|
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
You don't see how people willing to undermining tournament rules, which include price distribution, could be less trusted than people who don't do that? Really?
|
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.
it is very standard among pros, I guess the reason it isn't public knowledge is because of ignorant spectators being upset for invalid reasons
also anything that involves money shouldn't really be known to public
these deals are very common in poker and it isn't public knowledge either, it's not written anywhere
|
Anyone remember Hwasin vs Calm in China? They did this too :p.
I'm personally ok with it because the sponsors/reputation of winning a big tournament is a pretty significant amount even if you are splitting the money. Stork was never remembered as a champion, despite all of his 2nd places, and he only made the jump when he won something. Even now, he's still has a smaller legacy than anyone who's won multiple tournaments. For SC2, with unstable salaries, it's even more important. Reputation will get you sponsors/fans, which is more important than any one tournament prize. This guarantees that for most significant tournament prizes, there will still be competition. In the case of Fenix/TT1's competition, there was less at risk in that sense because it's not very well known, so that might explain TT1's apparent "throw" (if he did). If they were battling it out in the finals of an MLG, there's no way TT1 would have done anything risky intentionally (not saying he did in that tournament).
As for this specific situation though, I would put Fenix in the wrong unless there was some communication issue. If that was it, then all we can say was it was a misunderstanding. However, if Fenix understood the deal and agreed to it, then taking off is a pretty shitty move.
edit: yea forget Hwasin/Calm, my memory failed me.
|
On September 02 2011 13:44 benjammin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:38 MudkipSEA` wrote: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.
Okie, my point is quite extreme and I agree with you on that.
But, the point is, as a member of the community, I would be disgusted if i turned up my stream at 3-4 am in the morning, wake up to find player A and B going into the finals, and knowing that they are not really playing a finals. Or drive/take a flight/ take a ship all the way to a LAN event to watch the finals.
We should not really accept this as a community can we?
|
On September 02 2011 13:50 enzym 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 You don't see how people willing to undermining tournament rules, which include price distribution, could be less trusted than people who don't do that? Really?
there is no rules stating that people can't share their prize money....
as long as there isn't any cheating, rigged games going on.... It's all good
|
On September 02 2011 13:52 ketomai wrote:
Anyone remember Hwasin vs Calm in China? They did this too :p.
I'm personally ok with it because the sponsors/reputation of winning a big tournament is a pretty significant amount even if you are splitting the money. Stork was never remembered as a champion, despite all of his 2nd places, and he only made the jump when he won something. Even now, he's still has a smaller legacy than anyone who's won multiple tournaments. For SC2, with unstable salaries, it's even more important. Reputation will get you sponsors/fans, which is more important than any one tournament prize. This guarantees that for most significant tournament prizes, there will still be competition. In the case of Fenix/TT1's competition, there was less at risk in that sense because it's not very well known, so that might explain TT1's apparent "throw" (if he did). If they were battling it out in the finals of an MLG, there's no way TT1 would have done anything risky intentionally (not saying he did in that tournament).
As for this specific situation though, I would put Fenix in the wrong unless there was some communication issue. If that was it, then all we can say was it was a misunderstanding. However, if Fenix understood the deal and agreed to it, then taking off is a pretty shitty move.
the hwasin/calm thing is COMPLETELY different
|
On September 02 2011 13:52 ReignFayth 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. it is very standard among pros, I guess the reason it isn't public knowledge is because of ignorant spectators being upset for invalid reasons also anything that involves money shouldn't really be known to public these deals are very common in poker and it isn't public knowledge either, it's not written anywhere
Calling them ignorant wont win them over. Neither will calling the practice standard or saying they shouldnt know about it. It's really an issue of trust and very dangerous and possibly very damaging.
|
On September 02 2011 13:45 babylon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:37 anrimayu wrote: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.
I didn't follow WC3, so I didn't know about ToD. I'll just say I'm glad ToD and Grubby are mediocre at SC2 so they'll never be in any tournaments finals together.
Kiwi may be rich, but when was the last time he won any major SC2 tournaments? It's not that he doesn't need to win, but he can't when there's Koreans involved.
User was warned for this post
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On September 02 2011 13:53 ReignFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:50 enzym 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 You don't see how people willing to undermining tournament rules, which include price distribution, could be less trusted than people who don't do that? Really? there is no rules stating that people can't share their prize money.... as long as there isn't any cheating, rigged games going on.... It's all good
Its not all good if they come to this agreement beforehand, as it results in:
1) The possibility of changing of results of the games due to reduced pressure.
2) Shitstorms like Fenix/TT1 "he didn't pay me".
|
On September 02 2011 13:53 ReignFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:50 enzym 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 You don't see how people willing to undermining tournament rules, which include price distribution, could be less trusted than people who don't do that? Really? there is no rules stating that people can't share their prize money.... as long as there isn't any cheating, rigged games going on.... It's all good
Which goes back to price's point. It looks exactly the same from the outside. And I disagree: it's not all good to make any kind of shady (not publicly known) deal before the conclusion of the tournament, especially if it works to circumvent tournament rules. And yes, price money distribution can (should) easily be considered part of the rules of that tournament. What else would it be called?
Why take chances?
|
On September 02 2011 13:55 anrimayu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:45 babylon wrote:On September 02 2011 13:37 anrimayu wrote: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:
[quote]
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. I didn't follow WC3, so I didn't know about ToD. I'll just say I'm glad ToD and Grubby are mediocre at SC2 so they'll never be in any tournaments finals together. Kiwi may be rich, but when was the last time he won any major SC2 tournaments? It's not that he doesn't need to win, but he can't when there's Koreans involved.
If MLG is any indication, nobody can win when there's Koreans.
|
On September 02 2011 13:55 anrimayu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:45 babylon wrote:On September 02 2011 13:37 anrimayu wrote: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:
[quote]
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. I didn't follow WC3, so I didn't know about ToD. I'll just say I'm glad ToD and Grubby are mediocre at SC2 so they'll never be in any tournaments finals together. Kiwi may be rich, but when was the last time he won any major SC2 tournaments? It's not that he doesn't need to win, but he can't when there's Koreans involved.
Well, thank you for admitting your ignorance. 
|
On September 02 2011 13:56 Tektos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:53 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:50 enzym 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 You don't see how people willing to undermining tournament rules, which include price distribution, could be less trusted than people who don't do that? Really? there is no rules stating that people can't share their prize money.... as long as there isn't any cheating, rigged games going on.... It's all good Its not all good if they come to this agreement beforehand, as it results in: 1) The possibility of changing of results of the games due to reduced pressure. 2) Shitstorms like Fenix/TT1 "he didn't pay me".
honestly I don't know many players that would do something as fucking stupid as what Fenix has done, most teammates are usually fairly trustworthy
and I don't see people complaining about the possibility of changing of results of the game due to other emotions players may experience
|
People are just completely missing the point it's crazy.
In that case the best was made before the tournament. Fenix could have finished 6th and TT1 first and most of what Fenix is making is form TT1 winning the tournament, but they both make a really good amount of money.
It just happened that they both reached the final. They could have talked and said the winner takes 8500 and the loser 6500 out of the 15,000 they are winning or whatever, but they didn't.
They still play the finals to show some good games and mostly to try to win it. Then they split money and that's it. They both made a really good amount, it was a great tourny for them they had a good time, one of them won the other one finished 2nd you can't ask for more than that really and you both go home with 7.5k in your pocket.
Considering they were 2 of the best players in the tournament odds of one of them winning was pretty high so they both had 5k almost sure in their pocket going in rather than both have to really perform good that week end and make it to the final for that 5k.
Sc2 wasn't what it is today either with all the sick contracts so I doubt TT1 and Fenix had that good of a salary from Fnatic. Winning at least 5k was huge for both of them. It's really sad if Fenix really decided to bail on the deal. It's a really cheap move.
Let's say Liquid has 4 players at the NASL finals, Tyler, Jinro, Sheth and Ret.
The prizes are...
Champion $50,000
Second $25,000
Third $10,000
Fourth $5,000
Ro8 $1,500
Ro16 $500
Considering you barely make anything until you reach top 4 making a deal is pretty sweet. If anyone of the 4 players make top 4, you're sure to make more money than if you make it to top 8 on your own. And once you get top 4 sky's the limit really the prizes just sky rocket.
It's tough to be on top of your game the whole year, there are many tournaments, but some week ends you'll just not play at the level you should be at there are week-ends you'll play better than you ever did. Splitting with your team guarantee that you'll have decent winnings every months or so rather than possibly having a big one during the year if you perform amazingly at one of the big events. Everybody has bills to pay and hoping for that 10k winning or that 25k winning isn't always an option. If you can get a 1k every month for sure because you or one of your teammate got a good result it makes so much more sense and you get to celebrate it with all your teams and friends.
There are so many teams with players that just aren't top players or have no players that you expect in the top 16 of an MLG for example.
You might get one player every MLG that will get it, but you can't guarantee one will make it every time or 3 times out of 5 in a year. Complexity is a bit in that boat, I'm sure it's easier for them to support each others than just do your own thing and hope to be the lucky one that actually get a good bracket and make it far. One MLG you might do really well and the next time you face Puma early on and lose to Qxc in the loser bracket and you finish 50th.
Every players in this thread that has a shot at getting any winnings on a regular basis in SC2 says it's totally common to share your winnings and that no matter what it'll never change(Minigun's quote I think) and everybody that just watches the game can't believe it actually happens.
Sharing is part of life, when you make your living out of something as volatile as Sc2 it's even more important to do so if you want to pay the bills every month. There's just no reason not to unless your whole team is rich or something.
|
This issue goes beyond tournament rules. Unless you ban players from talking to each other during a tournament, there's nothing you can do about this. Banning "deals" is like banning generosity or gift-giving. You can't tell first place not to give second place money after the tournament. And it's not as if the deals are like "let me win and I'll give you some of my cut". The deals we are talking about is "hey, regardless of who wins, we'll split the pot later as consolation." It's up to the finalists whether to put up a fight or not, and then we as spectators can judge them on a case-by-case basis.
This discussion as a whole is pretty meaningless because we literally can't do anything to stop this from going on and the only reason it's even a debate is because someone posted one instance of it on TL. This has gone on in tournaments since forever and I've always thought this was standard between 1st and 2nd place if they knew each other or were friends.
Only way I can see fixing it is removing prizes altogether, or creating a different type of prize/currency. Even then, there are ways first place can give second place consolations.
|
On September 02 2011 13:56 enzym wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:53 ReignFayth wrote:On September 02 2011 13:50 enzym 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 You don't see how people willing to undermining tournament rules, which include price distribution, could be less trusted than people who don't do that? Really? there is no rules stating that people can't share their prize money.... as long as there isn't any cheating, rigged games going on.... It's all good Which goes back to price's point. It looks exactly the same from the outside. And I disagree: it's not all good to make any kind of shady (not publicly known) deal before the conclusion of the tournament, especially if it works to circumvent tournament rules. And yes, price money distribution can (should) easily be considered part of the rules of that tournament. What else would it be called? Why take chances?
ok whatever, you are entitled to your own opinion, people are still going to do it, even your idols and you're not going to know about it and they will still try their hardest for the fans, the money they make afterwards is none of ur business
|
On September 02 2011 13:56 FawkingGoomba wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:55 anrimayu wrote:On September 02 2011 13:45 babylon wrote:On September 02 2011 13:37 anrimayu wrote: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:
[quote]
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. I didn't follow WC3, so I didn't know about ToD. I'll just say I'm glad ToD and Grubby are mediocre at SC2 so they'll never be in any tournaments finals together. Kiwi may be rich, but when was the last time he won any major SC2 tournaments? It's not that he doesn't need to win, but he can't when there's Koreans involved. If MLG is any indication, nobody can win when there's Koreans.
Then maybe they should be putting in more effort or doing something differently so they can compete on a world class level instead of just sharing all their prizes with each other through pre-match deals so they can continue to play on a lower level while still making a living.
|
On September 02 2011 13:46 ReignFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:38 MudkipSEA` wrote: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
From what I'm implying, you're saying that playing in the finals is like gambling. Okie, let's not only talk about the finals then. I decide to make a deal with you on the first round, and you're a better player, loser gets no prize money. How bout that?
My point is we, as a community, cannot support deal making.
I'm ok with sharing prize money after the tourney, but not before.
Edit: I'm not going to reply to you, as I am beating around the leafless bush.
|
On September 02 2011 14:00 Tektos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 13:56 FawkingGoomba wrote:On September 02 2011 13:55 anrimayu wrote:On September 02 2011 13:45 babylon wrote:On September 02 2011 13:37 anrimayu wrote: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:
[quote]
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. I didn't follow WC3, so I didn't know about ToD. I'll just say I'm glad ToD and Grubby are mediocre at SC2 so they'll never be in any tournaments finals together. Kiwi may be rich, but when was the last time he won any major SC2 tournaments? It's not that he doesn't need to win, but he can't when there's Koreans involved. If MLG is any indication, nobody can win when there's Koreans. Then maybe they should be putting in more effort or doing something differently so they can compete on a world class level instead of just sharing all their prizes with each other through pre-match deals so they can continue to play on a lower level while still making a living.
There is really no evidence to suggest that deal making lowers the skills of foreign progamers.
How does that logical leap even work? Especially if Fayth is right in saying that SlayerS does the exact same thing.
|
fayth is right though. You're just modding the prize structure
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
