|
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.
This. White-ra does it and the community praises him as honorable and good-sportsmanship. Coca does it and everyone wants him sentenced to jail or something.
|
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.
The situation with White-Ra at the MGL was complete different. In his first match White-Ra got disqualified because he was late. As they meet again his opponent did not want an extended series because of that, so he forfeits a game, to make it even and fair.
CoCa just forfeits an already won game, just because of the fact that he has already a code S spot and Byun doesn't have a code A spot.
|
Wow this is absolutely huge. Thanks so much for the translation... Can't believe that this ended up happening so blatantly. You'd think they would at least try to conceal it..
|
On November 15 2011 20:32 Hnnngg wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:31 mrtomjones wrote: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.
If he let him win that 2nd game I'd be surprised if he tried his hardest in game three either. It wasn't like there was a good sport reason to do it. Essentially there is no way to tell. Plus I didn't see the games so I can't comment. I'm making an assumption.
|
He doesn't deserve to forfeit his Code S spot because I highly doubt that he was match fixing in any game other than that one in the Weekly... Byun and CoCa are best friends, and this pretty much spells doom to the career of one of the best up and comers in the scene, period.
|
this type of match fixing is practically unpreventable. It happens all the time in the top levels of sumo wrestling. Which apart from the Olympics, sumo is one of the oldests sports ever.
For anyone interested i think there was a 'This American Life' episode on it you can look up
|
On November 15 2011 20:33 bana 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. The situation with White-Ra at the MGL was complete different. In his first match White-Ra got disqualified because he was late. As they meet again his opponent did not want an extended series because of that, so he forfeits a game, to make it even and fair. CoCa just forfeits an already won game, just because of the fact that he has already a code S spot and Byun doesn't have a code A spot.
Looking at the chat I don't see anything about Code S or Code A. They had a nice banter about mutas and then they both decided they wanted a 3rd game.
I'm just glad that they haven't become excommunicated completely as people have been suggesting in this thread.
|
On November 15 2011 20:36 Hnnngg wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:33 bana wrote: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. The situation with White-Ra at the MGL was complete different. In his first match White-Ra got disqualified because he was late. As they meet again his opponent did not want an extended series because of that, so he forfeits a game, to make it even and fair. CoCa just forfeits an already won game, just because of the fact that he has already a code S spot and Byun doesn't have a code A spot. Looking at the chat I don't see anything about Code S or Code A. They had a nice banter about mutas and then they both decided they wanted a 3rd game. I'm just glad that they haven't become excommunicated completely as people have been suggesting in this thread.
The lack of proof is their only hope of staying as progamers. But it doesn't need to be openly stated to happen. But meh. Sleep!
|
On November 15 2011 20:23 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:07 Pangpootata wrote: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.
1) No, because the robber steals you valuables without consent, which harms you. Coca and byun did something mutually agreeable. Please refrain from using false analogies.
2) It is okay if the South Korean community objects to coca and byun's actions, as it is just their personal opinion, but the overreaction that harms them is certainly wrong.
3a) I do not understand your fragment of a sentence.
Your endeavours at ad hominem do not add value to your arguments. I would advise you not to attempt personal attacks in future, both over the internet and in personal life, as to reasonable people, it only discredits yourself.
On November 15 2011 20:25 Nouar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:07 Pangpootata wrote: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 and let me win the finals 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....)
That match was inconsequential. Coca and byun would play their best if it was something important. Byun asked to win in jest, and coca gave in jest. They probably didn't mean it to be cheating.
Besides, there is neither a law, nor a rule against purposely playing badly for reasons that do not benefit yourself. Perhaps the tournaments could add in such rules in future to prevent people from doing such things, if they wish to. But going by the current situation, what coca and byun did was a permissible choice.
|
On November 15 2011 20:25 Nouar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:07 Pangpootata wrote: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....)
Not the same at all. It was obvious thas this wasn't planned beforehand and how would you wonder if a match got "fixed" in this way or not? They did it in chat which everyone watching the game can see. If everybody "fixed" matches like this you would know if they did it 100% of the time.
This is the reason I don't think the punishment matches the crime. The should get disqualified from that tournament and given a fine or something similar from their team, but kicking Coca from Code S was really harsh. He basically got sacked from his job.
|
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.
Match fixing is a mutual agreement between both players. WhiteRa decided on his own to throw two of his games that ultimately had no impact on the outcome.... not even comparable.
|
On November 15 2011 20:33 bana 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. The situation with White-Ra at the MGL was complete different. In his first match White-Ra got disqualified because he was late. As they meet again his opponent did not want an extended series because of that, so he forfeits a game, to make it even and fair. CoCa just forfeits an already won game, just because of the fact that he has already a code S spot and Byun doesn't have a code A spot.
damnit, code A spot was not up for grabs.
they haven't even discussed 2012 plans with ESV yet.
|
On November 15 2011 20:40 IndoorSpawningPool 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. Match fixing is a mutual agreement between both players. WhiteRa decided on his own to throw two of his games that ultimately had no impact on the outcome.... not even comparable.
White-Ra was actually the one who was down and his Open Bracket opponent told him beforehand that he wanted to reset it to 2-2 in a bo7 and even asked the referee (which I already said).
So it's pretty comparable.
|
Damn I voted for Coca in the liquibet. Can I have my vote back 
|
On November 15 2011 20:38 Pangpootata wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:23 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On November 15 2011 20:07 Pangpootata wrote: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. 1) No, because the robber steals you valuables without consent, which harms you. Coca and byun did something mutually agreeable. Please refrain from using false analogies. 2) It is okay if the South Korean community objects to coca and byun's actions, as it is just their personal opinion, but the overreaction that harms them is certainly wrong. 3a) I do not understand your fragment of a sentence. Your endeavours at ad hominem do not add value to your arguments. I would advise you not to attempt personal attacks in future, both over the internet and in personal life, as to reasonable people, it only discredits yourself. Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:25 Nouar wrote:On November 15 2011 20:07 Pangpootata wrote: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 and let me win the finals 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....) That match was inconsequential. Coca and byun would play their best if it was something important. Byun asked to win in jest, and coca gave in jest. They probably didn't mean it to be cheating. Besides, there is neither a law, nor a rule against purposely playing badly for reasons that do not benefit yourself. Perhaps the tournaments could add in such rules in future to prevent people from doing such things, if they wish to. But going by the current situation, what coca and byun did was a permissible choice.
To summarise, two players openly collude to fix a game they were entered in by their respective teams and it is honourable and good by your standards for them to do so.
And you find this good and fair to watch games end this way when two friends meet each other in any tournament:
"HEY YOU, LEAVE NOW"
"OK, GG"
And you find this acceptable and good for the state of the eSports to move in this direction?
That friends should let their lower ranked friends win if the tournament doesn't interest them.
|
It's a damn shame for CoCa and Byun that I'm not the Supreme Being in charge of who cares about what because if I was, nobody would give a shit about this. Are you guys serious? It took about 30 seconds to assimilate the info in the OP and realize what is going on here -- and that is absolutely nothing of importance at all! People are simply making this an issue when it doesnt need to be an issue at all. At worst, they should be booted from the ESV tourny for _____ amount of time, and no one else should say a damn thing about it.
They weren't "match fixing". Don't call it that because that isn't fair to them. Don't counter me by pulling the "semantics card" either, because you know perfectly well what I'm talking about. There was no sinister "let's make money by throwing the bets" going on. Read the damn chat, they were obviously just engaging in banter and wanted to take it to another game in order to continue playing. It has nothing to do with calculated wrongdoing or exploitation of the GSL (wtf?).
Step off these bros, they get it bad enough from their coaches/peers in Korea due to the stigma associated with it (in fact, that's probably this non-issue was made into an issue -- stigma)
|
Oh boy oh boy....Korean match-making. Where have I heard of this before...hmmm
|
On November 15 2011 20:38 Pangpootata wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:23 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On November 15 2011 20:07 Pangpootata wrote: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. 1) No, because the robber steals you valuables without consent, which harms you. Coca and byun did something mutually agreeable. Please refrain from using false analogies. 2) It is okay if the South Korean community objects to coca and byun's actions, as it is just their personal opinion, but the overreaction that harms them is certainly wrong. 3a) I do not understand your fragment of a sentence. Your endeavours at ad hominem do not add value to your arguments. I would advise you not to attempt personal attacks in future, both over the internet and in personal life, as to reasonable people, it only discredits yourself. Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 20:25 Nouar wrote:On November 15 2011 20:07 Pangpootata wrote: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 and let me win the finals 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....) That match was inconsequential. Coca and byun would play their best if it was something important. Byun asked to win in jest, and coca gave in jest. They probably didn't mean it to be cheating. Besides, there is neither a law, nor a rule against purposely playing badly for reasons that do not benefit yourself. Perhaps the tournaments could add in such rules in future to prevent people from doing such things, if they wish to. But going by the current situation, what coca and byun did was a permissible choice.
I agree on most parts here i just wanted to add that you can't add rules for a players playing bad in purpose since you can't really prove that someone does that. Then people would start to make baseless claims when someone plays out of character and everything could get a huge clusterfuck.
A slap on the head for both guys and everything is fine with a temp. ban for the Korean Weekly should be sufficient. I mean if you do stuff like that you shouldn't openly state it. Stuff like this happens all the time in games that are not important and its def not right. But if people know about it just generates a shitstorm it just doesn't need to generate for something that is relatively minor.
|
This isn't match fixing, this is a CoCa tossing a game to his best friend and training partner in a tournament relatively insignificant compared to GSL, this is a huge overreaction and probably spells the end of CoCa's career.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
