EPTNaniwa offers Bounty to whoever beats Revival - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Scumi
Germany108 Posts
| ||
|
awesomoecalypse
United States2235 Posts
he didn't say "play your hardest," he said "do what it takes to win." naniwa offering money to another is not "playing starcraft" at all so i don't comprehend what your point is. if paying another player is "playing starcraft" because it helps you win, how is that different from maphacking? people maphack so they'll win. they're trying to win. Maphacking is against the rules. Paying players to play their hardest is not against the rules, because if it was no team could offer salaries and no tournament could offer rewards. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:34 Waise wrote: do you think the winner of a starcraft tournament should be the one who plays best at starcraft or the one who "tries the hardest to win"? as i said at the bottom of my post (which i'm sure you didn't read), if you don't care, you don't care. that's fine. but if you want big tournaments like wcs and blizzcon to be successful, you should want them to be conducted professionally, because sponsors aren't going to throw money at a tournament that allows this kind of thing you realize of course you could use the same logic to justify maphacking or really anything else? there are either rules or there aren't Player A and Player B are matched against each other. Player B is already trying to beat Player A. Player C says "I'll give you hug/burger/$500 if Player B beats Player A" There is nothing shady about that is overall just lighthearted good fun. If Player C/Naniwa asks people to maphack or send viruses to Revival's computer, that would be different. If Player C/Naniwa asked fans to attack Revival, that would be different. Revival's opponents are already trying to beat Revival. Naniwa letting the world know that he has a lot at stake in the match is good natured fun for everyone. It would be different if Naniwa asked Revival to punt a game. | ||
|
Noobity
United States871 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:29 Waise wrote: contract incentives are not anywhere close to what naniwa is doing here. blizzard is not naniwa's or revival's employer, they're a company running a tournament with a prize pool. the jets and mark sanchez are two parties involved in an employer-employee contract. naniwa and revival are two parties who signed up for a tournament where the prizes are paid out by a third party. there's just no analogue at all in either concept or legality the legitimacy of the tournament (at least, i would imagine, in most people's eyes) depends partly on the competition being based on skill at the sport in question. an employer giving an employee bonuses for doing well makes sense, because it's an internal bonus based on a common interest - obviously the player and the team both want themselves and each other to do well because they share their success. a competitor bribing other competitors to play harder against a rival is shady I don't agree. Where the money is coming from isn't important, the fact that the money is being offered to do something well is what's in question here. Any money offered to guarantee that a player does their best does not affect the legitimacy of an event in any way, other than to make it better. It just creates a situation where Revival will have some hungry opponents who might be trying harder to beat him, so he wont be able to skate through. Anything at all that adds to the reason that a player would play better is going to improve the legitimacy of the tournament. He's not asking anyone to do anything they shouldn't already be doing, he's just offering compensation if they do and it turns out to be something that directly benefits him. | ||
|
Waise
3165 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:42 Iceman331 wrote: You are a funny guy, really. Thank you for the amusement. i'm doing people a favor by explaining to them what the problem with this is from a business perspective. i actually couldn't care less if naniwa gives someone money to beat revival; i'm just stating facts about how it affects the legitimacy of the competition as i have said multiple times, if you think it's OK that the results of a starcraft tournament be affected by player-to-player payouts, that's fine. i really don't care. but don't expect these tournaments to thrive if that's how they're run, that's all i'm saying. | ||
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
Taeja forfeited. | ||
|
AnachronisticAnarchy
United States2957 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:39 trinxified wrote: The players who are playing against Revival should ALREADY be trying their hardest even without the $500 bounty. Isn't that what being professional means? If they weren't trying to win, then that's technically letting Revival win, which should be more of an issue. Technically, but not really. Games aren't won by trying your hardest in that game. Sure, there is something to be said about mindset, but that's not what really nets you the win. What nets you the win is what happens before the game. What nets you the win is every drill, sprint, pullup, pushup and scrim you've done before that point. It's all the sweat you've dropped, all the pain you've dealt with and all the effort you've put in. THAT is what Naniwa is encouraging. He isn't asking players to give their all for one game, like you seem to think. He's asking them to give their all for dozens of games, before they ever have to play the one that really matters. On October 29 2013 04:46 Waise wrote: i'm doing people a favor by explaining to them what the problem with this is from a business perspective. i actually couldn't care less if naniwa gives someone money to beat revival; i'm just stating facts about how it affects the legitimacy of the competition as i have said multiple times, if you think it's OK that the results of a starcraft tournament be affected by player-to-player payouts, that's fine. i really don't care. but don't expect these tournaments to thrive if that's how they're run, that's all i'm saying. Participants offering payouts to other participants for winning happens all the time in several of the biggest, international sports there are. When the tournament itself offers insufficient incentive to succeed, the players and teams step in a lot. Don't tell me this is going to "hurt esports," football is already doing this. | ||
|
PanN
United States2828 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:46 Waise wrote: i'm doing people a favor by explaining to them what the problem with this is from a business perspective. i actually couldn't care less if naniwa gives someone money to beat revival; i'm just stating facts about how it affects the legitimacy of the competition as i have said multiple times, if you think it's OK that the results of a starcraft tournament be affected by player-to-player payouts, that's fine. i really don't care. but don't expect these tournaments to thrive if that's how they're run, that's all i'm saying. Except you're not stating facts about how it will ruin the competition. You're saying a lot of nonsense and sensible people are correcting you and you're ignoring it. | ||
|
ZAiNs
United Kingdom6525 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:46 DarkLordOlli wrote: GUYS breaking news - Revival's group is Taeja, Select and Jonsnow. Taeja forfeited. https://twitter.com/NaNiwaSC2/status/394909633711579136 Revival isn't losing to Select and JonSnow  . | ||
|
awesomoecalypse
United States2235 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:46 Waise wrote: i'm doing people a favor by explaining to them what the problem with this is from a business perspective. i actually couldn't care less if naniwa gives someone money to beat revival; i'm just stating facts about how it affects the legitimacy of the competition as i have said multiple times, if you think it's OK that the results of a starcraft tournament be affected by player-to-player payouts, that's fine. i really don't care. but don't expect these tournaments to thrive if that's how they're run, that's all i'm saying. Protip: Your arguments are bad, and as such you have failed to convince anyone reading that your point is in any way legitimate. There is a vast difference between offering monetary rewards to a winner, and breaking the rules to cheat to win, and implying otherwise is either idiocy or trolling. | ||
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:46 Waise wrote: i'm doing people a favor by explaining to them what the problem with this is from a business perspective. i actually couldn't care less if naniwa gives someone money to beat revival; i'm just stating facts about how it affects the legitimacy of the competition as i have said multiple times, if you think it's OK that the results of a starcraft tournament be affected by player-to-player payouts, that's fine. i really don't care. but don't expect these tournaments to thrive if that's how they're run, that's all i'm saying. Actually, doesn't this happen in other sports as well? >.> | ||
|
Zaphid
Czech Republic1860 Posts
| ||
|
awesomoecalypse
United States2235 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:48 Zealously wrote: Actually, doesn't this happen in other sports as well? >.> Yes. NBA players are notorious for betting each other, and just a couple years ago it came out that in the NFL the New Orleans Saints were offering paid bounties to any player who injured someone on the other team. Both of those strike me as much more problematic than this, and both of those leagues are doing just fine. | ||
|
Sein
United States1811 Posts
| ||
|
Waise
3165 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:45 awesomoecalypse wrote: you sure about that? that's the nature of the entire debate. i would not be surprised at all if blizzard came out and made a ruling against this based on some conditions of the tournament signups. so yes, they could declare this to be against the rules if they chose toPaying players to play their hardest is not against the rules, On October 29 2013 04:45 awesomoecalypse wrote:because if it was no team could offer salaries and no tournament could offer rewards. that's not correct and doesn't make sense. naniwa's team is his employer, employers give employees bonuses if they perform well. a tournament is a competition that pays out to the best competitor. both are standard business and neither is related to players gambling or bribing amongst each other. the point you're missing is that it's not just for $500. it's also for all the potential and guaranteed prize money and benefits of making it to blizzcon. if this were over a showmatch, there wouldn't be an issue. but naniwa is trying to make an investment of $500 to ensure that blizzcon prize pools are more likely available to him and not revival. that is the issue to put it another way: i'm revival. i sign on to tournaments because my understanding is that blizzard will reward me for performing well at their game. i practice and play to the best of my ability. but my opponent has a higher potential prize than me because of naniwa. i will never have access to naniwa's $500. therefore the issue is that i am no longer competing on an equal footing with my opponent or naniwa the concern is blizzard's, if anyone's. like i said, it's not about morality but about professionalism and legitimacy | ||
|
AnachronisticAnarchy
United States2957 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:48 Zaphid wrote: I'm fine with this, because the way Revival got those points was pretty sketchy, he shouldn't have been awarded any points for IEM at all Is this sarcasm or did I miss something that happened recently? | ||
|
PerryHooter
Sweden268 Posts
On October 29 2013 03:37 Canucklehead wrote: I think it's a cool move by naniwa to offer a bounty. However, I'm wondering if the $500 is for beating revival or for knocking him out or both? For example, someone could beat revival, but then revival could get 2nd place still. Would that person who beat revival still get the $500 or not since revival still advanced? For revival to be knocked out he would need to lose twice. Would both people get $500? Also it's possible for the same person to beat revival twice in the group. Would that person get $1000? Fasten your seatbelts, we've got some real drama coming.  Also I don't think there's a problem with giving monetary incentives to win. Compare this situation to that of Naniwa and Sase discussing his games before the season two finals, and Naniwa saying "man I really feel I can beat innovation" and Sase decides to make it into a bet. With a perfect system both players would have the same incentive to do their best in every match, but that's not the case here. This is basically just leveling the playing field, which is awesome. | ||
|
Eventine
United States307 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:46 DarkLordOlli wrote: GUYS breaking news - Revival's group is Taeja, Select and Jonsnow. Taeja forfeited. https://twitter.com/NaNiwaSC2/status/394909633711579136 clearly koreans throwing to get other koreans into the finals | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12422 Posts
| ||
|
PanN
United States2828 Posts
On October 29 2013 04:52 Waise wrote: you sure about that? that's the nature of the entire debate. i would not be surprised at all if blizzard came out and made a ruling against this based on some conditions of the tournament signups. so yes, they could declare this to be against the rules if they chose to that's not correct and doesn't make sense. naniwa's team is his employer, employers give employees bonuses if they perform well. a tournament is a competition that pays out to the best competitor. both are standard business and neither is related to players gambling or bribing amongst each other. the point you're missing is that it's not just for $500. it's also for all the potential and guaranteed prize money and benefits of making it to blizzcon. if this were over a showmatch, there wouldn't be an issue. but naniwa is trying to make an investment of $500 to ensure that blizzcon prize pools are more likely available to him and not revival. that is the issue to put it another way: i'm revival. i sign on to tournaments because my understanding is that blizzard will reward me for performing well at their game. i practice and play to the best of my ability. but my opponent has a higher potential prize than me because of naniwa. i will never have access to naniwa's $500. therefore the issue is that i am no longer competing on an equal footing with my opponent or naniwa the concern is blizzard's, if anyone's. like i said, it's not about morality but about professionalism and legitimacy Yeah that makes absolutely no sense what so ever. You act as if the incentive to beat revival isn't there already, and you act as if revival has no incentive to win because *GASP* the prizepools are differen't! You're typing a lot of nonsense for no reason what so ever. | ||
| ||
