|
On September 02 2011 20:49 Mordiford wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 20:43 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On September 02 2011 20:39 Mordiford wrote:On September 02 2011 20:35 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On September 02 2011 20:23 Mordiford wrote:On September 02 2011 20:10 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On September 02 2011 19:59 MyNameWuzBoB wrote:
Any player with a good sense of responsibility would still play to win with a 50/50 split. These sort of statements just show me you have no idea what it is like to be a professional at any sport/game. When you play these huge tournaments the sudden knowledge about the money being a lock will give almost anyone a huge feeling of relief and settlement. This will result in lackluster/happy/unfocused play. I absolutely disagree with you here, Nazgul. This is different for different people and there are so many things that could negatively impact one's play. Someone may lock up at the thought of so much money and just freak out and do shitty cheeses instead of doing what they practiced. Someone may feel super relieved that they don't have to worry about winning or losing and just fuck around. This comes down to the player and it comes down to them in so many more ways than just this that singling it out isn't really sensible. I actually agree with you that there are many things that will affect someones play and that it is different for every player. However someone locking up under pressure to me is the beauty of competition. If nobody locked up under pressure we would not be able to admire those who play with nerves of steel. If that causes him to cheese then to me that is all within the nature of competition. I simply pointed this out because you earlier touched on it as possibly detrimental to the quality of games, but if this is your stance then the actually "quality of games" is not really what you're concerned about(which makes sense since it's so subjective and can often go outside the actual game to things like the story behind the match) and more-so about the thrill of competition, which in this case involved a monetary reward? Am I correct so far? I guess where we differ is that I feel competition is essentially there regardless of the difference in prize, or whether or not there exists a monetary prize at all. Thrill/excitement and quality of games are two different factors which are both heavily influenced by a 50-50 split. Yes, but since we've already touched on the limitless factors that can affect the quality of games, and the inability to really come to a conclusion to whether the effect on the quality of games is positive or negative, let's put that aside for now. The second thing is the thrill/excitement, which you've specifically touched on as separating those who buckle under pressure from those with nerves of steel. In that case of a game like Starcraft, where there is not that much money anyways, these monetary rewards can often make a massive difference. If we really wanted to push this further, why not come to an agreement in regards to eliminating player salaries to really push players into further pressure in regards to tournament winnings. That would really test their nerves and resolve. Ultimately, it's not feasible in regards to prize splitting just as it isn't in the above example, particularly in the case of eSports where there isn't that much money going around anyways and often times what is going around can mean the difference between a means to a profession and a simple hobby. Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 20:43 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On September 02 2011 20:39 Mordiford wrote:On September 02 2011 20:35 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On September 02 2011 20:23 Mordiford wrote:On September 02 2011 20:10 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On September 02 2011 19:59 MyNameWuzBoB wrote:
Any player with a good sense of responsibility would still play to win with a 50/50 split. These sort of statements just show me you have no idea what it is like to be a professional at any sport/game. When you play these huge tournaments the sudden knowledge about the money being a lock will give almost anyone a huge feeling of relief and settlement. This will result in lackluster/happy/unfocused play. I absolutely disagree with you here, Nazgul. This is different for different people and there are so many things that could negatively impact one's play. Someone may lock up at the thought of so much money and just freak out and do shitty cheeses instead of doing what they practiced. Someone may feel super relieved that they don't have to worry about winning or losing and just fuck around. This comes down to the player and it comes down to them in so many more ways than just this that singling it out isn't really sensible. I actually agree with you that there are many things that will affect someones play and that it is different for every player. However someone locking up under pressure to me is the beauty of competition. If nobody locked up under pressure we would not be able to admire those who play with nerves of steel. If that causes him to cheese then to me that is all within the nature of competition. I simply pointed this out because you earlier touched on it as possibly detrimental to the quality of games, but if this is your stance then the actually "quality of games" is not really what you're concerned about(which makes sense since it's so subjective and can often go outside the actual game to things like the story behind the match) and more-so about the thrill of competition, which in this case involved a monetary reward? Am I correct so far? I guess where we differ is that I feel competition is essentially there regardless of the difference in prize, or whether or not there exists a monetary prize at all. Thrill/excitement and quality of games are two different factors which are both heavily influenced by a 50-50 split. On September 02 2011 20:42 MyNameWuzBoB wrote:On September 02 2011 20:35 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On September 02 2011 20:23 Mordiford wrote:On September 02 2011 20:10 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On September 02 2011 19:59 MyNameWuzBoB wrote:
Any player with a good sense of responsibility would still play to win with a 50/50 split. These sort of statements just show me you have no idea what it is like to be a professional at any sport/game. When you play these huge tournaments the sudden knowledge about the money being a lock will give almost anyone a huge feeling of relief and settlement. This will result in lackluster/happy/unfocused play. I absolutely disagree with you here, Nazgul. This is different for different people and there are so many things that could negatively impact one's play. Someone may lock up at the thought of so much money and just freak out and do shitty cheeses instead of doing what they practiced. Someone may feel super relieved that they don't have to worry about winning or losing and just fuck around. This comes down to the player and it comes down to them in so many more ways than just this that singling it out isn't really sensible. I actually agree with you that there are many things that will affect someones play and that it is different for every player. However someone locking up under pressure to me is the beauty of competition. If nobody locked up under pressure we would not be able to admire those who play with nerves of steel. If that causes him to cheese then to me that is all within the nature of competition. Just because some factors affect people negatively already does not mean we should not investigate other factors. For example if tournaments made players play with sponsored gear which would lower the quality of all games I doubt you would be making this argument to justify it. But there is still pressure even with 50/50 chop. You even said yourself currently the prize money that goes with winning an MLG event is not up to par with the prestige that goes along with winning. Who is going to work hard and train 8+ hours a day for a month and win all his matches in a tournament to just not try when they make the finals? Can't imagine anyone. The basis of this topic is about TT1 in the finals of a tournament where he played less than optimal. The only case known to you and me already disproves your statement that it would not influence anyone. Secondly I do believe almost everyone would still try to win. However, you would be a fool if you thought the stakes felt exactly the same to players. I didn't say anything about not trying, I said that they would be more lackluster/happy/unfocused. It is a natural reaction to feeling good about your winnings. This isn't about the extremes of black or white, trying or not trying. It's about a certain influence it will have, which I undoubtedly believe it does. I do believe ToD gave an example of him and Grubby having a split in Warcraft III, to my knowledge it did not affect the quality of games, though I could be mistaken.
If you want to mess around with extremes such as removing salary to put more pressure on players in tournaments for the sake of entertainment, how about considering the opposite of that extreme which is people entering a tournament and all making the same amount of money and see how well that turns out. Both ideas are horrible examples obviously show that there is a middle ground we have to walk.
|
It should absolutely be illegal. The main thrill of watching any competetive sport isn't in the "sport" part, it's the "competetive" part.
|
Doesn't matter the spirit the deal is made in, rigging is rigging. That's the end of it.
|
This is all I'm gunna say. I'm pretty fucking sure Tiger Woods, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokavic, Federer, Mickelson, and a whole bunch of athletes, don't actually go to an event to win the prize pool. They go to just win. And the prestige of winning the event will make the money, not the actually prize money of the event. For example, I'm pretty freaking sure idra makes way more money off of his salary than his actual tournament winnings.
Splitting of prizepool doesn't matter.
|
On September 02 2011 21:00 wei2coolman wrote:
This is all I'm gunna say. I'm pretty fucking sure Tiger Woods, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokavic, Federer, Mickelson, and a whole bunch of athletes, don't actually go to an event to win the prize pool. They go to just win. And the prestige of winning the event will make the money, not the actually prize money of the event. For example, I'm pretty freaking sure idra makes way more money off of his salary than his actual tournament winnings.
Splitting of prizepool doesn't matter.
Is this why they are all paid huge money to show up at smaller tournaments? Where they sometimes end up playing lackluster because the show-up money is more than the first prize?
I don't understand how people have such a black and white view on this. Athletes in any sport at any level are influenced by things like this to some extent, even if it may be less than in SC2.
|
Just like corruption in the business world this is an invisible and unreportable problem - so talking about how to "fix" or "solve" this is a null point. You cant change something that you 1) can't prove and 2) will never be admitted.
Therefore I suggest people get used to it.
I would like to point out South Korea's horrific problem with endemic business corruption, and how their cuture sees such as acceptable. And then point out that the GSL gives out huge amounts of prize money, and that proteams are run as a business.
|
On September 02 2011 21:03 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 21:00 wei2coolman wrote:
This is all I'm gunna say. I'm pretty fucking sure Tiger Woods, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokavic, Federer, Mickelson, and a whole bunch of athletes, don't actually go to an event to win the prize pool. They go to just win. And the prestige of winning the event will make the money, not the actually prize money of the event. For example, I'm pretty freaking sure idra makes way more money off of his salary than his actual tournament winnings.
Splitting of prizepool doesn't matter. Is this why they are all paid huge money to show up at smaller tournaments? Where they sometimes end up playing lackluster because the show-up money is more than the first prize?
Thats honestly one of the bigger reasons why I stopped watching sports by the way. At least the smaller tournaments.
|
I don't see a problem with it. I see it like this 2 friends win $10,000 tourny and agreed to split it before hand, As far as I know they didn't go on stage and say "We agreed to split the winnings!!". So the thrill of the finals are still there for me, Its no diffrent from player winning the money and his friend lost in the tourny and hes like "Hey bro I'm going to give $5,000 of this $10,000 check for how much you helped my practice and supported me through this!" Its just a friend giving a gift to a friend should that be illegal?
Now I would be disappointed to find out before hand that they are going to share it, But what they do with the prize money is their buisness as its their money.
(Thats my opinion unless I understood the OP wrong).
|
if you guys have ever got second place in a tournament, it is an awful feeling. i've split first and second in a fighting game tourney before, tried hard and lost, and still felt pretty bad. it's a minor consolation if you actually care about the game
|
On September 02 2011 19:36 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 19:30 Medrea wrote:
Well obviously that works for the sponsors, but in the end the hear no evil see no evil approach still robs the spectators. That's why it is important to split the debate up into two parts. Nobody should disagree with it being illegal to talk about, no matter how you feel about it as a whole. Morally I think players should never share prize winnings to an extent of playing for nothing at all. When poker tournaments accomodate deals behind the scenes they will also keep this in mind. They will help setting up deals but they will always require a sum of money to be left in the middle. This is so that the players will continue to try at 100% to win. For example let's look at the Dreamhack Invitational where it was $16,000 for first and nothing for second. Two players splitting $8,000 each to me is morally wrong. Two players splitting $6,000 and $10,000 each to me is not morally wrong. Case 1 you deprive the viewers of quality games. Case 2 you have no negative influence on anything. I very much question whether you can have rules against any of this, so we are left with questions regarding the morals of the situation.
In Case 2 you are describing a normal finals game.
|
I remember not having a problem with this the first time I saw it happen when two teams in dota agreed to change the prize pool from winner takes all to being split 60/40 or something like that and I have just as little problem with it if two people have a deal about prizes going into the tournament. They aren't throwing matches and they still need to continue to win as many matches as possible to get more money so I don't see what the problem is. And in the case of the finals they still have motivation to win based on just being the winner. The money is theirs regardless and they are free to do whatever they want with it.
|
On September 02 2011 21:08 resilve wrote:
Just like corruption in the business world this is an invisible and unreportable problem - so talking about how to "fix" or "solve" this is a null point. You cant change something that you 1) can't prove and 2) will never be admitted.
Therefore I suggest people get used to it.
I would like to point out South Korea's horrific problem with endemic business corruption, and how their cuture sees such as acceptable. And then point out that the GSL gives out huge amounts of prize money, and that proteams are run as a business.
What?
If for arguments sake fans, fellow progamers and tournaments were against it - wouldn't most of those currently "deal making" morally feel that it is wrong and don't do it?
Why have they done it up until now? Is it because
a) they feel that it is right and thought everybody else thought so too?
b) they feel that it is right and didn't care that other thought it was bad?
c) they feel that it is wrong but didn't care about it?
It has different implications in each case. c) is probably the worst and a) is totally fine, b) is not necessarily bad.
|
I'd argue with people but I'll just state that I agree with Liquid'Nazgul.
Seriously this can bring nothing but bad things, I don't mind having more money or more equal distribution of the money...
but people compete to WIN, and the less incentiment there is to win the less people will fight for it: There is no arguement against this, I don't care "this and that guy didn't!" that's single subjects but the rule is that people tend to try and win because there is a reward in some form. Fame might be one of them, but removing the money incentive is never a good thing since most will be turned off by the removal even if there are those who are not.
|
not that you can force a player to keep the money for themself, they won it they can do what they want. And if they want to support their team member, so they can concentrate more on training to get better, i guess you gotta life with that.
And you might have heard this some people play better without pressure :3 , or regrets of beating up a team mate that has financial problems for example :3 .
But i find it wrong myself, but because in my eyes it would be standard to split with the team if its needed :3 and not wanting anything if not.
|
Pretty easy what to do:
Ban the players from all future events!
|
Not everything can be regulated. Gentlemen's agreements are incredibly hard to pinpoint, save in hindsight when they are spoken about to someone.
Now if a tournament organizer were to catch wind of a gentlemen's agreement before a finals match, I would suggest dealing with it as Nazgul describes.
|
This isn't even debatable. Deal making is a form of match fixing and it should be punished. There is far more at stake than just the prize money. It is a scandal. -_-
|
On September 02 2011 21:03 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2011 21:00 wei2coolman wrote:
This is all I'm gunna say. I'm pretty fucking sure Tiger Woods, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokavic, Federer, Mickelson, and a whole bunch of athletes, don't actually go to an event to win the prize pool. They go to just win. And the prestige of winning the event will make the money, not the actually prize money of the event. For example, I'm pretty freaking sure idra makes way more money off of his salary than his actual tournament winnings.
Splitting of prizepool doesn't matter. Is this why they are all paid huge money to show up at smaller tournaments? Where they sometimes end up playing lackluster because the show-up money is more than the first prize? I don't understand how people have such a black and white view on this. Athletes in any sport at any level are influenced by things like this to some extent, even if it may be less than in SC2.
Well, athletes have to show up because their sponsors require them to - so yes, money is the reason, but not so much the prize-money as the money they get because people watch them play in adidas-shoes and swing a wilson-racket.
|
I didn't really think this was going on, I wouldn't say this is as bad as match fixing, but as a spectator you still want to see people trying as hard as they can to win.
The only problem I have with it is that players are agreeing before hand to do this, it's not like they're subconsciously not playing as hard in the booth or something. I guess it's really hard to tell though if two players aren't playing their hardest(at least from watching a cast) unless the deal between the two was made public somehow.
I think if players are found to do this then they should have all there earnings from that tournament taken away and banned from the next similar tournament. Not sure if that's too harsh, or not harsh enough. I mean I'm sure when people figure it out, the backlash from the community may be a deterrent enough for most the players, I hope.
|
as long as their is no money involved (bribery, not the championship win) i think its ok, but still it should be frowned upon
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
