EPTShould "Deal Making" be illegal? - Page 63
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
NovaTheFeared
United States7226 Posts
| ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
Ignorance is bliss. And in this case it's good for e-sports. I would point out though, that there are a lot of benefits to winning a tournament aside from the money prize: sponsorship, fame, better team salary, etc. There's still PLENTY of incentive to win. | ||
|
The Final Boss
United States1839 Posts
| ||
|
AGIANTSMURF
United States1232 Posts
but other then that its a really tough call, I would hate to find out that players weren't giving their all in a tournament because the outcome truly didn't matter to them. Again, if they were teammates and they made some agreement before the start of the tournament, or perhaps if there was something in their contract that said something in relation then I can see why something like this would occur. Bottom line, just like anything else dealing with large amounts of money, if your going to make a deal with someone Get It in Writing..... also, dont split the money 50/50, thats pretty lame..... make it so the winner has something to fight for, split 65/35 or something like that if at all and also.... is there not a 2nd place prize? WTF? | ||
|
BadgerBadger8264
Netherlands409 Posts
and also.... is there not a 2nd place prize? WTF? The difference between second and first place is usually huge, with the winner making anywhere from 2-5 times as much money | ||
|
N3rV[Green]
United States1935 Posts
That leap in logic escapes me entirely and it the only thing that people seem to hate about this topic. Seriously guys, just cause the money is going to be split, it has absolutely 0 to do with how well the players preform. | ||
|
oogieogie
United States3657 Posts
On September 03 2011 00:53 BadgerBadger8264 wrote: The difference between second and first place is usually huge, with the winner making anywhere from 2-5 times as much money the winner of a finals should make more then the second place person. | ||
|
AGIANTSMURF
United States1232 Posts
On September 03 2011 00:56 N3rV[Green] wrote: where does the notion that if two players were to make a money splitting deal, they no longer care about winning or giving it their all? That leap in logic escapes me entirely and it the only thing that people seem to hate about this topic. Seriously guys, just cause the money is going to be split, it has absolutely 0 to do with how well the players preform. Because you are removing the mental stress and tension that comes naturally when there is money on the line, if its some Shitty tournament that no one has really heard of then money would certainly be more important to the players then the title. By making a deal to split the winnings you are without a doubt removing that natural mental stress which has an undeniable impact on the game. | ||
|
noclaninator
Canada19 Posts
Put yourself in their shoes: starcraft 2 tournaments often have poor prize structures that are far too top heavy. Suppose it is a winner take all event where first place gets $2,500. You are up against <insert amazing player here> and you feel it will be some kind of coinflip or 55/45 match. Why do you want to gamble on this? One might argue that the pressure of this scenario actually detracts from the players abilities. They should be allowed a deal. However, a deal that splits the entirety of the money as has been mentioned will leave no incentive for the players to play amazing starcraft. This is bad for the fans and bad for esports. Something needs to be played for. | ||
|
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
| ||
|
Asshat
593 Posts
On September 03 2011 01:02 oogieogie wrote: the winner of a finals should make more then the second place person. He does, he just chooses to give x amount to the second place player. | ||
|
Dragar
United Kingdom971 Posts
| ||
|
Trumpet
United States1935 Posts
Calm and Hwasin got to the finals of a chinese tournament and whispered each other before the start of every game telling one another what builds to do to make it look like a real game instead of playing it out for real. I don't think any viewers enjoyed that experience. I think it's lame when it happens, and an even split definitely affects how someone plays. A 60/40 split between teammates, especially when a tournament has an incredibly skewed prize distribution, isn't as big a deal, however, and generally is still plenty enough money to motivate real matches. On September 03 2011 00:56 N3rV[Green] wrote: where does the notion that if two players were to make a money splitting deal, they no longer care about winning or giving it their all? As stated, it comes from experience if it happening, not the possibility of it happening. | ||
|
Oktyabr
Singapore2234 Posts
On September 03 2011 01:11 DrainX wrote: I think match fixing is a good thing. It forces tournaments to have a more gradual prize distribution instead of some "winner takes it all" bullshit. This isn't match fixing. Match fixing involves 2 players who have decided the outcome of the game even before it has taken place (i.e Player A wins, Player B loses) such that they profit from this specific result. Prize splitting on the other hand is another whole issue altogether. | ||
|
Assaulter
Lithuania324 Posts
| ||
|
Athrun
Philippines16 Posts
1) It does not affect anyone except the players involved because the rest of the field has already been eliminated. 2) Those players have to agree or it doesn't occur. 3) The incentive for winning first place far outweighs the cash incentive (notoriety, future sponsorships, salary increases, etc.), hence there is still so much to play for. Perhaps I am biased because I have done the same thing several times in poker tournaments, but I always continued to play as if the money wasn't being split, and I could say the same thing for the people I've split the money with. There is a saying that "No one remembers who came in second." On a side note, it had always been the stronger and more experienced players who were very quick to say yes to a proposal to chop the money. I wonder how it is with starcraft. | ||
|
leandroqm
Netherlands874 Posts
On September 02 2011 23:42 Sbrubbles wrote: I wouldn't mind this, as long as no one told me. Ignorance is bliss. And in this case it's good for e-sports. I would point out though, that there are a lot of benefits to winning a tournament aside from the money prize: sponsorship, fame, better team salary, etc. There's still PLENTY of incentive to win. I disagree. Looks like the "bread and circuses" theory, that's why I hate this thinking. This is why our politics is as it is now...  I got really disappointed when I heard about this the first time (won't say any names). This last time it was actually good because, not only it was brought up, but it was widely discussed. Some bad things comes when we *need* it. This issue needed to be discussed. I can say that it would be a lot worse if we just let it happen freely. IMHO, that's how match fixing WOULD start, not anymore since we've finally discussed it. Even tho players can still do it (and probably a few will still do), they know how the community feels about it and can make their own choices based on that. I am ready to forgive (and have forgiven) who did it in the past, but I will not cheer for players who keep doing this nor buy products/services from sponsors that support that kind of player anymore. | ||
|
ramaen
United States2 Posts
| ||
|
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
On September 03 2011 01:18 Oktyabr wrote: This isn't match fixing. Match fixing involves 2 players who have decided the outcome of the game even before it has taken place (i.e Player A wins, Player B loses) such that they profit from this specific result. Prize splitting on the other hand is another whole issue altogether. Yeah sorry. I just woke up. My head is a bit off. I meant Deal making or Prize splitting of course, which would be obvious from my argument. | ||
|
TheResidentEvil
United States991 Posts
1) The games are still played for real and not some made up fake stuff like WWE 2) No one knows about it. If you are going to do it, deny it and keep your mouth shut. | ||
| ||
