to give them the same chance is wrong?
|
On September 02 2011 13:37 anrimayu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:10 babylon wrote:On September 02 2011 13:05 anrimayu wrote:On September 02 2011 13:02 Medrea wrote:On September 02 2011 12:59 FawkingGoomba wrote:On September 02 2011 12:57 Medrea 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. MLG is a well run tournament on all sides. I do believe more prizemoney is warranted. But so far the real gem is community support. Not the prize. Its a big gem too, foreigner scene really likes MLG so far. Right, so when player from team 'X' splits with his teammate in the finals, do you think they're not going to try their hardest to win the finals? I think this issue is better directed at smaller tournaments to be honest, where the viewership is large enough where it is interesting, but not syndicated. For MLG, the benefits of exposure is so high it kind of mutes the prize earnings. Well, major tournaments like MLG will have Koreans and top notch foreigners who will play their best and win like a pro gamer should. Those greedy "pros" that are just in it for the money will never win anything with that kind of mindset. For minor tournaments where they can actually match fix, noone will take those seriously and the sponsors will bail. Earlier in the thread, ToD said that he viewed deal-cutting as a standard between teammates. He cut a deal back in his WC3 days with Grubby for a $30k first prize. He won and split it, as was agreed. Saying that ToD or Grubby were "in it for the money" and "never [won] anything" is idiotic at best. I hope you know about the dangers of generalizing now. Also, saying that Kiwi is in SC2 for the money is laughable. Saying something is "idiotic at best" and "laughable" shows that you have an opinion that you're not willing to discuss or argue. I can also reply to that by saying your comments are idiotic and laughable, and there won't be anything to talk about. How would I know Kiwi isn't playing for money? He never talked to me about his reason of becoming a pro gamer. I put the word "pro" in quotation mark because thats not how professionals should act. They're not just couple of friends playing some game for fun. They're playing in front of paying audience backed up by sponsors. What they're doing is bitch slapping the fans, sponsors, and other players who were eliminated. Being a pro gamer is about performing under pressure. It's a completely different game when money isn't involved. How can you compare playing blackjack for fun on iPhone vs playing at Vegas for real money? Most people will choke under pressure, so much that they'll use DT rush 4 times in a row even though it will never work because they can't think clearly. That's what competition is.
*facepalm*
Here it is, man. Let me break it down for you. Saying that ToD and Grubby never won anything is "idiotic" because Grubby and ToD are amongst the most successful WC3 progamers in the world.
Saying that Kiwi is in SC2 for the money is "laughable" because he's fucking rich. He makes a shit ton of money off poker and doesn't need to win anything in SC2 to make a living.
Okay, did we clear things up there? Those are actually facts, not opinions. Saying otherwise would be like me saying that 2+2=5.
|
On September 02 2011 13:44 enzym wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:32 FawkingGoomba wrote:
If you are watching video games because you want to see people battle it out over money, you're watching the wrong thing. Prize money is only there to allows people to dedicate more time to what they love. In that case it should all go to the team and be redistributed according to team policies. Or are you now going to argue that only players who're in the money deserve to be able to dedicate more time for what they love, but evening out variance for team mates in order to give them the same chance is wrong?
If all the teammates agree to it, then by all means do it.
|
While I think that there is a problem in terms of decreasing the tension created by the difference in prize money, there is still a very large reward to coming first. A few weeks later, who is going to remember who came second. Also, the winner is likely to get increased financial reward due to sponsorship, streaming revenue, and possible salary increase/bonus.
|
On September 02 2011 13:38 MudkipSEA` wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:29 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:27 MudkipSEA` wrote:On September 02 2011 13:16 Arisen wrote: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. Well, I don't know what kind of sports you watch. But the point is it is not accepted by the community is it? Tell me how would people feel if all Federer and Nadal decided to split their earnings of all the Grand Slam finals they attended. Would they have this epic rivalry? The point I'm trying to make here is that how can we, as a community accept that they make deals before the tournament. they DEFINITELY would have this epic rivarly, their rivarly goes far beyond prize money No, I'm not implying that the prize money is the most important. BUT, to say that prize money is not one reason to justify their hard work is nonsensical. Then how would they learn a living? Read what I'm trying to notion, and don't pick a sentence out of the point I'm trying to make. Hypothetically, if deal making is the norm in eSports. As a progamer, I would make deals with everyone. And as a spectator/ aspiring player/ a commentator or anyone involved in that sport for that matter, would I be really interested in this sport if I know that they are not really putting in effort to become the best that they can? But rather, choose to earn as much money as possible while putting in the least effort that they need to? Edit: Grammar ><
you realize you still have to put a shitton of effort to make it to the finals, and you also need a bit of luck, that said, once they get to the final, prize money gets big enough for most players that they both don't feel like gambling the difference between 1st and 2nd place, cuz really most of the time players in finals are very close in skill level and at this point it's almost only variance
|
Have you seen a player who is normally great make terrible terrible mistakes because they are nervous *GSTL spoilers*+ Show Spoiler +Like MC missing his force fields TWICE vs Fenix
Benefit for us: We get to see them without them being under heavy pressure to win, so they will play at their best.
Benefit for them: More steady income stream.
|
On September 02 2011 13:42 ReignFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:38 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:36 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:33 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:31 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:29 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:10 ReignFayth wrote:
I watch because there are good players playing and good casters casting and to cheer for my friends I am guessing that if this kind of thing upset enough fans that it affected sponsorships, or simply upset sponsors, then steps would be taken to prevent it (why would a sponsor want to put their brand's name on the line for a fixed match?). You really cannot enforce it without monitoring players' bank accounts, but if there is an appearance that the match was not "real" then sponsors could definitely get angry. Agreements suggest that the players will not play as hard (regardless of whether it's true or not). In my opinion, it's basically like betting against yourself to win (you are betting a share of your winnings that you will lose the match, e.g., Pete Rose). once again you are mixing up matchfixing and deal-making 2 distinct things, you need to learn to make the difference The difference is in your mind, not in ours. To an outsider they look the same, but to the person making the deal they are different. Deal-making gives the appearance of matchfixing. That is the issue I see with it. lol no it's clearly not only in my mind, just like 2+2=4 match fixing is when the winner is decided beforehand, the matches are rigged, deal making is really just someone giving money to someone else and nothing about the upcoming match has been decided they're still gonna play to the best of their ability I know what they are. This is not a problem of definitions. To someone making the arrangement, they are very, very different. To an outsider, watching the transaction, they have to take you at your word. Someone who pays another player to lose can simply say they made a deal. They look exactly the same from the outside. nobody is paying anyone, nobody knows who is going to win or lose though, I fail to see how people could perceive it that way, the only thing they tell each other is "hey let's modify the prizes" it really is not the spectator's business
It's the way a lot of people will perceive it, I guarantee you.
|
On September 02 2011 13:46 price wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:42 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:38 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:36 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:33 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:31 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:29 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:10 ReignFayth wrote:
I watch because there are good players playing and good casters casting and to cheer for my friends I am guessing that if this kind of thing upset enough fans that it affected sponsorships, or simply upset sponsors, then steps would be taken to prevent it (why would a sponsor want to put their brand's name on the line for a fixed match?). You really cannot enforce it without monitoring players' bank accounts, but if there is an appearance that the match was not "real" then sponsors could definitely get angry. Agreements suggest that the players will not play as hard (regardless of whether it's true or not). In my opinion, it's basically like betting against yourself to win (you are betting a share of your winnings that you will lose the match, e.g., Pete Rose). once again you are mixing up matchfixing and deal-making 2 distinct things, you need to learn to make the difference The difference is in your mind, not in ours. To an outsider they look the same, but to the person making the deal they are different. Deal-making gives the appearance of matchfixing. That is the issue I see with it. lol no it's clearly not only in my mind, just like 2+2=4 match fixing is when the winner is decided beforehand, the matches are rigged, deal making is really just someone giving money to someone else and nothing about the upcoming match has been decided they're still gonna play to the best of their ability I know what they are. This is not a problem of definitions. To someone making the arrangement, they are very, very different. To an outsider, watching the transaction, they have to take you at your word. Someone who pays another player to lose can simply say they made a deal. They look exactly the same from the outside. nobody is paying anyone, nobody knows who is going to win or lose though, I fail to see how people could perceive it that way, the only thing they tell each other is "hey let's modify the prizes" it really is not the spectator's business It's the way a lot of people will perceive it, I guarantee you.
That's their problem.
|
On September 02 2011 13:47 FawkingGoomba wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:46 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:42 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:38 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:36 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:33 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:31 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:29 price wrote:On September 02 2011 13:10 ReignFayth wrote:
I watch because there are good players playing and good casters casting and to cheer for my friends I am guessing that if this kind of thing upset enough fans that it affected sponsorships, or simply upset sponsors, then steps would be taken to prevent it (why would a sponsor want to put their brand's name on the line for a fixed match?). You really cannot enforce it without monitoring players' bank accounts, but if there is an appearance that the match was not "real" then sponsors could definitely get angry. Agreements suggest that the players will not play as hard (regardless of whether it's true or not). In my opinion, it's basically like betting against yourself to win (you are betting a share of your winnings that you will lose the match, e.g., Pete Rose). once again you are mixing up matchfixing and deal-making 2 distinct things, you need to learn to make the difference The difference is in your mind, not in ours. To an outsider they look the same, but to the person making the deal they are different. Deal-making gives the appearance of matchfixing. That is the issue I see with it. lol no it's clearly not only in my mind, just like 2+2=4 match fixing is when the winner is decided beforehand, the matches are rigged, deal making is really just someone giving money to someone else and nothing about the upcoming match has been decided they're still gonna play to the best of their ability I know what they are. This is not a problem of definitions. To someone making the arrangement, they are very, very different. To an outsider, watching the transaction, they have to take you at your word. Someone who pays another player to lose can simply say they made a deal. They look exactly the same from the outside. nobody is paying anyone, nobody knows who is going to win or lose though, I fail to see how people could perceive it that way, the only thing they tell each other is "hey let's modify the prizes" it really is not the spectator's business It's the way a lot of people will perceive it, I guarantee you. That's their problem.
It is everyone's problem, it reflects on starcraft 2 as a spectator sport.
If you have someone going around saying "oh don't watch that starcraft 2 thing, they just fix every match anyway" it has a large negative impact and influences new people coming to watch as an e-sport.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
