|
On November 15 2011 20:14 zOula... wrote:
this is worse than what saviOr did
This is a terrible incident but you must not know your history bro.
|
that was just really stupid by coca. just ruining his career with one move. :/
|
On November 15 2011 20:16 BlitchizSC2 wrote:This is a terrible incident but you must not know your history bro.
He is trolling in my opinion.
|
On November 15 2011 20:17 Finrod1 wrote:
that was just really stupid by coca. just ruining his career with one move. :/
I hope he is allowed back after a 3-4 month ban or something :/
|
On November 15 2011 20:13 WhiteDog wrote:Coca has such a big hearth man 
Yeah letting his former teammate get the win and perhaps free Code A spot, you surely can trust Coca in future tourmanents.
+ Show Spoiler +I'm glad they got banned from ESV Korean weekly and the actions done by Mr.Chae and SlayerS/ZENEX.
|
Can't say I expected this to ever happen, especially between these players.
|
Eh the only mistake he did was broadcasting it to everyone instead of talking about this beforehand.
|
On November 15 2011 19:54 Sawamura wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 19:52 Pangpootata wrote:On November 15 2011 19:45 Sawamura wrote:On November 15 2011 19:36 Pangpootata wrote:
Just lost respect for the key people of SlayerS and Prime for imposing overly harsh punishment for something trivial, possibly to pander to popular public opinion.
Junkka's analogy about killing a rich man or a homeless man is a flawed analogy. In savior's match fixing case, he harmed himself and his whole team for monetary benefit, while coca made a personal decision that only harmed himself. The analogy should have been between killing (or harming) yourself and your whole team for the sake of money, or just yourself to help a friend, of which the second one can actually be considered a noble action.
Besides, what coca and byun did was not harmful to competition at all. Firstly, coca's actions were not harmful to other competitors. Since coca could have won byun, it proves that coca is a better player than byun. Henceforth, byun's opponents should have an easier time beating him than if they had to face coca. Therefore, the whole field of competition, besides coca himself, stood to benefit competitively from coca's loss. Some may complain that not playing one's best would ruin the standard of games, but progamers in fact routinely play badly for fun such as mothership rushing by Huk. Moreover, forcing one to compete against one's will won't produce entertaining games anyway.
In addition to that, even more blatant match fixing such as stork's hilarious loss to whitera in WCG 2007 have happened before, and nobody really cared. Progamers frequently treat competitive matches non-seriously such as july using terran in an official proleague match, and nobody cares.
It is my strong suspicion that the overreaction to this was in light of savior's match fixing scandal. If my suspicions are true, it would go to show how some people easily change their standards and judge things based on emotional impulses rather than logic and reason. Such actions can only hurt esports.
Coca should've just quit SlayerS. I'm sure there are many reasonable teams out there which would admire his talent. Match fixing has already done enough harm to the bw scene and I believed boxer and slayers wouldn't have wanted such nonsense to spread in to the sc2 scene also . Hence the heavy repercussion impose by slayers on these coca player . Too bad for coca though . Looking at how he commented in game with that kind of attitude , I wonder how mature the player is . Luckily broodwar we do not have to deal with these kind of thing anymore . Kespa handle's thing nicely <3 Already explained how comparing this to savior's match fixing is flawed. On November 15 2011 19:45 Nouar wrote:On November 15 2011 19:36 Pangpootata wrote:
Just lost respect for the key people of SlayerS and Prime for imposing overly harsh punishment for something trivial, possibly to pander to popular public opinion.
Junkka's analogy about killing a rich man or a homeless man is a flawed analogy. In savior's match fixing case, he harmed himself and his whole team for monetary benefit, while coca made a personal decision that only harmed himself. The analogy should have been between killing (or harming) yourself and your whole team for the sake of money, or just yourself to help a friend, of which the second one can actually be considered a noble action.
Besides, what coca and byun did was not harmful to competition at all. Firstly, coca's actions were not harmful to other competitors. Since coca could have won byun, it proves that coca is a better player than byun. Henceforth, byun's opponents should have an easier time beating him than if they had to face coca. Therefore, the whole field of competition, besides coca himself, stood to benefit competitively from coca's loss. Some may complain that not playing one's best would ruin the standard of games, but progamers in fact routinely play badly for fun such as mothership rushing by Huk. Moreover, forcing one to compete against one's will won't produce entertaining games anyway.
In addition to that, even more blatant match fixing such as stork's hilarious loss to whitera in WCG 2007 have happened before, and nobody really cared. Progamers frequently treat competitive matches non-seriously such as july using terran in an official proleague match, and nobody cares.
It is my strong suspicion that the overreaction to this was in light of savior's match fixing scandal. If my suspicions are true, it would go to show how some people easily change their standards and judge things based on emotional impulses rather than logic and reason. Such actions can only hurt esports.
Coca should've just quit SlayerS. I'm sure there are many reasonable teams out there which would admire his talent. I COMPLETELY disagree with each and every point you made and i'm sure i'm not the only one. Sadly i'm at work and can't really argue or explain... Just read the 2 previous pages and the post by diamond a few posts above yours please. Yes, I understand that majority of the public is against coca, and corporations that sponsor the team as well as the team itself have to maintain their image. However, such drastic measures taken are best seen as pandering to public opinion with disregard for reason. Sure, from a commercial standpoint, it is the optimum thing to do, but is it the right thing to do? It is thoroughly unfair to coca, who is losing his code S salary, and I'm sure most people know that B-team progamers at best only barely eke out a living. Match fixing in any form is not acceptable .
The issue is the punishment. You don't kill a person for theft.
|
Matching-fixing is bad enough but actually saying it in the chat? I don't know what to say...
|
On November 15 2011 20:07 Pangpootata wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 19:52 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On November 15 2011 19:36 Pangpootata wrote:
Just lost respect for the key people of SlayerS and Prime for imposing overly harsh punishment for something trivial, possibly to pander to popular public opinion.
Junkka's analogy about killing a rich man or a homeless man is a flawed analogy. In savior's match fixing case, he harmed himself and his whole team for monetary benefit, while coca made a personal decision that only harmed himself. The analogy should have been between killing (or harming) yourself and your whole team for the sake of money, or just yourself to help a friend, of which the second one can actually be considered a noble action.
Besides, what coca and byun did was not harmful to competition at all. Firstly, coca's actions were not harmful to other competitors. Since coca could have won byun, it proves that coca is a better player than byun. Henceforth, byun's opponents should have an easier time beating him than if they had to face coca. Therefore, the whole field of competition, besides coca himself, stood to benefit competitively from coca's loss. Some may complain that not playing one's best would ruin the standard of games, but progamers in fact routinely play badly for fun such as mothership rushing by Huk. Moreover, forcing one to compete against one's will won't produce entertaining games anyway.
In addition to that, even more blatant match fixing such as stork's hilarious loss to whitera in WCG 2007 have happened before, and nobody really cared. Progamers frequently treat competitive matches non-seriously such as july using terran in an official proleague match, and nobody cares.
It is my strong suspicion that the overreaction to this was in light of savior's match fixing scandal. If my suspicions are true, it would go to show how some people easily change their standards and judge things based on emotional impulses rather than logic and reason. Such actions can only hurt esports.
Coca should've just quit SlayerS. I'm sure there are many reasonable teams out there which would admire his talent. 1) His actions called to question his integrity as a sportsman. He threw a match due to external factors. The other showed he was willing to cheat to win. 2) So it's noble to throw a match for your friend at the cost of the reputation of the team you represent? 3a) So it's not harmful to know that a competition's winner could have won because of friendship and not because of his insane macro, micro and good tactics. 3b) So because they didn't like it, they can do whatever they want on company/team time. 4) We can't force the manager of the top football team to field his best players against a bottom league team but we can force the manager from blatantly throwing the game by fielding all eleven players from the reserve squad. 5) Maybe AZK will take him. 1) Coca's actions reflect total integrity. From wikipedia "integrity is regarded as the honesty and truthfulness or accuracy of one's actions". Coca was honest, truthful, that's why he did not try to hide the fact that he let byun win, and Coca was consistent in upholding his friendship. Don't know whether you misunderstand the concept of integrity or something. Besides, byun asked coca to let him win in jest, and was probably surprised that coca was willing to. It was spontaneous rather than premeditated, any byun probably wasn't thinking of cheating. 2) The team's reputation only took a beating because poorly reasoned public opinion was strongly against coca. It is more so the fault of the public than coca. If the public didn't react badly, it would not have harmed the team's reputation. 3a) No it's not. In this case byun didn't win, but if byun had won the competition, then we would have known that he is at least better than everyone else (except coca), and since coca let him win, then so be it. 3b) They probably didn't consider that at that time, which is admittedly their fault. But then again, such actions only hurt the company/team name because of public backlash, which would not have happened if the public was more understanding (as per 2). 4) Sorry, don't know what this point is supposed to mean. 5) Gus might not want to pay for Coca's travel expenses.
1) Right. So a robber has better integrity than a pickpocket. Because he's honest and truthful in relieving you of your valuables.
You have evidence this was done in jest? Please provide these incidences. Where you there behind either Byun's or CoCa's PC? Or do you know them personally?
And spontaneous theft is perfectly acceptable in our modern society.
2) So the either South Korean eSports community are wrong to call Byun's demands to CoCa to leave the game
3a) How does throwing a game...
You know what, forget it. You sir, are certifiably immoral.
I wouldn't trust you with spare change.
|
Also...using analogies is one of the worst debating tactics there is.
|
On November 15 2011 20:21 pdd wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 19:54 Sawamura wrote:On November 15 2011 19:52 Pangpootata wrote:On November 15 2011 19:45 Sawamura wrote:On November 15 2011 19:36 Pangpootata wrote:
Just lost respect for the key people of SlayerS and Prime for imposing overly harsh punishment for something trivial, possibly to pander to popular public opinion.
Junkka's analogy about killing a rich man or a homeless man is a flawed analogy. In savior's match fixing case, he harmed himself and his whole team for monetary benefit, while coca made a personal decision that only harmed himself. The analogy should have been between killing (or harming) yourself and your whole team for the sake of money, or just yourself to help a friend, of which the second one can actually be considered a noble action.
Besides, what coca and byun did was not harmful to competition at all. Firstly, coca's actions were not harmful to other competitors. Since coca could have won byun, it proves that coca is a better player than byun. Henceforth, byun's opponents should have an easier time beating him than if they had to face coca. Therefore, the whole field of competition, besides coca himself, stood to benefit competitively from coca's loss. Some may complain that not playing one's best would ruin the standard of games, but progamers in fact routinely play badly for fun such as mothership rushing by Huk. Moreover, forcing one to compete against one's will won't produce entertaining games anyway.
In addition to that, even more blatant match fixing such as stork's hilarious loss to whitera in WCG 2007 have happened before, and nobody really cared. Progamers frequently treat competitive matches non-seriously such as july using terran in an official proleague match, and nobody cares.
It is my strong suspicion that the overreaction to this was in light of savior's match fixing scandal. If my suspicions are true, it would go to show how some people easily change their standards and judge things based on emotional impulses rather than logic and reason. Such actions can only hurt esports.
Coca should've just quit SlayerS. I'm sure there are many reasonable teams out there which would admire his talent. Match fixing has already done enough harm to the bw scene and I believed boxer and slayers wouldn't have wanted such nonsense to spread in to the sc2 scene also . Hence the heavy repercussion impose by slayers on these coca player . Too bad for coca though . Looking at how he commented in game with that kind of attitude , I wonder how mature the player is . Luckily broodwar we do not have to deal with these kind of thing anymore . Kespa handle's thing nicely <3 Already explained how comparing this to savior's match fixing is flawed. On November 15 2011 19:45 Nouar wrote:On November 15 2011 19:36 Pangpootata wrote:
Just lost respect for the key people of SlayerS and Prime for imposing overly harsh punishment for something trivial, possibly to pander to popular public opinion.
Junkka's analogy about killing a rich man or a homeless man is a flawed analogy. In savior's match fixing case, he harmed himself and his whole team for monetary benefit, while coca made a personal decision that only harmed himself. The analogy should have been between killing (or harming) yourself and your whole team for the sake of money, or just yourself to help a friend, of which the second one can actually be considered a noble action.
Besides, what coca and byun did was not harmful to competition at all. Firstly, coca's actions were not harmful to other competitors. Since coca could have won byun, it proves that coca is a better player than byun. Henceforth, byun's opponents should have an easier time beating him than if they had to face coca. Therefore, the whole field of competition, besides coca himself, stood to benefit competitively from coca's loss. Some may complain that not playing one's best would ruin the standard of games, but progamers in fact routinely play badly for fun such as mothership rushing by Huk. Moreover, forcing one to compete against one's will won't produce entertaining games anyway.
In addition to that, even more blatant match fixing such as stork's hilarious loss to whitera in WCG 2007 have happened before, and nobody really cared. Progamers frequently treat competitive matches non-seriously such as july using terran in an official proleague match, and nobody cares.
It is my strong suspicion that the overreaction to this was in light of savior's match fixing scandal. If my suspicions are true, it would go to show how some people easily change their standards and judge things based on emotional impulses rather than logic and reason. Such actions can only hurt esports.
Coca should've just quit SlayerS. I'm sure there are many reasonable teams out there which would admire his talent. I COMPLETELY disagree with each and every point you made and i'm sure i'm not the only one. Sadly i'm at work and can't really argue or explain... Just read the 2 previous pages and the post by diamond a few posts above yours please. Yes, I understand that majority of the public is against coca, and corporations that sponsor the team as well as the team itself have to maintain their image. However, such drastic measures taken are best seen as pandering to public opinion with disregard for reason. Sure, from a commercial standpoint, it is the optimum thing to do, but is it the right thing to do? It is thoroughly unfair to coca, who is losing his code S salary, and I'm sure most people know that B-team progamers at best only barely eke out a living. Match fixing in any form is not acceptable . The issue is the punishment. You don't kill a person for theft.
are you implying savior,upmagic and hwasin got killed for match fixing ? . Like wise it doesn't change the fact that what they did was totally unacceptable . On the issue with punishment , it's definitely up to the respective team leaders to decide on , No matter how much we debate , on what degree the severity of these match fixing is and what appropriate punishment it should be . We aren't the guys who are going to call the shots . Let's wait and see what's coach chae and slayers have to say.
|
On November 15 2011 20:07 Pangpootata wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 19:52 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On November 15 2011 19:36 Pangpootata wrote:
Just lost respect for the key people of SlayerS and Prime for imposing overly harsh punishment for something trivial, possibly to pander to popular public opinion.
Junkka's analogy about killing a rich man or a homeless man is a flawed analogy. In savior's match fixing case, he harmed himself and his whole team for monetary benefit, while coca made a personal decision that only harmed himself. The analogy should have been between killing (or harming) yourself and your whole team for the sake of money, or just yourself to help a friend, of which the second one can actually be considered a noble action.
Besides, what coca and byun did was not harmful to competition at all. Firstly, coca's actions were not harmful to other competitors. Since coca could have won byun, it proves that coca is a better player than byun. Henceforth, byun's opponents should have an easier time beating him than if they had to face coca. Therefore, the whole field of competition, besides coca himself, stood to benefit competitively from coca's loss. Some may complain that not playing one's best would ruin the standard of games, but progamers in fact routinely play badly for fun such as mothership rushing by Huk. Moreover, forcing one to compete against one's will won't produce entertaining games anyway.
In addition to that, even more blatant match fixing such as stork's hilarious loss to whitera in WCG 2007 have happened before, and nobody really cared. Progamers frequently treat competitive matches non-seriously such as july using terran in an official proleague match, and nobody cares.
It is my strong suspicion that the overreaction to this was in light of savior's match fixing scandal. If my suspicions are true, it would go to show how some people easily change their standards and judge things based on emotional impulses rather than logic and reason. Such actions can only hurt esports.
Coca should've just quit SlayerS. I'm sure there are many reasonable teams out there which would admire his talent. 1) His actions called to question his integrity as a sportsman. He threw a match due to external factors. The other showed he was willing to cheat to win. 2) So it's noble to throw a match for your friend at the cost of the reputation of the team you represent? 3a) So it's not harmful to know that a competition's winner could have won because of friendship and not because of his insane macro, micro and good tactics. 3b) So because they didn't like it, they can do whatever they want on company/team time. 4) We can't force the manager of the top football team to field his best players against a bottom league team but we can force the manager from blatantly throwing the game by fielding all eleven players from the reserve squad. 5) Maybe AZK will take him. 1) Coca's actions reflect total integrity. From wikipedia "integrity is regarded as the honesty and truthfulness or accuracy of one's actions". Coca was honest, truthful, that's why he did not try to hide the fact that he let byun win, and Coca was consistent in upholding his friendship. Don't know whether you misunderstand the concept of integrity or something. Besides, byun asked coca to let him win in jest, and was probably surprised that coca was willing to. It was spontaneous rather than premeditated, any byun probably wasn't thinking of cheating. 2) The team's reputation only took a beating because poorly reasoned public opinion was strongly against coca. It is more so the fault of the public than coca. If the public didn't react badly, it would not have harmed the team's reputation. 3a) No it's not. In this case byun didn't win, but if byun had won the competition, then we would have known that he is at least better than everyone else (except coca), and since coca let him win, then so be it. 3b) They probably didn't consider that at that time, which is admittedly their fault. But then again, such actions only hurt the company/team name because of public backlash, which would not have happened if the public was more understanding (as per 2). 4) Sorry, don't know what this point is supposed to mean. 5) Gus might not want to pay for Coca's travel expenses.
If it starts like that, we Will ALL wonder each and every Time two players meet : "is this match fixed because they are friends?"
This is the kind of trust WE need as viewers to know matches are fair and the competition is fair. "i'm better at zvt than you, lose against me in the semi and let me win the finals vs that terran and we'll share the money" is what your opinion will bring us to. I don't watch a tournament to see people lose on purpose and ask myself "is it à true match, is the guy who advances the one who should?" this is NOT integrity. Friendship is not the most important thing when you take part in a COMPETITION ! Letting friends win on purpose is not the way to go whatever the reason. (and asking for a win is even worse imo... Byun....)
|
On November 15 2011 20:23 boaecho wrote:
Also...using analogies is one of the worst debating tactics there is.
Well you see your argument there is flawed. Its kind of like if you are in football and talk about how going for it on 4th and 1 is the worst tactic ever. Obviously it isn't in every case right? Sometimes it just works.
|
On November 15 2011 20:22 elwoodng wrote:
Matching-fixing is bad enough but actually saying it in the chat? I don't know what to say...
CoCa wanted a third game instead of a 2-0, White-Ra accepted similar terms during an open bracket at an MLG where he was disqualified from his open bracket match and met the same person later on and they decided to reset the extended series by just leaving the game twice so that it would be 2-2 (the referee wouldn't let them hard reset).
But it's okay because he's White-Ra and the SC2 community prides itself on nepotism instead of actual merit that has been displayed by CoCa and Byun.
|
Canada312 Posts
A code S player playing in a tournament for a code A spot was asked to leave by his friend, and he did. Now he loses his team and Code S spot. Sounds fair too me....
|
On November 15 2011 20:27 Hnnngg wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:22 elwoodng wrote:
Matching-fixing is bad enough but actually saying it in the chat? I don't know what to say... CoCa wanted a third game instead of a 2-0, White-Ra accepted similar terms during an open bracket at an MLG where he was disqualified from his open bracket match and met the same person later on and they decided to reset the extended series by just leaving the game twice so that it would be 2-2 (the referee wouldn't let them hard reset). But it's okay because he's White-Ra and the SC2 community prides itself on nepotism instead of actual merit that has been displayed by CoCa and Byun.
Yes but the person playing white rar still tried to win the series. In that case it was good sportsmanship by putting them on an even footing since he missed his match. In this case he was helping him unfairly get into code A.
|
thats not kool. shame on them
|
On November 15 2011 20:27 Hnnngg wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:22 elwoodng wrote:
Matching-fixing is bad enough but actually saying it in the chat? I don't know what to say... CoCa wanted a third game instead of a 2-0, White-Ra accepted similar terms during an open bracket at an MLG where he was disqualified from his open bracket match and met the same person later on and they decided to reset the extended series by just leaving the game twice so that it would be 2-2 (the referee wouldn't let them hard reset). But it's okay because he's White-Ra and the SC2 community prides itself on nepotism instead of actual merit that has been displayed by CoCa and Byun.
In that case the other player didn't want to take the defwin in the first place and the tournament admins who enforced the first defwin more or less agreed so it's not exactly the same... But yeah...
Edit : yes at mrtomjones :p
Plus extended series is....... xD but that's offtopic.
|
On November 15 2011 20:31 mrtomjones wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:27 Hnnngg wrote:On November 15 2011 20:22 elwoodng wrote:
Matching-fixing is bad enough but actually saying it in the chat? I don't know what to say... CoCa wanted a third game instead of a 2-0, White-Ra accepted similar terms during an open bracket at an MLG where he was disqualified from his open bracket match and met the same person later on and they decided to reset the extended series by just leaving the game twice so that it would be 2-2 (the referee wouldn't let them hard reset). But it's okay because he's White-Ra and the SC2 community prides itself on nepotism instead of actual merit that has been displayed by CoCa and Byun. Yes but the person playing white rar still tried to win the series. In that case it was good sportsmanship by putting them on an even footing since he missed his match. In this case he was helping him unfairly get into code A.
CoCa did try to win Game 3 though and leaving Game 2 tied it to 1-1 in the bo3 making it even footing.
Sounds exactly the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
