|
On October 31 2013 03:42 Wombat_NI wrote:
It's quite frustrating to hear the 'this would never be tolerated in real sports' when it is, frequently.
Positive incentivisation is completely distinct from the likes of matchfixing which are more obviously unethical.
Well, some people don't want to hear that and want to keep claiming its unfair. Of course professional players in all sports make wagers and set bounties against eachother. It makes the game more fun and exciting.
|
United States23455 Posts
On October 31 2013 03:40 TXRaunchy wrote:
i played an EGRevival online and beat him.
however he was a terran player and in plat.
does this count?
Message Naniwa to claim your prize.
|
On October 31 2013 03:34 Storm71 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 03:30 Thieving Magpie wrote:On October 31 2013 03:26 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 03:24 Plansix wrote:On October 31 2013 03:19 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 03:13 Plansix wrote:On October 31 2013 03:09 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 03:06 Plansix wrote:On October 31 2013 03:00 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 02:56 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
No, I know for sure. I've watched these players for years and they give no fucks $500 bounty. It is fucking minor pressure compared to what these players normally deal with. So all those showmatches which give out $500 or less, it's the same as playing for nothing, huh? I didn't know you could read minds. I don't need to. All the players are professionals and the additional "stress" of the $500 bounty is minor. You are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Not stress, motivation. $500 for winning a Bo3 isn't exactly trivial. And just because you like to refer to them as "professionals", it doesn't mean that $500 is necessarily a meaningless amount. Nothing will change because of the bounty. It won't change how hard Revival plays and his opponents will not go up in skill. If he can't beat a modivated player, he doesn't deserve to be at Blizzcon. The bounty will change nothing? Then why did Naniwa offer it? Maybe because he knows that performance is not merely a product of skill, but also of motivation. And Revival already has 3175 wcs points; he has beaten quite a few motivated players. Using your logic, perhaps we should replay Naniwa's challenger league matches, offer his opponents a bounty to see if HE deserves to be at Blizzcon? He offered it to make a joke and hype the match. And because the community are a bunch of drama sluts that will get down with even the tinyest amount of drama that can dig up. And it worked, because the community had a hard on for this sort of shit. I didn't know you could read Naniwa's mind. It is hard to convey tone across written text; is that just an assumption you made? Backroom deals are made in backrooms, public displays are public displays. A twitter post is not a contract, a twitter post is not a promise, a twitter post is just someone on the internet yelling. If I made a twitter post saying you are gay--it doesn't make you gay. Much like if Naniwa is making a twitter post about offering a bounty--it does not mean he is forced to pay said bounty. To assume a twitter post is a contract written in stone is ridiculous. Either stop trolling or--no, fuck it, please just stop trolling, no or. That's assuming that a public statement on Twitter can't possibly lead to an agreement between players, legally enforceable or not. I'm not the one who needs to stop trolling.
A twitter post is not a contract or promise, it is a social media service with as much legal bearing as a facebook status.
To assume it is real is to construe the idea that social media posts are legally binding promises that must have follow through--which is false.
It is literally more ridiculous to think his tweet was not a joke than it is to think his tweet was the real thing.
What you are talking about is that his tweet could possibly lead to backroom deals, but in order to do that they would have to take their conversation to a backroom somewhere so they can speak in private. Why? Because a twitter post is not a promise. We don't need to read Naniwa's mind on whether that tweet was a joke or not because it is not a promise or contract--it literally cannot be taken seriously.
So can you please answer the question of why you don't like it that players practice against revival?
|
On October 31 2013 03:24 Storm71 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 03:23 Energizer wrote:
This just goes to show that no matter what, there are posters who will find a way to bitch about anything, no matter how insignificant.
Kudos to Naniwa! Yes, shame on us for wanting fair competition.
Didn't realize that cash was some sort of doping.
|
On October 31 2013 03:34 Storm71 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 03:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:On October 31 2013 03:32 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 03:30 Pazuzu wrote:On October 31 2013 03:19 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 03:13 Plansix wrote:On October 31 2013 03:09 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 03:06 Plansix wrote:On October 31 2013 03:00 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 02:56 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
No, I know for sure. I've watched these players for years and they give no fucks $500 bounty. It is fucking minor pressure compared to what these players normally deal with. So all those showmatches which give out $500 or less, it's the same as playing for nothing, huh? I didn't know you could read minds. I don't need to. All the players are professionals and the additional "stress" of the $500 bounty is minor. You are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Not stress, motivation. $500 for winning a Bo3 isn't exactly trivial. And just because you like to refer to them as "professionals", it doesn't mean that $500 is necessarily a meaningless amount. Nothing will change because of the bounty. It won't change how hard Revival plays and his opponents will not go up in skill. If he can't beat a modivated player, he doesn't deserve to be at Blizzcon. The bounty will change nothing? Then why did Naniwa offer it? Maybe because he knows that performance is not merely a product of skill, but also of motivation. And Revival already has 3175 wcs points; he has beaten quite a few motivated players. Using your logic, perhaps we should replay Naniwa's challenger league matches, offer his opponents a bounty to see if HE deserves to be at Blizzcon? Give it a rest bud, you've switched arguments multiple times over the many pages that I'm not quite sure why I read. You're saying the money is extra motivation, Plansix is saying that the money, while being a nice perk if they were to win, is not going to motivate them to practice harder as they already would have been. You guys aren't gonna convince each other Yeah, players practice the same amount for each match, regardless of how much money is at stake. LOL So you're upset that Select and Jon Snow will practice vs Revival? Uh.... no, I never stated, suggested or implied that.
On October 31 2013 03:54 Thieving Magpie wrote:
So can you please answer the question of why you don't like it that players practice against revival?
No point since you clearly don't even read what I post. Either that or you just want to troll.
|
On October 31 2013 03:46 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 03:42 Wombat_NI wrote:
It's quite frustrating to hear the 'this would never be tolerated in real sports' when it is, frequently.
Positive incentivisation is completely distinct from the likes of matchfixing which are more obviously unethical. Well, some people don't want to hear that and want to keep claiming its unfair. Of course professional players in all sports make wagers and set bounties against eachother. It makes the game more fun and exciting.
Yeah when Pete Rose bet on his own team it wasn't a big deal at a... oh wait
|
On October 31 2013 04:02 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 03:24 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 03:23 Energizer wrote:
This just goes to show that no matter what, there are posters who will find a way to bitch about anything, no matter how insignificant.
Kudos to Naniwa! Yes, shame on us for wanting fair competition. Didn't realize that cash was some sort of doping.
It modivates players to play hard and Naniwas opponents were not modivated, according to him. And that isn't fair, for some fucking reason.
|
On October 31 2013 04:05 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 04:02 Godwrath wrote:On October 31 2013 03:24 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 03:23 Energizer wrote:
This just goes to show that no matter what, there are posters who will find a way to bitch about anything, no matter how insignificant.
Kudos to Naniwa! Yes, shame on us for wanting fair competition. Didn't realize that cash was some sort of doping. It modivates players to play hard and Naniwas opponents were not modivated, according to him. And that isn't fair, for some fucking reason.
Hey, let's bribe Revival's players so they play motivated in what is to them a meaningless match. It's fair to do that to only Revival and not Naniwa, because fuck him.
|
Nothing wrong with this. Offering extra money for doing you should be doing in the first place (going 100% for the win vs revival) is ok in my book.
|
On October 31 2013 04:03 Storm71 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 03:46 Plansix wrote:On October 31 2013 03:42 Wombat_NI wrote:
It's quite frustrating to hear the 'this would never be tolerated in real sports' when it is, frequently.
Positive incentivisation is completely distinct from the likes of matchfixing which are more obviously unethical. Well, some people don't want to hear that and want to keep claiming its unfair. Of course professional players in all sports make wagers and set bounties against eachother. It makes the game more fun and exciting. Yeah when Pete Rose bet on his own team it wasn't a big deal at a... oh wait
Yeah when Pete Rose bet on his own team he was BETTING on his own team. This isnt naniwa making a bet, this is naniwa throwing a cash prize out there for a player who actually has to WIN a match. You sound dumb and now I am even more mad that naniwa might not even be serious which means fuck that guy because the coolest thing he has ever done isnt even a real thing anymore :/
|
On October 31 2013 04:07 Storm71 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 04:05 Plansix wrote:On October 31 2013 04:02 Godwrath wrote:On October 31 2013 03:24 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 03:23 Energizer wrote:
This just goes to show that no matter what, there are posters who will find a way to bitch about anything, no matter how insignificant.
Kudos to Naniwa! Yes, shame on us for wanting fair competition. Didn't realize that cash was some sort of doping. It modivates players to play hard and Naniwas opponents were not modivated, according to him. And that isn't fair, for some fucking reason. Hey, let's bribe Revival's players so they play motivated in what is to them a meaningless match. It's fair to do that to only Revival and not Naniwa, because fuck him.
Who cares about motivation? If revival cant beat a player - he cant beat a player and doesnt deserve to win PERIOD.
|
On October 31 2013 04:03 Storm71 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 03:46 Plansix wrote:On October 31 2013 03:42 Wombat_NI wrote:
It's quite frustrating to hear the 'this would never be tolerated in real sports' when it is, frequently.
Positive incentivisation is completely distinct from the likes of matchfixing which are more obviously unethical. Well, some people don't want to hear that and want to keep claiming its unfair. Of course professional players in all sports make wagers and set bounties against eachother. It makes the game more fun and exciting. Yeah when Pete Rose bet on his own team it wasn't a big deal at a... oh wait
He didn't do that publicly and took great efforts to hide it. Context is key, since Naniwa isn't going to win money from this, unlike Pete Rose.
|
I will warrant a guess that if the reverse had happened, and Revival had offered a "bounty" for ForGG to beat NaNiwa in his Challenger League bracket, this forum would be filled with "OMG Korean conspiracy" and "Revival must be disqualified," not "this is totally fine because it makes the matches more fun."
I think it's a gray area on whether it's fine or not (I don't like it but don't feel that strongly), but the double standard is a little sad.
|
Does anybody remember when Naniwa probe-rushed Nestea in the GSL because he was forced to play a meaningless match? You remember how disappointed everyone was with how that match never happened? I wonder if Naniwa would have played that match out if he had been promised $500 :D
One thing's for sure - I'm actually going to watch Revival's matches. I wouldn't have, otherwise. Thank you, Nani!
|
Lol, Naniwa offering bounty is bad, but Taeja not playing is good? Blame Taeja, not Naniwa
|
Northern Ireland25669 Posts
On October 31 2013 04:13 Yakikorosu wrote:
I will warrant a guess that if the reverse had happened, and Revival had offered a "bounty" for ForGG to beat NaNiwa in his Challenger League bracket, this forum would be filled with "OMG Korean conspiracy" and "Revival must be disqualified," not "this is totally fine because it makes the matches more fun."
I think it's a gray area on whether it's fine or not (I don't like it but don't feel that strongly), but the double standard is a little sad.
I Really doubt there would be such talk from anyone other than hardcore Nani fanboys
|
On October 31 2013 04:13 Yakikorosu wrote:
I will warrant a guess that if the reverse had happened, and Revival had offered a "bounty" for ForGG to beat NaNiwa in his Challenger League bracket, this forum would be filled with "OMG Korean conspiracy" and "Revival must be disqualified," not "this is totally fine because it makes the matches more fun."
I think it's a gray area on whether it's fine or not (I don't like it but don't feel that strongly), but the double standard is a little sad.
The double standard is a figment of your imagination considering it is based on your 'guess'. Naniwa was hung out to dry for throwing a meaningless match like nobody ever was in sc2. Quit race-baiting.
|
On October 31 2013 04:13 Yakikorosu wrote:
I will warrant a guess that if the reverse had happened, and Revival had offered a "bounty" for ForGG to beat NaNiwa in his Challenger League bracket, this forum would be filled with "OMG Korean conspiracy" and "Revival must be disqualified," not "this is totally fine because it makes the matches more fun."
I think it's a gray area on whether it's fine or not (I don't like it but don't feel that strongly), but the double standard is a little sad.
What double standard ? There would be a double standard if people said yes to Naniwa's bounty on Revival, but no to whatever Bounty you are making up for your analogy to have some sort of sense(or parody? sorry english isn't my forte).
On October 31 2013 04:13 CakeSauc3 wrote:
Does anybody remember when Naniwa probe-rushed Nestea in the GSL because he was forced to play a meaningless match? You remember how disappointed everyone was with how that match never happened? I wonder if Naniwa would have played that match out if he had been promised $500 :D
One thing's for sure - I'm actually going to watch Revival's matches. I wouldn't have, otherwise. Thank you, Nani!
Probably, 500 cash is quite decent cash for just one game. If anything, i think he has enough experience to know what could motivate himself and others  /shrug.
|
On October 31 2013 04:10 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 04:03 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 03:46 Plansix wrote:On October 31 2013 03:42 Wombat_NI wrote:
It's quite frustrating to hear the 'this would never be tolerated in real sports' when it is, frequently.
Positive incentivisation is completely distinct from the likes of matchfixing which are more obviously unethical. Well, some people don't want to hear that and want to keep claiming its unfair. Of course professional players in all sports make wagers and set bounties against eachother. It makes the game more fun and exciting. Yeah when Pete Rose bet on his own team it wasn't a big deal at a... oh wait He didn't do that publicly and took great efforts to hide it. Context is key, since Naniwa isn't going to win money from this, unlike Pete Rose.
Well if revivial does not win his matches nani has confirmed money from blizzcon, no? I know it's not the same as gambling, but nani will win more money if revival loses his matches.
|
On October 31 2013 04:21 ZachFreeman wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 04:10 Plansix wrote:On October 31 2013 04:03 Storm71 wrote:On October 31 2013 03:46 Plansix wrote:On October 31 2013 03:42 Wombat_NI wrote:
It's quite frustrating to hear the 'this would never be tolerated in real sports' when it is, frequently.
Positive incentivisation is completely distinct from the likes of matchfixing which are more obviously unethical. Well, some people don't want to hear that and want to keep claiming its unfair. Of course professional players in all sports make wagers and set bounties against eachother. It makes the game more fun and exciting. Yeah when Pete Rose bet on his own team it wasn't a big deal at a... oh wait He didn't do that publicly and took great efforts to hide it. Context is key, since Naniwa isn't going to win money from this, unlike Pete Rose. Well if revivial does not win his matches nani has confirmed money from blizzcon, no? I know it's not the same as gambling, but nani will win more money if revival loses his matches.
Yes he gets cash. 5k.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
