|
i'm saying that naniwa, if he is serious, believes he is doing this for the purpose of giving revival's opponents an advantage over him. if he didn't think he was gaining an advantage, he wouldn't do it
No, he's doing it so they'll actually play Revival seriously, rather than treating the games like they don't matter (which, bounty aside, they don't to anyone except Revival). Giving people a reason not to slack off isn't at all the same as giving them an unfair advantage.
Seriously, guys, the comparison with real sports is the comparison to side bets athletes have about their performance, and those side bets are a commonplace. Michael Jordan is so famous for his side bets that there's a conspiracy theory that his first retirement was to hush up a real gambling scandal. This is mostly a non-issue, does not reflect badly on anybody's professionalism, and I think it's kind of cool.
Yeah Jordan made side bets all the time, and he was far from the only one.
|
Hahaha this is awesome, I don't even care if it's real or serious, it's fucking hilarious. If he actually follows through with this I'll be a fan forever.
|
On October 29 2013 05:02 Waise wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2013 04:55 PanN wrote:
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! no? i didn't say those things at all, you just made them up and attributing them to me i'm saying that naniwa, if he is serious, believes he is doing this for the purpose of giving revival's opponents an advantage over him. if he didn't think he was gaining an advantage, he wouldn't do it (btw i'm still not 100% convinced he's serious anyway). that advantage would be based on naniwa being willing to pay another player, which is not something i think should affect a starcraft competition. simple as that. maybe i'm wrong that it would be a detriment to the scene, maybe i'm not, but if i were running a tournament i wouldn't allow that sort of thing because it's not related to skill at the sport, just like cheating/maphacking/etc. isn't related to skill either Show nested quote +On October 29 2013 04:55 PanN wrote:
You're typing a lot of nonsense for no reason what so ever. i'm typing opinions and arguments because i enjoy it and i want to have a healthy debate with people, just like anyone else? maybe you need to relax?
naniwa doesn't believe he's giving revival's opponents an advantage, he's doing it to give revival's opponents a motivation that they don't have BUT REVIVAL DOES HAVE, because challenger is worth nothing besides the couple wcs points revival could get to go to blizzcon
how's that for inequality hhhehhehe
|
I have the feeling that it's just a joke, I doubt that NaNi would actually pay someone that much to beat Revival.
|
On October 29 2013 05:07 IntoTheheart wrote:
I have the feeling that it's just a joke, I doubt that NaNi would actually pay someone that much to beat Revival.
If someone beats Revival (well, if 2 people do), Naniwa gets a guaranteed $5k at Blizzcon he otherwise wouldn't. Paying $500 to get $5000 is just good sense.
|
Disappointing if understandable that Taeja gave Revival a bye.
|
On October 29 2013 05:02 InvictusRage wrote:
You're Korean. Your opponents are not. Hell, you are significantly better at the game than they are. Why aren't you worried about these inequalities? a lot of people are worried about those inequalities, it's a pretty big subject of debate in the community as far as i can tell? a lot of people don't like koreans coming in and winning prize money for other regions because korean culture has more infrastructure and dedication toward starcraft than other societies. it's an interesting debate, but one that has nothing to do with revival or naniwa, because they presumably knew the rules when they signed up for the tournaments they compete in
On October 29 2013 05:02 InvictusRage wrote:You're not worried about those because they don't matter. We don't care if people are competing under different circumstances if all of the relevant circumstances are the same, and both players are interacting with the program under the ways that everyone has agreed are okay, and that the differences in play are due to skill and execution. None of that has changed. i think one player having a higher potential prize pool matters. if you were offered a spot in a tournament with 15 other people who are about equal to you in skill, and the organizers told you that if you won you would only receive 50% of the first place prize, would you not have a problem with that? it doesn't matter what the exact dollar figure is, it's just a principle. why should the rewards not be even? if the rewards didn't matter to players, blizzard certainly wouldn't offer them. so yeah i think it matters
On October 29 2013 05:02 InvictusRage wrote:Now, it may be the case that your opponents are slightly more motivated than they would be otherwise, but so what? You (and Revival) are not entitled to have unmotivated opponents. In fact, Naniwa and the watchers are entitled to your having very motivated opponents. This is why we think badly of people who concede these things without playing. We understand, in cases like Taeja's and Scarlett's before it turned out she could play third season of WCS, that they are conceding for good reasons - health, wrist reasons mostly. no, and that's a good point, revival isn't "entitled to unmotivated players." but if revival's opponent is thinking "ok, this is just challenger, i want to win and i will play hard but i'm only going to practice 2 hours instead of 6," then naniwa's offer comes along and he says "oh, more money! i'll put in those six hours after all!" i think that's a real form of competitive imbalance. it's not the fact that they're becoming motivated, it's the fact that naniwa is manipulating their motivation with financial incentives.
On October 29 2013 05:02 InvictusRage wrote:Seriously, guys, the comparison with real sports is the comparison to side bets athletes have about their performance, and those side bets are a commonplace. Michael Jordan is so famous for his side bets that there's a conspiracy theory that his first retirement was to hush up a real gambling scandal. This is mostly a non-issue, does not reflect badly on anybody's professionalism, and I think it's kind of cool.
key word is "side." doing things openly on twitter is not "side" anything. another key word is "scandal." michael jordan had a gambling scandal because there was a problem with it. those things are still supporting my point IMO
|
On October 29 2013 05:08 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2013 05:07 IntoTheheart wrote:
I have the feeling that it's just a joke, I doubt that NaNi would actually pay someone that much to beat Revival.
If someone beats Revival (well, if 2 people do), Naniwa gets a guaranteed $5k at Blizzcon he otherwise wouldn't. Paying $500 to get $5000 is just good sense.
That's fair.
|
On October 29 2013 05:07 Epamynondas wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2013 05:02 Waise wrote:On October 29 2013 04:55 PanN wrote:
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! no? i didn't say those things at all, you just made them up and attributing them to me i'm saying that naniwa, if he is serious, believes he is doing this for the purpose of giving revival's opponents an advantage over him. if he didn't think he was gaining an advantage, he wouldn't do it (btw i'm still not 100% convinced he's serious anyway). that advantage would be based on naniwa being willing to pay another player, which is not something i think should affect a starcraft competition. simple as that. maybe i'm wrong that it would be a detriment to the scene, maybe i'm not, but if i were running a tournament i wouldn't allow that sort of thing because it's not related to skill at the sport, just like cheating/maphacking/etc. isn't related to skill either On October 29 2013 04:55 PanN wrote:
You're typing a lot of nonsense for no reason what so ever. i'm typing opinions and arguments because i enjoy it and i want to have a healthy debate with people, just like anyone else? maybe you need to relax? naniwa doesn't believe he's giving revival's opponents an advantage, he's doing it to give revival's opponents a motivation that they don't have BUT REVIVAL DOES HAVE, because challenger is worth nothing besides the couple wcs points revival could get to go to blizzcon how's that for inequality hhhehhehe
good try, but no. revival began the competitive year on equal footing with all other players. the reason he has that extra incentive at this stage of the year is because of the quality of his play in the past.
|
On October 29 2013 04:52 Waise wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2013 04:45 awesomoecalypse wrote:
Paying players to play their hardest is not against the rules, 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 Show nested quote +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 naniwathe concern is blizzard's, if anyone's. like i said, it's not about morality but about professionalism and legitimacy
Naniwa isn't skewing the chances in his favour. The chances are skewed in Revivals favour because of the simple fact that Revival has all the incentives in the world to do well while his opponents doesn't. Revival will have an easier time advancing to the bo5 decider vs Naniwa than he would without this flaw in the system. Naniwa is just "deskewing" the incentives, leveling the playing field, curing the flaw in the system.
Many major leagues/tournaments has this flaw; in the final rounds there ends up being between a player/team that has everything on the line agains the other player/team with nothing on the line. This is always a major dent in the legitimacy of the tournament and a inherent problem in those system. Allowing these incentives is one way.
(As a non-native english speaker I'm really stretching my language but I think my point comes across)
|
On October 29 2013 04:52 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:Show nested quote +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?
IEM invited Revival to replace someone who couldn't make it.
They invited him on the basis that he was the highest WCS points holder who wasn't already going and who accepted the invitation.
The person they SHOULD have invited was the person who came second in a qualifier to the guy who forfeited, but instead they invite people who already have WCS points so they can get more WCS points.
It's ridiculous and should not have happened.
If Revival had not gone, he would not be able to match Naniwa on WCS points.
|
I understand where Waise is coming from.
It can look poisonous that Naniwa is trying to defeat Revival in a match he himself is not even a part of.
He's trying to inject motivation from outside that otherwise wouldn't be there.
Revival has an obstacle in front of him on his way to Blizzcon.
Naniwa is trying to make it bigger.
Of course this is non-standard behavior, it's why it's controversial.
Whether it's 'right' or 'wrong' is tricky of course.
But whether it's illegal or not should be black or white.
|
On October 29 2013 05:05 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +i'm saying that naniwa, if he is serious, believes he is doing this for the purpose of giving revival's opponents an advantage over him. if he didn't think he was gaining an advantage, he wouldn't do it No, he's doing it so they'll actually play Revival seriously, rather than treating the games like they don't matter (which, bounty aside, they don't to anyone except Revival). Giving people a reason not to slack off isn't at all the same as giving them an unfair advantage.
... so he's doing it so revival's opponents will play harder and provide more of a challenge. which is an advantage if you compare it to "treating the games like they don't matter." which benefits naniwa....
i don't see how what you said is different from what i said? are we arguing semantics?
|
Austria24417 Posts
On October 29 2013 05:09 Sabu113 wrote:
Disappointing if understandable that Taeja gave Revival a bye.
Taeja forfeited Challenger League due to illness before he knew his group
|
On October 29 2013 05:03 Norzma wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2013 04:52 Waise wrote:On October 29 2013 04:45 awesomoecalypse wrote:
Paying players to play their hardest is not against the rules, 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 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 naniwathe concern is blizzard's, if anyone's. like i said, it's not about morality but about professionalism and legitimacy However Naniwa is just offering an incentive for other players that has NOTHING to gain from winning their group over revival. Revival himself has his incentive already, if he wins he gets to play naniwa in a tiebreaker to enter the final 16 at blizzcon. A incentive wont make revival play worse. A incentive will make the other players take that group more serious.
revival has the incentive already because he played better than his opponents throughout seasons 1, 2 and 3. that's a legitimate reason for him to have a higher incentive. naniwa injecting money isn't what i consider a legitimate reason.
On October 29 2013 05:04 Pirfiktshon wrote:Seriously? Seriously? People are taking issue with this? I wish the mods would ban the Nay sayers from this thread. Naniwa isn't doing anything illegal he is giving players extra incentive to ensure his trip to blizzcon. He is doing it in a light hearted manner that actually WILL come up during IEM and will make the game that much more interesting to watch so to all the nay-sayers go post another "Why is Sc2 Dying" Thread please and leave eSports to have some fun Please and Thank You 
you literally want me to be banned because i don't agree with your opinion?
On October 29 2013 05:05 Iceman331 wrote:
Can we stop feeding the troll please.....
can you stop spamming accusations that i'm trolling just because you don't like my opinion? thanks
|
If you forfeit you should be excluded from future competition in that season.
That would sort people out.
|
On October 29 2013 05:13 Waise wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2013 05:05 awesomoecalypse wrote:i'm saying that naniwa, if he is serious, believes he is doing this for the purpose of giving revival's opponents an advantage over him. if he didn't think he was gaining an advantage, he wouldn't do it No, he's doing it so they'll actually play Revival seriously, rather than treating the games like they don't matter (which, bounty aside, they don't to anyone except Revival). Giving people a reason not to slack off isn't at all the same as giving them an unfair advantage. ... so he's doing it so revival's opponents will play harder and provide more of a challenge. which is an advantage if you compare it to "treating the games like they don't matter." which benefits naniwa.... i don't see how what you said is different from what i said? are we arguing semantics?
An advantage implies unequal footing. Revival is not entitled to opponents who don't give a shit, it is not somehow unfair for him to play people who actually have motivation to play.
|
revival has the incentive already because he played better than his opponents throughout seasons 1, 2 and 3. that's a legitimate reason for him to have a higher incentive. naniwa injecting money isn't what i consider a legitimate reason.
Everyone should play their hardest, and whatever incentive system produces that outcomes is a good thing.
|
I can do this. Hold me beer!
|
On October 29 2013 05:05 InvictusRage wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2013 04:58 Waise wrote:On October 29 2013 04:50 awesomoecalypse wrote:On October 29 2013 04:48 Zealously wrote:On October 29 2013 04:46 Waise wrote:On October 29 2013 04:42 Iceman331 wrote:On October 29 2013 04:39 Waise wrote:On October 29 2013 04:37 Nebuchad wrote:On October 29 2013 04:34 Waise wrote:On October 29 2013 04:31 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
I fail to understand how it is unfair for a player that his opponents try their best to beat him. I thought that was the whole goal of, you know, competitive gaming. 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 No, I don't realize at all what this has to do with maphack. And since I don't really believe in people who are born with the ability to move units on a screen, I'm pretty sure that the people who play best are also the people who try the hardest. yeah i refuse to believe this isn't trolling. if you're not trolling, try to think a bit more critically about my post, otherwise i can't even engage your nonsense 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. 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. do you not understand the difference between underground gambling going on and a player doing this openly? i didn't say "esports will suffer if players pay each other," i said it's not a good look for blizzard's competitions if they simply allow it to be done openly. and your NBA/NFL examples seem to agree with my point because i recall both of them being absolutely major public scandals at the time You're right about the NFL example. That's why it's a bad example-it was about hurting the other players, and was still a case of the team paying the employed player. The relevant comparison is to the side bets Jordan made, well-documented by every biographer he's had. I followed the Atlanta Braves, an MLB team, very closely in the 1990s (still do!) and the famous pitching staff they had always had running bets amongst them about who had the best hitting stats. These were bets that the announcers doing the commentating, most of them former professional baseball players and some of them former Braves, talked about quite a bit. Nothing under the table.
yes, but those bets are between team members who were all playing for a common goal of high achievement. it's not like smoltz is paying glavine to get more hits than maddux to make maddux look bad. in my opinion that kind of bet is between the players because it doesn't affect the competitive balance of the game between their team and the opponent's team. if anything, it's a way to elevate their own team's play.
to keep going with the analogies, if naniwa wanted to pay, uh... well fuck, no one is on his team. but if revival wanted to bet with suppy about winning games in team league, i wouldn't have a problem with that, because they're still playing for a common goal and they're not trying to backhandedly screw anyone other than their opponents by playing well
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
