EPTShould "Deal Making" be illegal? - Page 68
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Full.tilt
United Kingdom1709 Posts
| ||
|
Truedot
444 Posts
On September 02 2011 19:26 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: It's very simple. No matter whether you think it is fine or not fine to actually do it: This has to be illegal to talk about it in public, no doubt about it. If it is legal and players can openly talk about splitting prize money then this ruins all anticipation and hype around a match. Besides anticipation and hype it can also influence the level of the finals. For big live poker tournaments it is often against the rules to talk about deals, but it is accomodated nonetheless off camera. I don't know what would be right for SC2 right now. Can you really prevent people from sharing the money they win? I do know that talking about it should be at the very least not allowed. you cant do anything about what people do with their money after they win it. its their money. but you can do contracts to prevent them from making deals before hand, since its not their money until they win. if the contract says they are prevented from making any deals that would cheapen or invalidate competitive play during the tournament, on forfeiture of winnings if found out, then even once they get the money, and if they spend it all, if found out, they would have to give it all back to the tournament, and if they spent it all, that means they would have to make money to give it back. On September 03 2011 05:33 Full.tilt wrote: What is with this "sc2 fans entitlement" and "the sense of entitlement disgusts me" bullshit? What's wrong with expecting prize money to be split as the tournament organisers advertise and then being disappointed it does not happen. whats with this SC2 pro and pro supporter sense of entitlement that people should be able to make deals because its their money? Its not their money yet. Its only their money once they win. How can you agree to split the money by defrauding a tournament and thinking thats okay makes no sense to me. | ||
|
Novalisk
Israel1818 Posts
On September 03 2011 05:32 MerciLess wrote: #1 He's saying it's not illegal so nothing should be done in the way of punishment towards the players #2 He's saying the players could(potentially) lose fans if they split prizes, not that making it illegal will lose fans Thanks for the translation. I still don't see any reasoning for the "bottom line" statement. Just because it's a stupid thing to do doesn't mean it shouldn't be made illegal. It doesn't just hurt the players, it hurts the tournament as well. | ||
|
VPCursed
1044 Posts
| ||
|
Subztance
United States139 Posts
Fans will lose interest if the finals of a tournament is being played "for fun" with the prize pool being split. Fewer fans means fewer spectators. Fewer spectators means less effective advertisement. That in turn means less sponsorship. Ultimately I believe that allowing deal making will hurt e-sports. | ||
|
Barundar
Denmark1582 Posts
| ||
|
Truedot
444 Posts
On September 03 2011 05:41 VPCursed wrote: my opinion is, no one got to where they were by wanting to play for money at the pro level. There going to do their best to win regardless, pro's are poor.. unless they're in eg your opinion is completely self contradictory. >Pros are poor. >no one wanting to play for money at the pro level. ??? Thats the point. If they are assured of getting some money making a behind the back deal, then they won't play as fully as if their livelihood is on the line. derp. due to this it also happens to be defrauding the agreement between the tournament and players being that the tournament is a third party. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On September 03 2011 05:17 hacky wrote: I don't understand any of this animosity toward prize splits. If both parties agree and it only affects both parties in terms of prizes, what business do you have with what they do? They've already earned their keep. They didn't earn any of it, if the tournament wanted to offer those prize amount they'd make the first and second prize equal. At the same time, you lose your incentive to practice hard, and it simply doesn't mean as much. It kills the competitive spirit, we've already seen TT1 not give a shit about the finals he was in. So please, no matter how much people "want the glory," there's not even close to as much on the line. And yes, I'd rather have the progamers be shit out of luck with "only" the second place prize money. Get out of the damn profession, shit. Don't get me wrong, I've considered doing the same thing when there was a ton of money on the line, but I didn't, and at the same time when I was considering it I felt I was doing something incredibly wrong. Hypocritical... yes, but that doesn't mean it should be endorsed. | ||
|
zul
Germany5427 Posts
| ||
|
Novalisk
Israel1818 Posts
On September 03 2011 05:46 Barundar wrote: As long as they don't bring out their dirty laundry in public I'm fine with them being realistic about their income. Where is my: "I just don't want to know about it" button? It's pretty much the same as making it illegal, as you can't enforce it on deals not made public. | ||
|
babylon
8765 Posts
On September 03 2011 05:46 Barundar wrote: As long as they don't bring out their dirty laundry in public I'm fine with them being realistic about their income. Where is my: "I just don't want to know about it" button? Don't worry, you'll forget about it in one or two months. Everyone already knew ToD and Grubby were splitting way back when in their WC3 days -- you can still pull up random forum comments from 2006 about the topic -- and nobody really gave a shit. | ||
|
VPCursed
1044 Posts
On September 03 2011 05:46 Truedot wrote: .. your opinion is completely self contradictory. >Pros are poor. >no one wanting to play for money at the pro level. ??? Thats the point. If they are assured of getting some money making a behind the back deal, then they won't play as fully as if their livelihood is on the line. derp. due to this it also happens to be defrauding the agreement between the tournament and players being that the tournament is a third party. ye cause, people who get first place dont get more notoriety and more sponsorship deals. my bad bro. sry for being self contradictory. my comment on them being poor is just the reasoning behind what they're doing.. they're still going to do there best to win. There are more then enough incentives. | ||
|
TimeSpiral
United States1010 Posts
If they're not rigging the games, or throwing games, or doing anything nefarious that would affect the outcome of the tournament, who cares what they do with their earnings? Welcome to sports, people. eSports is still young. The bigger it gets, the more controversial every single miniscule aspect of the system appears. | ||
|
exnomendei
Netherlands122 Posts
| ||
|
Tanith
United Kingdom108 Posts
People are never going to agree on this some will think its fine some won't, the fact of the matter is you can never enforce an outright ban or "make it illegal" as some are calling this prize splitting as it will happen no matter what and your being naive in thinking this is not common place in the majority of competitions and sports even with countless measures in some sports to prevent this it still happens. My own opinion on the matter is that's its fine, I recently won £1500 in a snooker tournament I played my friend in the final who I am on the same team as and have practised with for years...... we split the money. We both played to win and wanted to win the tournament not for the money but to say we won it, obviously not on the same scale as these major gaming tournaments but the fact remains that if I didn't give my friend half the cash I'd feel like an absolute twot considering I play against the guy every evening and wouldn't be near the player I am without his help. | ||
|
ROOTFayth
Canada3351 Posts
On September 03 2011 05:34 Truedot wrote: you cant do anything about what people do with their money after they win it. its their money. but you can do contracts to prevent them from making deals before hand, since its not their money until they win. if the contract says they are prevented from making any deals that would cheapen or invalidate competitive play during the tournament, on forfeiture of winnings if found out, then even once they get the money, and if they spend it all, if found out, they would have to give it all back to the tournament, and if they spent it all, that means they would have to make money to give it back. whats with this SC2 pro and pro supporter sense of entitlement that people should be able to make deals because its their money? Its not their money yet. Its only their money once they win. How can you agree to split the money by defrauding a tournament and thinking thats okay makes no sense to me. ok then they say they both have 10 000$ in their bank account and they agree that in a tournament where 1st place is 5000$ and 2nd place is 2000$ the winner sends 1500$ of his own money they're doing it with their own money, not the money from the tourney | ||
|
JLew
Canada353 Posts
I am surprised at a few things in this thread, the first being that people are surprised that this happens? Perhaps it is because I come from a poker background and it is only natural to make deals for the money, the reasoning behind this has already been stated a hundred times in this thead. I realize poker is not like SC2 but like SC2 it is an individual game where if you are a pro the chances of you meeting a close friend at some point in the tournament is good, in an SC2 foreign tournament if you are on a major foreign team then the chances of you meeting in the finals is very good. Like most other things the SC2 payout structures have not been that great in the past, it's too easy for the hosting company to get sucked into being able to say '' $15k for first place!'' and their tournament sounds a lot better then "25k prize pool divided among the top 50 players!". Imagine for a second that you are in a situation similar to Kiwikaki and Slush or InControl and Idra who live together and are close friends, why risk having any sort of awkward tension or animosity between you because one guy won 10 grand more because he 6 pooled you on a live stream. Everyone is making it sound like the game is totally irrelevant after a deal is made and because of this there will be no entertainment value. Most ''deals'' in poker and other things actually still leave a small amount of money more for the winner, the deal is just to flatten it out to lower the variance of the situation. Both guys could get 10k guaranteed and an extra 5k to the winner instead of the winner getting 20k and 2nd place getting 5. It is still a match worth 5k plus all of the bonuses that cannot accurately be tracked in monetary value. You will play it out for 1st anyway and the winner reaps the rewards of a tournament title and more coverage,etc. which will probably result in more sponsorship dollars, stream views, overall popularity,etc. down the road. It's not like they aren't playing for anything at that point. Something that disturbs me about peoples behavior in this thread is not that they are against ''deal making'' but that they are so willing to call someone that they don't even know (TT1) a ''cheater'' and slew of other insults over a situation that they weren't involved in and know nothing about. We're lucky to have a community where pros will interact on a level with the average player on a forum, and sometimes we take that for granted by trying to get a little bit too involved in the dealings of the pro world than we should. For anyone who is actually comparing deal-making to match fixing I think that you need your head examined. I don't even know where to start on how the two situations are different. As for if deal-making is right or wrong I personally have no problems with it, especially in cases like the one that sparked this entire debate where the hosting party (Xeris) was informed before hand of the situation, I think as long as the tournament is ok with it than there is nothing wrong with it. It is also something that would be near impossible to govern. It won't be an issue if/when more tournaments start flattening their pay out structures which has already started to happen. | ||
|
icarly
United States400 Posts
There is the perception that in the interest of 2 friends, or 2 teammates who's livelihood rests with income generated within the game that in the interest of trust or friendship they can both mutually agree to split the winnings if they think it is likely, or actually any possibility, that they meet in the finals. wtf does that mean? and what does it have to do with anything? If I'm guessing right, it would be like the number 1 and 2 best players are both unconfident they can beat the other one so they agree to just split the prize pool? | ||
|
ROOTFayth
Canada3351 Posts
On September 03 2011 05:46 Truedot wrote: .. your opinion is completely self contradictory. >Pros are poor. >no one wanting to play for money at the pro level. ??? Thats the point. If they are assured of getting some money making a behind the back deal, then they won't play as fully as if their livelihood is on the line. derp. due to this it also happens to be defrauding the agreement between the tournament and players being that the tournament is a third party. they do not make extra money from that, they reduce variance | ||
|
Noro
Canada991 Posts
| ||
| ||
