EPTShould "Deal Making" be illegal? - Page 62
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Samuel Neptune
United States95 Posts
| ||
|
blanks.yuC
Poland61 Posts
DD1, Instead of arguing that Fenix behaved even worse then you I would say you both are retarded. No idea which one more, but probably you, he got his money after all. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
There is a lot more to it than just the players. Something like this would be a lot harder to regulate compared to BW and considering all the things that happened prior (goes way beyond the KeSPA match-fixing scandal). We know a player's word can mean shit. You have to catch their hand within the cookie jar before you can do anything about it and hell, we've caught so many in prominent tournaments. | ||
|
bonifaceviii
Canada2890 Posts
On September 02 2011 22:01 StarStruck wrote: 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. -_- It's not exactly the same as match-fixing, because due to the agreement either party can win and the same financial result will occur. That's not to say that there wouldn't be other incentives to letting a teammate win, but then it gets into real unsavoury stuff. | ||
|
HaXXspetten
Sweden15718 Posts
| ||
|
price
United States297 Posts
On September 02 2011 17:27 MyNameWuzBoB wrote: I'm just going to end with this: 1. You cannot tell players what to do with their own money 2. The negative impact it has on games is debatable. People in this thread are running under the false assumption that deals make games less enjoyable for the viewers. 3. There is no way to regulate it even if you wanted to make it illegal 4. There are still incentives to win even though the prize is chopped. 5. Some people may find 1 base carrier games interesting. What makes a good game is subjective. Looking to this thread since last night, this sums it up pretty nicely. In my mind, deal-making gives the image of impropriety and large tournament organizers could simply exclude players from their tournaments if they or their sponsors deemed deal-making to be wrong or to take away from the incentive to win (points 2 and 4). So tournaments in fact could tell players what to do and thus try to regulate it for their own tournaments (points 1 and 3). If a players league regulated all of this, then it could simply ban players. It would then depend on whether a particular league or tournament wants to allow its players to be able to make deals. In the end, if this were a serious issue, I could see things like this occurring. | ||
|
blanks.yuC
Poland61 Posts
| ||
|
annedeman
Netherlands350 Posts
in a tournament there is also more at stake then only the money you win, fans and fame are both important to players because it will influence the amount of money you will make in the future through invitations and improved sponsorship contracts, would Huk been given the same 'life-changing" deal if he had not won dreamhack and homestory cup, fame and fans are really important for sponsors. football players dont play bad at world cup because they aren't payed for it either, and playing good at the world cup turns out to be really lucrative as well(getting a transfer to a bigger team), as long as a tournament is prestigious and has alot of people watching i think 95% of the players would still really really want to win the tournament. | ||
|
Egyptian_Head
South Africa508 Posts
| ||
|
Oktyabr
Singapore2234 Posts
On September 02 2011 22:14 blanks.yuC wrote: Screw that guys, lets just give each of 250 MLG players 50 bucks so they can compete for fame. You didn't even need to practise, there is no point cose koreans will take top 8 places. Everybody happy? Anyone would watch that? And how ISN'T that killing e-sport? DD1, Instead of arguing that Fenix behaved even worse then you I would say you both are retarded. No idea which one more, but probably you, he got his money after all. That doesn't make sense because out of those 250, 10 of them probably have a disproportionately higher chance of winning as compared to the other 240. Why would the 10 Koreans/top foreigners even screw over their own potential winnings by opting to share it with people they don't care about, and can roll over in under 10 minutes? If you were MVP back in Anaheim, would you even consider splitting the money with your fellow Korean invites? Probably not. None of them are on his team, and he has no obligation to the rest of them because he believes he can win them all head on, plus winning Anaheim makes him an auto-invite for Raleigh assuming he was out of the GSL by then. There are so many intangible benefits in coming in first for other tournaments besides the prize money (i.e better seedings in a larger tournament). | ||
|
Full.tilt
United Kingdom1709 Posts
On September 02 2011 22:42 Egyptian_Head wrote: What is wrong with you people? Why do you guys get a say in what people do with there own money? If someone wins some money they can do what ever they want with it. You are missing the point entirely, quite impressive considering there are 60+ pages to read. | ||
|
skeldark
Germany2223 Posts
On September 02 2011 23:08 Full.tilt wrote: You are missing the point entirely, quite impressive considering there are 60+ pages to read. no he get the point, you missing it entirely. The 60+ pages only show that you are not alone with this... | ||
|
templar rage
United States2509 Posts
Also, for anyone who doesn't get it (a lot judging by this thread), chops aren't mandatory. They only happen if all parties involved agree to it. If even one person disagrees, then it doesn't happen. | ||
|
blanks.yuC
Poland61 Posts
On September 02 2011 23:11 skeldark wrote: no he get the point, you missing it entirely. The 60+ pages only show that you are not alone with this... The point is, it's not their money. When one wins, be my guest share it with your team-mate, but before that, just play your best. On September 02 2011 23:13 templar rage wrote: I honestly cannot understand how so many people think that chopping is the same thing as match-fixing. Match-fixing is predetermining the outcome of the match beforehand. Chopping is restructuring the prizepool to make it more mutually agreeable to all parties involved. Notice how nowhere in that statement did the outcome of the finals match come up, because it doesn't matter. Anyone who thinks players play for only money is an idiot whose probably never been in that position before. No one is going to stop trying to win a GSL title just because they chopped up the prize money 50/50 (or whatever), and it's pretty disrespectful to the players to assume they would give anything other than their best in such a situation. I mean, it's still a fucking GSL title. That means something (and a lot usually) beyond the prize money. Also, for anyone who doesn't get it (a lot judging by this thread), chops aren't mandatory. They only happen if all parties involved agree to it. If even one person disagrees, then it doesn't happen. Yet again, not all parties agree, I don't and I provide money for it. | ||
|
skeldark
Germany2223 Posts
On September 02 2011 23:14 blanks.yuC wrote: The point is, it's not their money. When one wins, be my guest share it with your team-mate, but before that, just play your best. and.... where is the point? They make a deal to share money they dont make a deal to play worse... When they win its their money. When they make a deal what to do IF they win, its a deal about THEIR money... | ||
|
blanks.yuC
Poland61 Posts
On September 02 2011 23:15 skeldark wrote: and.... where is the point? They make a deal to share money they dont make a deal to play worse... When they win its their money. When they make a deal what to do IF they win, its a deal about THEIR money... It's NOT their money, they did not deserved it yet, they will after one of them wins and the second one looses. Now if the one who won feels like it, he can share his part, after all they are friends right? I don't care what he does with his money. | ||
|
templar rage
United States2509 Posts
On September 02 2011 23:14 blanks.yuC wrote: Yet again, not all parties agree, I don't and I provide money for it. I said all parties involved. Are you playing in the finals of GSL? Being a paying customer doesn't count, because once you play for your GSL/MLG/NASL ticket, it's not your money anymore. And before you try to use the "well in poker it's your money, not so in SC2", you're wrong. When I buy-in to a poker tournament, that money is no longer mine. It belongs to the prizepool now, and as such, I have no say in what happens to it anymore. As far as I'm concerned, the same thing happens in SC2 tournaments. IMO, the prizepool (even unawarded) is player's money. It just hasn't been handed out yet. The tournament structure is the default payout system, but IMO the players have the right to alter it as they see fit (within reason). | ||
|
NrG.Bamboo
United States2756 Posts
On September 02 2011 23:23 blanks.yuC wrote: It's NOT their money, they did not deserved it yet, they will after one of them wins and the second one looses. Now if the one who won feels like it, he can share his part, after all they are friends right? I don't care what he does with his money. I feel like it's just like planning "If I get this job I can help my friend out financially." In this case, the money doesn't belong to either yet, but if it does turn out that one gets the money, they have a plan for the future. It's not like someone has to decide what they want to do with potential money after it's physically theirs. | ||
|
Egyptian_Head
South Africa508 Posts
On September 02 2011 23:23 blanks.yuC wrote: It's NOT their money, they did not deserved it yet, they will after one of them wins and the second one looses. Now if the one who won feels like it, he can share his part, after all they are friends right? I don't care what he does with his money. And you don't plan what to do with your next paycheck? | ||
|
rastaban
United States2294 Posts
Either way as long as what is and isn't allowed is stated clearly whichever method people use is ok with me. | ||
| ||
