|
United States33403 Posts
Yonhap News (link) reported that sentencing was passed down on Gerrard, YoDa, BBoongBBoong and others involved in the PRIME match-fixing scandal.
Gerrard, YoDa, and BBoongBBoong were sentenced to 18 months in prison, but had their sentences suspended for three years. Former progamer Enough who acted as a broker received a two year sentence, suspended three years. In the Korean judicial system, a suspended sentence is essentially probation that occurs before a sentence actually starts. If the convicted parties can pass the probationary period without any infractions against the law, they will not serve their original sentence.
The players involved in the 2010 match-fixing scandal received similarly sentencing; For example, Savior received a sentence of one year in prison, suspended two years.
Additionally, YoDa was fined 30 million Korean Won (KRW), which is approximately $26,000 USD. Gerrard was fined 10 million won, while BBoongBBoong was fined 5 million won. The other brokers and financial backers involved received sentences between 10 and 18 months, also suspended.
Judge Seo Dong-chil, who passed down the sentencing, said "Lowering the credibility of esports and damaging its foundations should be punished severely. However, [the convicted] did not participate in match-fixing previously, and the actual amount of profit they gained was not large. Taking this into account, I suspend their sentences."
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES50143 Posts
more free than life, disgusting.
|
They got more than sAviOr? :O
|
Weird they all got the same sentence; You'd expect a higher sentence for Gerrard.
|
glad we have a sentence. Hope that it will discourage people from match-fixing.
|
Additionally, YoDa was fined 30 million Korean Won (KRW), which is approximately $26,000 USD. Gerrard was fined 10 million won, while YoDa was fined 5 million won.
One of those YoDa's got to be BBoongBBoong, right?
|
|
|
France9034 Posts
On March 31 2016 17:19 Elentos wrote:
They got more than sAviOr? :O
 Savior - 120 hours community service, 2 year probation (on a 12 month sentence)
If I understand correctly, they got less, no?
|
On March 31 2016 17:30 Dumbledore wrote:
2 YoDas o.O
The force is stronk with those ones.
Regarding previous information we had, I expected Gerard to get much more than the players involved. I am a bit surprised.
I guess we will also have to wait that long for update on Life's case.
|
On March 31 2016 17:28 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +Additionally, YoDa was fined 30 million Korean Won (KRW), which is approximately $26,000 USD. Gerrard was fined 10 million won, while YoDa was fined 5 million won. One of those YoDa's got to be BBoongBBoong, right?
Presumably the 2nd one, as the prosecutor's report only mentioned one instance of BBoongBBoong matchfixing. Would make sense for YoDa to get a higher fine.
On March 31 2016 17:34 Ragnarork wrote:If I understand correctly, they got less, no?
Well, they got 18 months of jail on 3 years of probation. If all 4 of them actually went to jail sAviOr would have gotten off the easiest.
|
United States33403 Posts
On March 31 2016 17:34 Ragnarork wrote:If I understand correctly, they got less, no?
They got the same sentences as Justin 18months/36months suspended
|
So.. Life? What happend there?
|
Good to see that match-fixing is still punished hard. Hopefully we get some updates regarding Life soon.
|
And Life ? Any news ? :'(
|
United States33403 Posts
The Prime scandal reared its head in October of last year. Life was brought in by the authorities in February of this year. So probably no news for a while.
|
I don't understand how Gerrard got a lesser fine. More co-operation?
|
It says "and others". Any idea who those others are?
And I love the opinion of the judge ""Lowering the credibility of esports and damaging its foundations should be punished severely."
No where else in the world would you hear a statement like that. Props to Korea for being so progressive.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES50143 Posts
On March 31 2016 17:54 Noonius wrote:
I don't understand how Gerrard got a lesser fine. More co-operation?
probably the kinda guy who'd sell everyone out for a lighter sentence.
|
Canada16217 Posts
On March 31 2016 17:56 jimminy_kriket wrote:
It says "and others". Any idea who those others are?
And I love the opinion of the judge ""Lowering the credibility of esports and damaging its foundations should be punished severely."
No where in the world would you hear a statement like that. Props to Korea for being so progressive.
"and others" probably refers to the people who setup the bets.
|
On March 31 2016 17:50 Waxangel wrote:
The Prime scandal reared its head in October of last year. Life was brought in by the authorities in February of this year. So probably no news for a while.
Yes, but it's still weird that not even KESPA said anything about it (ban?). We shouldn't expect a sentence for a while, but ANY statement by ANYONE.
|
Thank god it's not actual prison time. Even though it's hard to judge without knowledge of Korean society how harsh a punishment this is - in my country, having a criminal record (which a suspended sentence gives you) disqualifies you from a lot of jobs.
|
On March 31 2016 17:16 BLinD-RawR wrote:
more free than life, disgusting.
?
We dunno yet what life did, but I guess they don't keep him just for fun.
Besides that, the mentioned players were not "free" before that news, were they?
So he shouldn't be either if he is guilty. If not, that would of course be really sad.
|
On March 31 2016 18:07 opisska wrote:
Thank god it's not actual prison time. Even though it's hard to judge without knowledge of Korean society how harsh a punishment this is - in my country, having a criminal record (which a suspended sentence gives you) disqualifies you from a lot of jobs.
Not only that, but I feel like the sentence itself is insanely harsh. Athlets who were caught using performance-enhancing drugs are punished less harsh than this in the western world, don't they?
(I don't think a hard sentence is bad, just from a western perspective, it seems harsh)
|
btw how old were they at the time of the crime?
Is this a sort of youth-crime (dunno english expression, sorry folks) with some?
|
On March 31 2016 18:15 Rollora wrote:
btw how old were they at the time of the crime?
Is this a sort of youth-crime (dunno english expression, sorry folks) with some?
YoDa in his early 20s, BBoongBBoong in his late 20s and Gerrard in his early 30s. None of them fall under juvenile law. A bunch of unknown people where we can't tell.
Life might fall under juvenile law if it ever comes to that.
|
|
|
United States33403 Posts
|
On March 31 2016 18:18 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 18:15 Rollora wrote:
btw how old were they at the time of the crime?
Is this a sort of youth-crime (dunno english expression, sorry folks) with some? YoDa in his early 20s, BBoongBBoong in his late 20s and Gerrard in his early 30s. None of them fall under juvenile law. A bunch of unknown people where we can't tell. Life might fall under juvenile law if it ever comes to that.
thx!
Yeah I was mostly thinking about Life here. The poor guy couldn't even lift a trophy 
|
So if they do not fuck up again within the delayed sentence period all they got was a fine? Do I understand this correctly?
Obviously they're not allowed back competing so that in itself is perhaps the biggest punishment.
|
thanks for the report agent waxangel
|
No electric chair? Korea I am disappoint
|
How can you claim Gerrard deserves more. Like you were personally involved in the affair and know all the details. Let the prosecutor deal with it. Gawd.
|
On March 31 2016 19:10 insitelol wrote:
How can you claim Gerrard deserves more. Like you were personally involved in the affair and know all the details. Let the prosecutor deal with it. Gawd.
But... but free speech...
|
On March 31 2016 18:12 Swisslink wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 18:07 opisska wrote:
Thank god it's not actual prison time. Even though it's hard to judge without knowledge of Korean society how harsh a punishment this is - in my country, having a criminal record (which a suspended sentence gives you) disqualifies you from a lot of jobs. Not only that, but I feel like the sentence itself is insanely harsh. Athlets who were caught using performance-enhancing drugs are punished less harsh than this in the western world, don't they? (I don't think a hard sentence is bad, just from a western perspective, it seems harsh) Using PEDs is not actually a crime. Match-fixing, I believe, is, as it falls under laws about deceiving customers. (In the US there are specific laws against fixing a competition on TV, I assume this would fall under that)
|
On March 31 2016 18:12 Swisslink wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 18:07 opisska wrote:
Thank god it's not actual prison time. Even though it's hard to judge without knowledge of Korean society how harsh a punishment this is - in my country, having a criminal record (which a suspended sentence gives you) disqualifies you from a lot of jobs. Not only that, but I feel like the sentence itself is insanely harsh. Athlets who were caught using performance-enhancing drugs are punished less harsh than this in the western world, don't they? (I don't think a hard sentence is bad, just from a western perspective, it seems harsh)
well every single top athlete use performance drugs so punishing hard is just stupid, evreone is gonna do it anyway.
|
On March 31 2016 19:10 insitelol wrote:
How can you claim Gerrard deserves more. Like you were personally involved in the affair and know all the details. Let the prosecutor deal with it. Gawd.
From the prosecutor's report, it seems Gerrard acted as the middle man between the players and the people trying to get them to matchfix. I think for that he should have been punished harder.
|
On March 31 2016 19:37 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 19:10 insitelol wrote:
How can you claim Gerrard deserves more. Like you were personally involved in the affair and know all the details. Let the prosecutor deal with it. Gawd. From the prosecutor's report, it seems Gerrard acted as the middle man between the players and the people trying to get them to matchfix. I think for that he should have been punished harder.
I don't know. It's like conspirecy to commit murder and murder. Not actually doing the deed seems like it should be punished less severe?
|
France17333 Posts
This sounds like an almost appropriate sentence to me. Good job to Judge Seo Dong-chil.
|
The sentence seems a bit weak, they got a fine and probation. Not sure if that's enough to deter others from trying as well.
|
On March 31 2016 20:02 Sjokola wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 19:37 Elentos wrote:On March 31 2016 19:10 insitelol wrote:
How can you claim Gerrard deserves more. Like you were personally involved in the affair and know all the details. Let the prosecutor deal with it. Gawd. From the prosecutor's report, it seems Gerrard acted as the middle man between the players and the people trying to get them to matchfix. I think for that he should have been punished harder. I don't know. It's like conspirecy to commit murder and murder. Not actually doing the deed seems like it should be punished less severe?
As a coach, his job is to protect his players from such influences. Instead, he introduced them to crime. Also, as he himself is not a pro and can't fix matches himself, what he did is basically the closest he could get to actually matchfixing.
|
France17333 Posts
On March 31 2016 20:07 DwD wrote:
The sentence seems a bit weak, they got a fine and probation. Not sure if that's enough to deter others from trying as well.
Sentences, no matter how hard they might be, rarely deter people from doing stupid shit.
On March 31 2016 20:07 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 20:02 Sjokola wrote:On March 31 2016 19:37 Elentos wrote:On March 31 2016 19:10 insitelol wrote:
How can you claim Gerrard deserves more. Like you were personally involved in the affair and know all the details. Let the prosecutor deal with it. Gawd. From the prosecutor's report, it seems Gerrard acted as the middle man between the players and the people trying to get them to matchfix. I think for that he should have been punished harder. I don't know. It's like conspirecy to commit murder and murder. Not actually doing the deed seems like it should be punished less severe? As a coach, his job is to protect his players from such influences. Instead, he introduced them to crime. Also, as he himself is not a pro and can't fix matches himself, what he did is basically the closest he could get to actually matchfixing.
I guess it depends if you consider that the coach is considered as hierarchically superior to the players or not.
|
well, this is a good decision i think. still, im frustrated that not even Kespa is saying anything about Life.
Gerrard should have got fucked even more than Yoda.
|
On March 31 2016 20:05 OtherWorld wrote:
This sounds like an almost appropriate sentence to me. Good job to Judge Seo Dong-chil.
Agreed. A fine hits them where it hurts, people match fix for money. On top of that 3 years probation. Ye seems about right.
|
On March 31 2016 19:37 Elentos wrote:
From the prosecutor's report, it seems Gerrard acted as the middle man between the players and the people trying to get them to matchfix. I think for that he should have been punished harder.
Meaning no offense but the way a person is fined/punished is fully regulated by law according to the crime he commited. No need for speculations.
|
On March 31 2016 20:29 Penev wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 20:05 OtherWorld wrote:
This sounds like an almost appropriate sentence to me. Good job to Judge Seo Dong-chil. Agreed. A fine hits them where it hurts, people match fix for money. On top of that 3 years probation. Ye seems about right.
+ the federation ban (which is kinda like sport's court). Definitely on point since it was for low sums and not like a big network of matchfixers.
|
On March 31 2016 20:34 insitelol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 19:37 Elentos wrote:
From the prosecutor's report, it seems Gerrard acted as the middle man between the players and the people trying to get them to matchfix. I think for that he should have been punished harder. Meaning no offense but the way a person is fined/punished is fully regulated by law according to the crime he commited. No need for speculations.
uhh... dunno how it works in korea, but don't judges actually have quite a bit of discretion in sentencing? isn't that what sentencing hearings are for?
like yeah i'm sure the law regulates minimum/maximum sentences, but the judge can still take circumstances into account and be lenient or strict... (at least from what i know of western law)
|
On March 31 2016 20:20 Dungeontay wrote:
well, this is a good decision i think. still, im frustrated that not even Kespa is saying anything about Life.
Gerrard should have got fucked even more than Yoda.
KeSPA has no say in this. This is a police investigation. Why would they release a statement publishing news on a ongoing investigation ? Even if they know i don't think they have the rights to give detail on an ongoing police investigation.
Good they got sentenced.
|
On March 31 2016 21:22 FFW_Rude wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 20:20 Dungeontay wrote:
well, this is a good decision i think. still, im frustrated that not even Kespa is saying anything about Life.
Gerrard should have got fucked even more than Yoda. KeSPA has no say in this. This is a police investigation. Why would they release a statement publishing news on a ongoing investigation ? Even if they know i don't think they have the rights to give detail on an ongoing police investigation. Good they got sentenced.
Well, they don't need to release a statement on ongoing investigations, but a statement whether he's banned or not.
|
On March 31 2016 18:12 Swisslink wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 18:07 opisska wrote:
Thank god it's not actual prison time. Even though it's hard to judge without knowledge of Korean society how harsh a punishment this is - in my country, having a criminal record (which a suspended sentence gives you) disqualifies you from a lot of jobs. Not only that, but I feel like the sentence itself is insanely harsh. Athlets who were caught using performance-enhancing drugs are punished less harsh than this in the western world, don't they? (I don't think a hard sentence is bad, just from a western perspective, it seems harsh)
Most modern PEDs are not actually illegal to take, they are just against the rules of most sports. No laws broken means no legal repercussions, and thus only whatever penalties the sport can enforce itself.
|
Chile820 Posts
lol the 2015 match-fixing "scandal" ends up with three-year probation for all the people involved in it.
All the noise, all the shouts, all the rage, all the accusations, ends up with no effective jail time. The declarations of the judge are just cliché. "Yeah, damaging the scene deserves a severe punishment, but since the kids are good in the bottom of their hearts, I will suspend their sentences". If the punishment established by law was really severe, gerrard and co., won't even had the chance of probation.
I hope that all the kids in this site will finally understand that arranging some irrelevant matches is no worthy of an excessive punishment.
|
On March 31 2016 22:04 Apoteosis wrote:
lol the 2015 match-fixing "scandal" ends up with three-year probation for all the people involved in it.
sAviOr didn't go to jail either, actual jail time was never realistic.
|
Not sure how the Korean justice system works as I don't watch too much k-drama, but this seems like a decent sentence. However I think Gerard should have gotten a harsher sentence.
Did Barbie ever say anything about Gerard and the match fixing?
|
On March 31 2016 22:40 geokilla wrote:
Not sure how the Korean justice system works as I don't watch too much k-drama, but this seems like a decent sentence. However I think Gerard should have gotten a harsher sentence.
Did Barbie ever say anything about Gerard and the match fixing?
I get the feeling Barbie left him long before this scandal ever came to light, I mean, she left Prime over a year before it was revealed that Gerrard was a scumbag.
|
On March 31 2016 18:11 Rollora wrote:? We dunno yet what life did, but I guess they don't keep him just for fun.
Word is out of some mob hits being performed by zerglings.
There is only one man capable of that. Normally he would be more careful but after his match with Taeja he was a little tired, and some of the witnesses survived to report of zerglings at the crime scene.
|
On March 31 2016 22:04 Apoteosis wrote:
lol the 2015 match-fixing "scandal" ends up with three-year probation for all the people involved in it.
All the noise, all the shouts, all the rage, all the accusations, ends up with no effective jail time. The declarations of the judge are just cliché. "Yeah, damaging the scene deserves a severe punishment, but since the kids are good in the bottom of their hearts, I will suspend their sentences". If the punishment established by law was really severe, gerrard and co., won't even had the chance of probation.
I hope that all the kids in this site will finally understand that arranging some irrelevant matches is no worthy of an excessive punishment.
Wait, cliche? How so? The judge basically said: This is your first offense. You won't get off with a slap on the wrist but you'll receive a necessary form of punishment. Understand that any further offenses will result in more severe punishment.
This way of thinking is way different compared to other countries, especially the U.S., where we imprison people for life for first time, non-violent drug offenses and let Wall Street pay a fine for almost destroying the economy.
But I could be interpreting what you're saying wrong.
I'm just glad that this has been resolved, in a way, and now, we patiently wait for Life...
|
Why was Yoda's fine greater than B4 and Gerard's ?
|
On April 01 2016 01:39 Shinespark wrote:
Why was Yoda's fine greater than B4 and Gerard's ?
Judging from the prosecutor's report back when the whole scandal came out, it seems he made the most money out of the 3 from matchfixing.
|
On April 01 2016 01:41 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2016 01:39 Shinespark wrote:
Why was Yoda's fine greater than B4 and Gerard's ? Judging from the prosecutor's report back when the whole scandal came out, it seems he made the most money out of the 3 from matchfixing.
What I thought happened was that most of the money they made from matchfixing was spent trying to keep Prime afloat...
I thought they didn't keep much for themselves.
Am I wrong?
|
nobody cares about those nonames... WHAT'S WITH LIFE :'((((
Kappa 
User was warned for this post
|
On March 31 2016 21:03 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 20:34 insitelol wrote:On March 31 2016 19:37 Elentos wrote:
From the prosecutor's report, it seems Gerrard acted as the middle man between the players and the people trying to get them to matchfix. I think for that he should have been punished harder. Meaning no offense but the way a person is fined/punished is fully regulated by law according to the crime he commited. No need for speculations. uhh... dunno how it works in korea, but don't judges actually have quite a bit of discretion in sentencing? isn't that what sentencing hearings are for? like yeah i'm sure the law regulates minimum/maximum sentences, but the judge can still take circumstances into account and be lenient or strict... (at least from what i know of western law)
Yes it works that way in almost every state. But that doesnt mean judge decides everything according to his free will. A final decision within the min/max sentence range depends on a clearly defined set of factors (circumstances, the degree of the guilt, mental state of a culprit etc etc). And these factors are not something undefined or blurred. The exact definitions of these are given in legal acts.
p.s. yes i'm a lawyer. not a native english speaker though so the definitions i've given may not be the exact ones used in english speaking countries, so i apologize for that.
|
Fiddler's Green42661 Posts
How did Gerrard get less when he was the ringleader?
|
Probably the expected sentence, huge fines and loss of careers are punishment enough.
On the Life thing, if we use this as an example. The majority of the matches fixed happened in January 2015, we heard nothing official till October. Life was arrested in February, we may be waiting quite a while yet
|
On March 31 2016 17:34 Ragnarork wrote:If I understand correctly, they got less, no?
Yup; that's crazy.
I assume they're banned from competitive e-sports for life too?
|
On April 01 2016 02:52 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 17:34 Ragnarork wrote:On March 31 2016 17:19 Elentos wrote:
They got more than sAviOr? :O Savior - 120 hours community service, 2 year probation (on a 12 month sentence) If I understand correctly, they got less, no? Yup; that's crazy. I assume they're banned from competitive e-sports for life too?
They were banned for life by KeSPA back in October, yeah. I guess technically, they could try to get something done outside of KeSPA, but with their history, it's not very likely. Especially since most streaming services will cooperate with KeSPA on this, we'll probably not hear from them again in an eSports context, unless matchfixing is brought up.
|
France17333 Posts
On April 01 2016 02:36 showstealer1829 wrote:
Probably the expected sentence, huge fines and loss of careers are punishment enough.
On the Life thing, if we use this as an example. The majority of the matches fixed happened in January 2015, we heard nothing official till October. Life was arrested in February, we may be waiting quite a while yet
The Prime guys didn't get arrested in January though? For all we know, Life might be concerned about games happening in January 2015 too...
|
On March 31 2016 17:19 Penev wrote:
Weird they all got the same sentence; You'd expect a higher sentence for Gerrard.
I'd agree, but I guess the rationale is "it's the actual syndicates we want, hitting these guys hard doesn't do much of anything".
|
so they are free basically and can do what they want unless they wont commit further crime,
thats great, hope to see them back in the starcraft scene ot did they get a ban as well?
|
On April 01 2016 04:31 bypLy wrote:
so they are free basically and can do what they want unless they wont commit further crime,
thats great, hope to see them back in the starcraft scene ot did they get a ban as well?
They are banned for life by KeSPA. Odds are you'll never see any of them again.
|
Chile820 Posts
On April 01 2016 01:39 Ja.Y. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 22:04 Apoteosis wrote:
lol the 2015 match-fixing "scandal" ends up with three-year probation for all the people involved in it.
All the noise, all the shouts, all the rage, all the accusations, ends up with no effective jail time. The declarations of the judge are just cliché. "Yeah, damaging the scene deserves a severe punishment, but since the kids are good in the bottom of their hearts, I will suspend their sentences". If the punishment established by law was really severe, gerrard and co., won't even had the chance of probation.
I hope that all the kids in this site will finally understand that arranging some irrelevant matches is no worthy of an excessive punishment.
Wait, cliche? How so? The judge basically said: This is your first offense. You won't get off with a slap on the wrist but you'll receive a necessary form of punishment. Understand that any further offenses will result in more severe punishment. This way of thinking is way different compared to other countries, especially the U.S., where we imprison people for life for first time, non-violent drug offenses and let Wall Street pay a fine for almost destroying the economy. But I could be interpreting what you're saying wrong. I'm just glad that this has been resolved, in a way, and now, we patiently wait for Life...
I apologize beforehand if I was misunderstood; I'm a lawyer in a continental law system, so my english, common law lexica is somewhat poor.
With that said, I think that the judge simply applied basic principles of criminal law in this case, which are: proportionality between the crime and the punishment, consideration of attenuating circumstances, etc.
So in this case, it was pretty obvious that the Prime guys won't spend a single night at jail (which is effective punishment), because it was their first crime, and the charges were for just misdemeanors (instead of major crimes). So, the Prime guys were candidates to applying to alternative punishment (instead of jail), like probation, paying fines, etc.
Plus, there is a concept behind every crime, that is the actual good that the law is taking care of (i.e.: murder, which is a major crime, tends to protect the human life, a desirable good that is protected by the law). In the case of match-fixing, I think that this good is the gambling forbiddance.
That is why I think the Judge's statement was mere cliché: because he knew that, despite their intentions, he was forced to apply the alternative punishment.
|
Chile820 Posts
On April 01 2016 02:32 stuchiu wrote:
How did Gerrard get less when he was the ringleader?
Because he wasn't the matherial author of the match fix, neither his "intellectual" autor.
He was a middle man, so he was a mere accomplice of the criminal offense.
Accomplices always got less punishment than the author of a criminal offense.
That's why.
|
Facepalm Gerrard you were a respectable figure in the SC2 scene at one point, how low have you fallen
|
On April 01 2016 02:32 stuchiu wrote:
How did Gerrard get less when he was the ringleader?
He probably was the one who snitched them out and cooperated.
|
On April 01 2016 01:54 africola wrote:
nobody cares about those nonames... WHAT'S WITH LIFE :'((((
User was warned for this post
Well
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Criminals are the worst. I'm glad Teamliquid and it's community isn't backing these criminal heinous acts. I think I say with confidence we would be better if these idiots were not part of community at all, and they should never be welcomed back into our gracious hands. Savior, you too.
Also, what is with their punishment? What's the point of having a judicial system if they don't even get punished for their crimes. They stole money, and lots of it, and they just hit with petty fines? Give them 10 to 15 years so they smarten up instead of just letting them go into the wild after a year where they'll do even more damage..
|
On April 01 2016 06:44 BingbingBOPOMOFO wrote:
Criminals are the worst. I'm glad Teamliquid and it's community isn't backing these criminal heinous acts. I think I say with confidence we would be better if these idiots were not part of community at all, and they should never be welcomed back into our gracious hands. Savior, you too.
Also, what is with their punishment? What's the point of having a judicial system if they don't even get punished for their crimes. They stole money, and lots of it, and they just hit with petty fines? Give them 10 to 15 years so they smarten up instead of just letting them go into the wild after a year where they'll do even more damage..
American spotted, most likely republican.
User was warned for this post
|
I don't get why the brokers and the people behind the scenes who were organizing the match-fixing got suspended sentences. Surely they should have faced jail time no matter what?
|
so technicaly a person can matchfix 100 games and if they find out hes matchfixed 5 games he pays some fines for those 5 games and then makes a ton of cash and only gets suspended sentence? Ok korean players you should keep matchfixing the punishment is nonexistent.
|
On April 01 2016 06:44 BingbingBOPOMOFO wrote:
Also, what is with their punishment? What's the point of having a judicial system if they don't even get punished for their crimes. They stole money, and lots of it, and they just hit with petty fines? Give them 10 to 15 years so they smarten up instead of just letting them go into the wild after a year where they'll do even more damage..
You propose an absolutely ridiculous punishment for what they did. The criminal record, fines (on people who clearly were in need of the money) and effective removal from e-sports (the entirety of their career experience) are altogether huge and life changing punishments. Are you saying someone should lose more than a decade of their life for match-fixing in a sport?
Especially when you consider these aren't the ring-leaders and organised criminals, the players especially were likely to a large degree manipulated by both the criminal organisations and their position as under-performing pro-gamers not making enough to really sustain themselves on the only career path they'd so far invested in.
|
a multi year prison sentence cause they "cheated/fixed" a computer game.. WHAT THE FUCK!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
i thought america was retarded but this is beyond anything i could have ever imagined.
but i read this on April 1st.. is it a joke??
has to be
|
On March 31 2016 21:46 Swisslink wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2016 21:22 FFW_Rude wrote:On March 31 2016 20:20 Dungeontay wrote:
well, this is a good decision i think. still, im frustrated that not even Kespa is saying anything about Life.
Gerrard should have got fucked even more than Yoda. KeSPA has no say in this. This is a police investigation. Why would they release a statement publishing news on a ongoing investigation ? Even if they know i don't think they have the rights to give detail on an ongoing police investigation. Good they got sentenced. Well, they don't need to release a statement on ongoing investigations, but a statement whether he's banned or not.
When KeSPA bans a player you will know. IF no statement. No ban for now.
On April 01 2016 02:32 stuchiu wrote:
How did Gerrard get less when he was the ringleader?
Maybe YoDa was deeper in this that we know
|
Yoda has gotten back on the internet and has now protected his tweets.
|
On April 01 2016 06:44 BingbingBOPOMOFO wrote:
Criminals are the worst. I'm glad Teamliquid and it's community isn't backing these criminal heinous acts. I think I say with confidence we would be better if these idiots were not part of community at all, and they should never be welcomed back into our gracious hands. Savior, you too.
Also, what is with their punishment? What's the point of having a judicial system if they don't even get punished for their crimes. They stole money, and lots of it, and they just hit with petty fines? Give them 10 to 15 years so they smarten up instead of just letting them go into the wild after a year where they'll do even more damage..
Woah slow down there. I think the Judge's verdict is perfectly sound. 10-15 years is usually a punishment reserved for murderers and rapists. In any case, they have ruined their own lives, you can be sure as with the Savior scandal, society as a whole has already ostracized them. You wouldn't be the first or the last person to feel that way, so its safe to say that they are indirectly being punished. They have trespassed their society's honor code, and they will reap their punishment, deserved or not.
|
IIRC, the conviction rate is extremely high in Korea (among most Asian countries) and based almost entirely on confessions.
Also I'm shocked at how vindictive people are on this topic. They were banned for life and now live with convictions. That seems pretty tough to me.
|
Do you think they will eventually post apology letters and be interviewed.
|
Lorning
Belgica34432 Posts
I hope they rot in a cell
|
Not trolling, not trying to start something, just curious.
+ Show Spoiler +As far as the law is concerned, Marineking is officially not guilty, correct? I remember hearing his name tossed around when all this started...
|
On April 02 2016 06:44 TheDougler wrote:Not trolling, not trying to start something, just curious. + Show Spoiler +As far as the law is concerned, Marineking is officially not guilty, correct? I remember hearing his name tossed around when all this started...
He was investigated by KeSPA I believe, but I don't believe the law was involved at all. At any rate he was never charged with anything.
|
So if they behave for 3 years then no prison time? What a nice way of promoting matchfixing.
|
On April 02 2016 06:57 Skynx wrote:
So if they behave for 3 years then no prison time? What a nice way of promoting matchfixing.
They're still banned for life and can never compete again in e-sports in Korea.
|
On March 31 2016 17:56 jimminy_kriket wrote:
It says "and others". Any idea who those others are?
And I love the opinion of the judge ""Lowering the credibility of esports and damaging its foundations should be punished severely."
No where else in the world would you hear a statement like that. Props to Korea for being so progressive.
You ever hear of the NCAA?
|
That's pretty harsh sentencing for first time non violent offenders. The amount of money involved also is so small. It's not like they stole money from someone it's gambling money.
|
On April 02 2016 08:48 20-Minute-Jackal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2016 06:57 Skynx wrote:
So if they behave for 3 years then no prison time? What a nice way of promoting matchfixing. They're still banned for life and can never compete again in e-sports in Korea.
In Turkey they make you into giblet gravy for match-fixing.
I think they should get stuffing.
|
On April 01 2016 07:28 flipstar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2016 06:44 BingbingBOPOMOFO wrote:
Criminals are the worst. I'm glad Teamliquid and it's community isn't backing these criminal heinous acts. I think I say with confidence we would be better if these idiots were not part of community at all, and they should never be welcomed back into our gracious hands. Savior, you too.
Also, what is with their punishment? What's the point of having a judicial system if they don't even get punished for their crimes. They stole money, and lots of it, and they just hit with petty fines? Give them 10 to 15 years so they smarten up instead of just letting them go into the wild after a year where they'll do even more damage..
American spotted, most likely republican. User was warned for this post
0_0 That is Trump's personal account!
|
Never forget sAviOr and YoDa reaper rushed me in HOTS SpoTV qualifier, I will never forget or forgive.
sAviOr is still a baller through.
|
Gerrard is clearly a snitch if her was the mastermind behind this, yet got way smaller penalties. How can anyone trust him after this fiasco? I wonder if the reason ByuN was absent for so long and not playing for Prime was because Gerrard is a snake?
|
On April 02 2016 14:41 RichardNPL wrote:
That's pretty harsh sentencing for first time non violent offenders. The amount of money involved also is so small. It's not like they stole money from someone it's gambling money.
And "gambling money" just grow on trees, it does not come from people who bet on someone without knowing it's fixed and their money is lost the moment they bet?
|
On April 02 2016 14:41 RichardNPL wrote:
That's pretty harsh sentencing for first time non violent offenders. The amount of money involved also is so small. It's not like they stole money from someone it's gambling money.
It's same as stealing the money from betters.
|
France17333 Posts
On April 03 2016 01:18 Sejanus wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2016 14:41 RichardNPL wrote:
That's pretty harsh sentencing for first time non violent offenders. The amount of money involved also is so small. It's not like they stole money from someone it's gambling money. And "gambling money" just grow on trees, it does not come from people who bet on someone without knowing it's fixed and their money is lost the moment they bet?
Betting is illegal in Korea anyways
|
Is anyone going to do this. This might be controversial. If anyone is still followed to Yoda's twitter account send what he tweets. I would want to know if he tweets why he match fixed and if he apologises.
|
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
|
Good to hear about the resolution of this case.
The punishments seem very appropriate and about right.
|
On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha
|
On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha
Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting.
|
Chile820 Posts
On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting.
gambling is illegal in korea. arguing that they should get more punishment because of they "stole" money from the betting ppl is a pertty idiotic argument. it's like someone complaining because your pot was tea instead of real marijuana.
|
France17333 Posts
On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting.
Aside from the already widely pointed out fact that any kind of betting is illegal in Korea, it's important to notice that the players themselves didn't "steal" money by match-fixing ; however, the people who payed them to matchfix did "steal" money through betting on a match they fixed.
|
Anyone knows what the situation is with Life?
|
On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting.
lmao if you actually think this, I would highly recommend you seek professional help.
User was warned for this post
|
On April 04 2016 01:52 Apoteosis wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting. gambling is illegal in korea. arguing that they should get more punishment because of they "stole" money from the betting ppl is a pertty idiotic argument. it's like someone complaining because your pot was tea instead of real marijuana.
I don't care if gambling is illegal in Korea. There are people outside Korea who bet on matches. How would you feel if you bet on player A when player A played to lose? It's not nice but I guess kids like you go to their mom for money rather than see how hard it is to earn some.
User was warned for this post
|
On April 04 2016 06:13 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 01:52 Apoteosis wrote:On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting. gambling is illegal in korea. arguing that they should get more punishment because of they "stole" money from the betting ppl is a pertty idiotic argument. it's like someone complaining because your pot was tea instead of real marijuana. I don't care if gambling is illegal in Korea. There are people outside Korea who bet on matches. How would you feel if you bet on player A when player A played to lose? It's not nice but I guess kids like you go to their mom for money rather than see how hard it is to earn some.
Might be the dumbest post I've ever read. Why should a Korean criminal court care about a foreigners betting money on eSports?
If your betting on eSports you have nothing but yourself to blame for blowing your money. Matter of fact if you gamble on ANYTHING you have no one but yourself to blame for losing that money.
|
France17333 Posts
On April 04 2016 06:13 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 01:52 Apoteosis wrote:On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting. gambling is illegal in korea. arguing that they should get more punishment because of they "stole" money from the betting ppl is a pertty idiotic argument. it's like someone complaining because your pot was tea instead of real marijuana. I don't care if gambling is illegal in Korea. There are people outside Korea who bet on matches. How would you feel if you bet on player A when player A played to lose? It's not nice but I guess kids like you go to their mom for money rather than see how hard it is to earn some. User was warned for this post
The fact that what you bet on might not be fair competition (through matchfixing, doping, corruption, etc) is parts of the risks you accept when you bet on something. And I don't believe moms have anything to do with that fact.
|
On April 04 2016 09:22 MaCRo.gg wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 06:13 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:52 Apoteosis wrote:On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting. gambling is illegal in korea. arguing that they should get more punishment because of they "stole" money from the betting ppl is a pertty idiotic argument. it's like someone complaining because your pot was tea instead of real marijuana. I don't care if gambling is illegal in Korea. There are people outside Korea who bet on matches. How would you feel if you bet on player A when player A played to lose? It's not nice but I guess kids like you go to their mom for money rather than see how hard it is to earn some. Might be the dumbest post I've ever read. Why should a Korean criminal court care about a foreigners betting money on eSports? If your betting on eSports you have nothing but yourself to blame for blowing your money. Matter of fact if you gamble on ANYTHING you have no one but yourself to blame for losing that money.
Umm not completely true. In a world where no betting is tampered with (i.e no matchfixing) your claim is correct. But you certainly do have someone else to blame if you lose money because someone else tampered with the bet. That's the whole reason why matches have their bets voided, to protect the betting service in the event that a situation was fixed (among other reasons).
It does suck for the people who lost money in matches that were fixed but bets weren't voided but nothing can be done about it, moving on is the only option. That doesn't however mean someone else can't be blamed for you losing money
|
How much did they make from the match fixings and what was the processes of them being caught ?
|
Just man up and accept that predicting which game will be fixed for whom is an integral part of the betting process instead of complaining about "losing money".
|
Whether or not gambling is illegal or whether or not gamblers 'deserve' losing money is irrelevant.
If you do something illegal, you will be punished regardless of whether your victims were doing something illegal as well.
Just like you'll still get punishment if you're caught stealing from a thief. Theft is theft regardless of how you feel about the victims.
|
How long were they actually held in jail before they got sentenced/released?
I mean Life's been in jail for months now, does it matter that they get suspended sentences, but are being held in jail for let's say a year??
It's like releasing a guy from Gitmo after 20 years with a "sorry, we got the wrong guy, your record is clear, move along, good luck!"
To me the idea you could get even a day in jail for cheating on a video game is pretty insane, but I guess ppl will get outraged about anything these days and ready to lynch..
|
On April 04 2016 21:02 waiting2Bbanned wrote:
I mean Life's been in jail for months now
That's just speculation. It's way more likely he's been a free man for weeks and we just don't hear anything.
|
That's just speculation. It's way more likely he's been a free man for weeks and we just don't hear anything.
Sooo.. did he lose his phone, then..?
|
On April 04 2016 11:03 chipmonklord17 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 09:22 MaCRo.gg wrote:On April 04 2016 06:13 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:52 Apoteosis wrote:On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting. gambling is illegal in korea. arguing that they should get more punishment because of they "stole" money from the betting ppl is a pertty idiotic argument. it's like someone complaining because your pot was tea instead of real marijuana. I don't care if gambling is illegal in Korea. There are people outside Korea who bet on matches. How would you feel if you bet on player A when player A played to lose? It's not nice but I guess kids like you go to their mom for money rather than see how hard it is to earn some. Might be the dumbest post I've ever read. Why should a Korean criminal court care about a foreigners betting money on eSports? If your betting on eSports you have nothing but yourself to blame for blowing your money. Matter of fact if you gamble on ANYTHING you have no one but yourself to blame for losing that money. Umm not completely true. In a world where no betting is tampered with (i.e no matchfixing) your claim is correct. But you certainly do have someone else to blame if you lose money because someone else tampered with the bet. That's the whole reason why matches have their bets voided, to protect the betting service in the event that a situation was fixed (among other reasons). It does suck for the people who lost money in matches that were fixed but bets weren't voided but nothing can be done about it, moving on is the only option. That doesn't however mean someone else can't be blamed for you losing money
If sports betting is like sex, eSports betting is hiring a hooker. If you get an STD, you have more blame on yourself than the hooker.
|
If sports betting is like sex, eSports betting is hiring a hooker. If you get an STD, you have more blame on yourself than the hooker.
hmm.. building on that analogy then, I'm curious what betting on soccer - which is being governed by FIFA, so corrupt that they can't find one single person in there who hasn't been taking bribes to put in charge - would be like..?
|
On April 04 2016 18:02 opisska wrote:
Just man up and accept that predicting which game will be fixed for whom is an integral part of the betting process instead of complaining about "losing money".
So, if you follow your own logic, you shouldn't be too upset if a burglar steals from your house. It's an integral part of life sometimes. Really, this is the dumbest argument I've heard.
I betted only £20-40 back in WoL, I was never into gambling, and I haven't betted since then. I did it because I wanted to try my luck, so I don't consider myself a gambler. However, match-fixing shouldn't be part of betting's risk. Fairness has to be ensured. Whether it's smart to gamble or not is irrelevant here (I don't approve it even if I did it once with a very small amount of money).
Edit: In other words, environment has to be fair. After that, it's gamblers' fault if they lose money because THEY made the wrong decision. Not someone else who decided to lose a game.
|
---self nuked--- sorry I thought I pressed edit instead of quote.
|
On April 05 2016 03:47 MaCRo.gg wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 23:30 waiting2Bbanned wrote:If sports betting is like sex, eSports betting is hiring a hooker. If you get an STD, you have more blame on yourself than the hooker. hmm.. building on that analogy then, I'm curious what betting on soccer - which is being governed by FIFA, so corrupt that they can't find one single person in there who hasn't been taking bribes to put in charge - would be like..? How does bribing to have a World Cup in your country have anything to do with match fixing?
On April 05 2016 02:15 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 18:02 opisska wrote:
Just man up and accept that predicting which game will be fixed for whom is an integral part of the betting process instead of complaining about "losing money". So, if you follow your own logic, you shouldn't be too upset if a burglar steals from your house. It's an integral part of life sometimes. Really, this is the dumbest argument I've heard. I betted only £20-40 back in WoL, I was never into gambling, and I haven't betted since then. I did it because I wanted to try my luck, so I don't consider myself a gambler. However, match-fixing shouldn't be part of betting's risk. Fairness has to be ensured. Whether it's smart to gamble or not is irrelevant here (I don't approve it even if I did it once with a very small amount of money). Edit: In other words, environment has to be fair. After that, it's gamblers' fault if they lose money because THEY made the wrong decision. Not someone else who decided to lose a game.
Burglary is far from a valid comparison. More like getting swindled by a confidence man. It is as much your fault for being so... to use your words "dumb", than is the con man who misrepresented the facts. Gamblers already made a stupid decision to gamble, can't blame the casino for "fixing" the odds on a slot if you are dumb enough to gamble on a slot machine.
|
France17333 Posts
On April 05 2016 02:15 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 18:02 opisska wrote:
Just man up and accept that predicting which game will be fixed for whom is an integral part of the betting process instead of complaining about "losing money". So, if you follow your own logic, you shouldn't be too upset if a burglar steals from your house. It's an integral part of life sometimes. Really, this is the dumbest argument I've heard. I betted only £20-40 back in WoL, I was never into gambling, and I haven't betted since then. I did it because I wanted to try my luck, so I don't consider myself a gambler. However, match-fixing shouldn't be part of betting's risk. Fairness has to be ensured. Whether it's smart to gamble or not is irrelevant here (I don't approve it even if I did it once with a very small amount of money). Edit: In other words, environment has to be fair. After that, it's gamblers' fault if they lose money because THEY made the wrong decision. Not someone else who decided to lose a game.
The fact that people choose to bet on something - which is a completely unilateral decision, the thing you bet on has no say in this - doesn't mean that what you bet on should change things in order to make itself fair for betting.
To go into details, when you bet on something, you bet based on two main factors : what you know, and what you don't know. Thus, "unfairness" is bound to happen within "what you don't know". It can be other things than matchfixing : it can be that one of the two players had a bad night because he was moderatly sick, it can be that he's having difficulties in practice and you don't know it, it can be that his opponent got leaked practice replays and knows what to prepare for. If we extend our thought beyond SC2 or (e)Sports, it can even be legitimate "matchfixing", in a way : for example if you bet on who's going to be the next Minister of Agriculture, and your assumption was going to be correct, up until the point a deal - something that you don't know when betting - got made assuring that politician that he'll get the Ministry of Finances soon if he accepts to leave the Ministry of Agriculture to a rival.
Thus, the perceived risk/reward balance you use when betting is necessarily false, because the real risk/reward balance is affected by things you don't know, things you cannot know.
As long as what you bet on was not created with the specific goal of being betted on, as long as what you bet on is something that existed before betting and can exist independently of betting, you are not entitled to getting that what you bet on changes its usual practices because of betting. You have to accept that when you bet on a environment, that environment has practices that are independent of betting, and that these practices (matchfixing, corruption, whatever) interfering with what you perceive as being "fair" will happen.
|
On April 05 2016 04:13 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2016 02:15 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 18:02 opisska wrote:
Just man up and accept that predicting which game will be fixed for whom is an integral part of the betting process instead of complaining about "losing money". So, if you follow your own logic, you shouldn't be too upset if a burglar steals from your house. It's an integral part of life sometimes. Really, this is the dumbest argument I've heard. I betted only £20-40 back in WoL, I was never into gambling, and I haven't betted since then. I did it because I wanted to try my luck, so I don't consider myself a gambler. However, match-fixing shouldn't be part of betting's risk. Fairness has to be ensured. Whether it's smart to gamble or not is irrelevant here (I don't approve it even if I did it once with a very small amount of money). Edit: In other words, environment has to be fair. After that, it's gamblers' fault if they lose money because THEY made the wrong decision. Not someone else who decided to lose a game. The fact that people choose to bet on something - which is a completely unilateral decision, the thing you bet on has no say in this - doesn't mean that what you bet on should change things in order to make itself fair for betting. To go into details, when you bet on something, you bet based on two main factors : what you know, and what you don't know. Thus, "unfairness" is bound to happen within "what you don't know". It can be other things than matchfixing : it can be that one of the two players had a bad night because he was moderatly sick, it can be that he's having difficulties in practice and you don't know it, it can be that his opponent got leaked practice replays and knows what to prepare for. If we extend our thought beyond SC2 or (e)Sports, it can even be legitimate "matchfixing", in a way : for example if you bet on who's going to be the next Minister of Agriculture, and your assumption was going to be correct, up until the point a deal - something that you don't know when betting - got made assuring that politician that he'll get the Ministry of Finances soon if he accepts to leave the Ministry of Agriculture to a rival. Thus, the perceived risk/reward balance you use when betting is necessarily false, because the real risk/reward balance is affected by things you don't know, things you cannot know. As long as what you bet on was not created with the specific goal of being betted on, as long as what you bet on is something that existed before betting and can exist independently of betting, you are not entitled to getting that what you bet on changes its usual practices because of betting. You have to accept that when you bet on a environment, that environment has practices that are independent of betting, and that these practices (matchfixing, corruption, whatever) interfering with what you perceive as being "fair" will happen.
I suppose I just have a difference of opinion. Yes there are things you don't know when you place a bet, but (in my opinion) factors like match fixing are not a part of those things. Betting is a game of probability, hard numbers. What is essential to placing a bet is assuming that the only thing you are betting against is probability, not that some outside source is fixing it. If I gave you 10 to 1 odds that a coin would land on heads, most rational people would place a bet saying the coin lands on tails. Your probability SHOULD BE 50% for either option, so betting $5 that it ends up on tails has a great chance of netting you an extra $45 dollars. Now what I didn't tell you is this is a trick coin and you actually have a 90% chance of landing on heads. Suddenly that bet isn't fair.
You don't gamble assuming your bet is unfair, you gamble assuming the probability of a situation occurring is in your favor. Or at least that's gambling smart. Shield hit the nail on the head imo, you have to assume your environment is fair and beyond that it becomes your fault for making the wrong decision.
|
In addition, if you say "match-fixing is part of betting's risk", what you say is this: the system is corrupt and I'm happy with status quo. Sorry, but if you apply this logic to any business, any sane customer will stop using their services as soon as possible.
Just to add to the probability discussion, say you calculate the probability player A loses if B cheeses him. Then, probability of player A winning if B doesn't cheese, then probability if both A and B play macro, etc. You do all the math, for example, then you reach a conclusion that player A is more likely to win against player B in 50%+ of cases, so you bet on A. What you didn't know is that player A already arranged to play to lose. Your probability estimation goes to toilet. It's no longer an environment you can 'control' based on data or assumptions. Hence, you need a fair environment to make a good guess.
Just because player A is more likely to win doesn't mean B won't win under fair circumstances though. In that case, it will be your fault if you bet on player A but only if there was no match-fixing.
|
France17333 Posts
On April 05 2016 04:35 chipmonklord17 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2016 04:13 OtherWorld wrote:On April 05 2016 02:15 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 18:02 opisska wrote:
Just man up and accept that predicting which game will be fixed for whom is an integral part of the betting process instead of complaining about "losing money". So, if you follow your own logic, you shouldn't be too upset if a burglar steals from your house. It's an integral part of life sometimes. Really, this is the dumbest argument I've heard. I betted only £20-40 back in WoL, I was never into gambling, and I haven't betted since then. I did it because I wanted to try my luck, so I don't consider myself a gambler. However, match-fixing shouldn't be part of betting's risk. Fairness has to be ensured. Whether it's smart to gamble or not is irrelevant here (I don't approve it even if I did it once with a very small amount of money). Edit: In other words, environment has to be fair. After that, it's gamblers' fault if they lose money because THEY made the wrong decision. Not someone else who decided to lose a game. The fact that people choose to bet on something - which is a completely unilateral decision, the thing you bet on has no say in this - doesn't mean that what you bet on should change things in order to make itself fair for betting. To go into details, when you bet on something, you bet based on two main factors : what you know, and what you don't know. Thus, "unfairness" is bound to happen within "what you don't know". It can be other things than matchfixing : it can be that one of the two players had a bad night because he was moderatly sick, it can be that he's having difficulties in practice and you don't know it, it can be that his opponent got leaked practice replays and knows what to prepare for. If we extend our thought beyond SC2 or (e)Sports, it can even be legitimate "matchfixing", in a way : for example if you bet on who's going to be the next Minister of Agriculture, and your assumption was going to be correct, up until the point a deal - something that you don't know when betting - got made assuring that politician that he'll get the Ministry of Finances soon if he accepts to leave the Ministry of Agriculture to a rival. Thus, the perceived risk/reward balance you use when betting is necessarily false, because the real risk/reward balance is affected by things you don't know, things you cannot know. As long as what you bet on was not created with the specific goal of being betted on, as long as what you bet on is something that existed before betting and can exist independently of betting, you are not entitled to getting that what you bet on changes its usual practices because of betting. You have to accept that when you bet on a environment, that environment has practices that are independent of betting, and that these practices (matchfixing, corruption, whatever) interfering with what you perceive as being "fair" will happen. I suppose I just have a difference of opinion. Yes there are things you don't know when you place a bet, but (in my opinion) factors like match fixing are not a part of those things. Betting is a game of probability, hard numbers. What is essential to placing a bet is assuming that the only thing you are betting against is probability, not that some outside source is fixing it. If I gave you 10 to 1 odds that a coin would land on heads, most rational people would place a bet saying the coin lands on tails. Your probability SHOULD BE 50% for either option, so betting $5 that it ends up on tails has a great chance of netting you an extra $45 dollars. Now what I didn't tell you is this is a trick coin and you actually have a 90% chance of landing on heads. Suddenly that bet isn't fair. You don't gamble assuming your bet is unfair, you gamble assuming the probability of a situation occurring is in your favor. Or at least that's gambling smart. Shield hit the nail on the head imo, you have to assume your environment is fair and beyond that it becomes your fault for making the wrong decision.
I precisely think that betting on uncontrolled/loosely controlled environment like in SC2 is not a game of hard probabilities, because the perceived risk/reward balance and the actual risk/reward balance aren't the same.
To further your coin example : if you hand me the coin so that I can test it, control it, make sure it is 50/50 weight, then yes, the probability should be 50% for either option. But in this case, I am betting in a controlled environment, thus we are indeed working with hard probabilities, kinda like if robots played SC2.
But if you offer me that bet without allowing me to test the coin, then nothing's telling me that this coin is a regular 50/50 weight coin : it is me who makes that assumption if I take the bet. In this case, I'm betting on an uncontrolled environment, thus the perceived risks/rewards balance (which, if I make the assumption that the bet is "fair" - which here means, really, nothing else than "how I think it should be" as opposed to "how it should be" -, should be heavily in my favor) is not the same as the actual risks/rewards balance. Thus, when you bet on an uncontrolled environment, you accept among the risks the fact that your perceived risks/rewards balance is wayyyyy off.
Thus, you indeed bet assuming that your environment is "fair", "fair" as far as what you perceive as being "fair" is "fair" ; however, you accept among the risks the fact that uncontrolled factors can skew what you thought were the probabilities of event X happening.
On April 05 2016 05:37 Shield wrote:
In addition, if you say "match-fixing is part of betting's risk", what you say is this: the system is corrupt and I'm happy with status quo. Sorry, but if you apply this logic to any business, any sane customer will stop using their services as soon as possible.
Just to add to the probability discussion, say you calculate the probability player A loses if B cheeses him. Then, probability of player A winning if B doesn't cheese, then probability if both A and B play macro, etc. You do all the math, for example, then you reach a conclusion that player A is more likely to win against player B in 50%+ of cases, so you bet on A. What you didn't know is that player A already arranged to play to lose. Your probability estimation goes to toilet. It's no longer an environment you can 'control' based on data or assumptions. Hence, you need a fair environment to make a good guess.
Just because player A is more likely to win doesn't mean B won't win under fair circumstances though. In that case, it will be your fault if you bet on player A but only if there was no match-fixing.
I did not say this, and please do not put words in my mouth. What I said was
(1) When betting on an uncontrolled environment, you have to accept the fact that uncontrolled factors can make it "unfair" ; among these factors is matchfixing. Other factors exist too : if player A (who, we'll assume, didn't fix the game) eats something bad the morning before his games, and that causes him to throw up 30 minutes before the game, and obviously he's not in his best state for the game, feeling all dizzy and stuff, and thus plays at ~30% of his actual level : your estimation also goes to the toilets. Yet, will you blame food? Will you blame the cook, asking that cooks should be controlled in order to have a fair betting environment? Or will you accept the fact that uncontrolled factors can fuck things up? And what if someone intentionally put bad food into player A's breakfast?
(2) Because of life and stuff, you cannot expect an uncontrolled environment to change its practices just because people are betting on it, thus suddenly they'd need a fair environment. You can say that matchfixing is bad, that the system is corrupt and should be fixed, independently of betting concerns. In fact, you can say "they matchfixed ; they should be punished because it's illegal/contrary to sportsmen ethics/a danger to the scene's future/whatever", while you cannot say "they matchfixed ; they should be punished because it's an attack on the fair environment necessary for betting" (!). Players did not choose to be the subjects of bets, and they can live without anyone betting on them. Betting on them is something you do without their consent at all, thus you have no right to force upon them the creation of a "fair" environment.
|
Bruh. smh... Gerrard, Yoda, and B4.... so disappointing... i remember in the wol days when i actually enjoyed watching Yoda and B4 play... everything changed to dramatically....
|
I am gonna to just continue post unclear oneliners as long as Otherworld is around to clarify my points in much better logical structure as I ever could
|
On April 05 2016 06:46 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2016 04:35 chipmonklord17 wrote:On April 05 2016 04:13 OtherWorld wrote:On April 05 2016 02:15 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 18:02 opisska wrote:
Just man up and accept that predicting which game will be fixed for whom is an integral part of the betting process instead of complaining about "losing money". So, if you follow your own logic, you shouldn't be too upset if a burglar steals from your house. It's an integral part of life sometimes. Really, this is the dumbest argument I've heard. I betted only £20-40 back in WoL, I was never into gambling, and I haven't betted since then. I did it because I wanted to try my luck, so I don't consider myself a gambler. However, match-fixing shouldn't be part of betting's risk. Fairness has to be ensured. Whether it's smart to gamble or not is irrelevant here (I don't approve it even if I did it once with a very small amount of money). Edit: In other words, environment has to be fair. After that, it's gamblers' fault if they lose money because THEY made the wrong decision. Not someone else who decided to lose a game. The fact that people choose to bet on something - which is a completely unilateral decision, the thing you bet on has no say in this - doesn't mean that what you bet on should change things in order to make itself fair for betting. To go into details, when you bet on something, you bet based on two main factors : what you know, and what you don't know. Thus, "unfairness" is bound to happen within "what you don't know". It can be other things than matchfixing : it can be that one of the two players had a bad night because he was moderatly sick, it can be that he's having difficulties in practice and you don't know it, it can be that his opponent got leaked practice replays and knows what to prepare for. If we extend our thought beyond SC2 or (e)Sports, it can even be legitimate "matchfixing", in a way : for example if you bet on who's going to be the next Minister of Agriculture, and your assumption was going to be correct, up until the point a deal - something that you don't know when betting - got made assuring that politician that he'll get the Ministry of Finances soon if he accepts to leave the Ministry of Agriculture to a rival. Thus, the perceived risk/reward balance you use when betting is necessarily false, because the real risk/reward balance is affected by things you don't know, things you cannot know. As long as what you bet on was not created with the specific goal of being betted on, as long as what you bet on is something that existed before betting and can exist independently of betting, you are not entitled to getting that what you bet on changes its usual practices because of betting. You have to accept that when you bet on a environment, that environment has practices that are independent of betting, and that these practices (matchfixing, corruption, whatever) interfering with what you perceive as being "fair" will happen. I suppose I just have a difference of opinion. Yes there are things you don't know when you place a bet, but (in my opinion) factors like match fixing are not a part of those things. Betting is a game of probability, hard numbers. What is essential to placing a bet is assuming that the only thing you are betting against is probability, not that some outside source is fixing it. If I gave you 10 to 1 odds that a coin would land on heads, most rational people would place a bet saying the coin lands on tails. Your probability SHOULD BE 50% for either option, so betting $5 that it ends up on tails has a great chance of netting you an extra $45 dollars. Now what I didn't tell you is this is a trick coin and you actually have a 90% chance of landing on heads. Suddenly that bet isn't fair. You don't gamble assuming your bet is unfair, you gamble assuming the probability of a situation occurring is in your favor. Or at least that's gambling smart. Shield hit the nail on the head imo, you have to assume your environment is fair and beyond that it becomes your fault for making the wrong decision. I precisely think that betting on uncontrolled/loosely controlled environment like in SC2 is not a game of hard probabilities, because the perceived risk/reward balance and the actual risk/reward balance aren't the same. To further your coin example : if you hand me the coin so that I can test it, control it, make sure it is 50/50 weight, then yes, the probability should be 50% for either option. But in this case, I am betting in a controlled environment, thus we are indeed working with hard probabilities, kinda like if robots played SC2. But if you offer me that bet without allowing me to test the coin, then nothing's telling me that this coin is a regular 50/50 weight coin : it is me who makes that assumption if I take the bet. In this case, I'm betting on an uncontrolled environment, thus the perceived risks/rewards balance (which, if I make the assumption that the bet is "fair" - which here means, really, nothing else than "how I think it should be" as opposed to "how it should be" -, should be heavily in my favor) is not the same as the actual risks/rewards balance. Thus, when you bet on an uncontrolled environment, you accept among the risks the fact that your perceived risks/rewards balance is wayyyyy off. Thus, you indeed bet assuming that your environment is "fair", "fair" as far as what you perceive as being "fair" is "fair" ; however, you accept among the risks the fact that uncontrolled factors can skew what you thought were the probabilities of event X happening. Show nested quote +On April 05 2016 05:37 Shield wrote:
In addition, if you say "match-fixing is part of betting's risk", what you say is this: the system is corrupt and I'm happy with status quo. Sorry, but if you apply this logic to any business, any sane customer will stop using their services as soon as possible.
Just to add to the probability discussion, say you calculate the probability player A loses if B cheeses him. Then, probability of player A winning if B doesn't cheese, then probability if both A and B play macro, etc. You do all the math, for example, then you reach a conclusion that player A is more likely to win against player B in 50%+ of cases, so you bet on A. What you didn't know is that player A already arranged to play to lose. Your probability estimation goes to toilet. It's no longer an environment you can 'control' based on data or assumptions. Hence, you need a fair environment to make a good guess.
Just because player A is more likely to win doesn't mean B won't win under fair circumstances though. In that case, it will be your fault if you bet on player A but only if there was no match-fixing. I did not say this, and please do not put words in my mouth. What I said was (1) When betting on an uncontrolled environment, you have to accept the fact that uncontrolled factors can make it "unfair" ; among these factors is matchfixing. Other factors exist too : if player A (who, we'll assume, didn't fix the game) eats something bad the morning before his games, and that causes him to throw up 30 minutes before the game, and obviously he's not in his best state for the game, feeling all dizzy and stuff, and thus plays at ~30% of his actual level : your estimation also goes to the toilets. Yet, will you blame food? Will you blame the cook, asking that cooks should be controlled in order to have a fair betting environment? Or will you accept the fact that uncontrolled factors can fuck things up? And what if someone intentionally put bad food into player A's breakfast? (2) Because of life and stuff, you cannot expect an uncontrolled environment to change its practices just because people are betting on it, thus suddenly they'd need a fair environment. You can say that matchfixing is bad, that the system is corrupt and should be fixed, independently of betting concerns. In fact, you can say "they matchfixed ; they should be punished because it's illegal/contrary to sportsmen ethics/a danger to the scene's future/whatever", while you cannot say "they matchfixed ; they should be punished because it's an attack on the fair environment necessary for betting" (!). Players did not choose to be the subjects of bets, and they can live without anyone betting on them. Betting on them is something you do without their consent at all, thus you have no right to force upon them the creation of a "fair" environment.
Let's answer your points one by one.
1. Match-fixing can't be an acceptable "unknown risk". I explained it already. Your food example is unfortunate, but it happens randomly. Match-fixing is a decision someone makes. Result from food is sometimes unexpected response from one's body. Yes, you may eat food you're allergic to but it's not advisable. This isn't part of discussion.
2. I don't want to force players to care about bets but players are expected to do their best on the given day under current circumstances. If they feel tired, sick or whatever - fine, just bad luck. That is LUCK. Match-fixing is a choice not luck. It's illegal as well.
I think there's no point discussing it anymore. Betting websites already void bets, so they should know better than you how to handle such cases.
|
Chile820 Posts
On April 04 2016 06:13 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 01:52 Apoteosis wrote:On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting. gambling is illegal in korea. arguing that they should get more punishment because of they "stole" money from the betting ppl is a pertty idiotic argument. it's like someone complaining because your pot was tea instead of real marijuana. I don't care if gambling is illegal in Korea. There are people outside Korea who bet on matches. How would you feel if you bet on player A when player A played to lose? It's not nice but I guess kids like you go to their mom for money rather than see how hard it is to earn some. User was warned for this post
I have a family on my own (my wife and my little kid), I work hard as a lawyer and I won't throw my money away gambling at some shady website. Maybe the one who can't appreciate the money we got through hard work is you, because people with true responsibilities don't throw his money by gambling.
But anyways, in gambling stuff, you can't just go crying because the match you were betting on was fixed. There is no costumer law on gambling, because of his inherent nature: a random event, that generates random obligations. The one who is betting takes all the risks when it comes to gambling. That is why, when you win, you get a huge reward. But when you lose... it's with no tears.
|
On April 04 2016 06:13 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 01:52 Apoteosis wrote:On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting. gambling is illegal in korea. arguing that they should get more punishment because of they "stole" money from the betting ppl is a pertty idiotic argument. it's like someone complaining because your pot was tea instead of real marijuana. I don't care if gambling is illegal in Korea. There are people outside Korea who bet on matches. How would you feel if you bet on player A when player A played to lose? It's not nice but I guess kids like you go to their mom for money rather than see how hard it is to earn some. User was warned for this post
For sure, all systems of legal gambling are rigged in favor of the house or institution that is hosting the gambling. If you bet against the house, it is rigged over time that you will lose your money.
The only chance you ever have in gambling is finding someone to host the bet and skim some money off the top for themselves as profit. If they have any other involvement I promise you they are manipulating the scenario to skew the results and amount of money they will take in their favor.
Match-fixing is a counter manipulation on the side of person betting to neutralize the other person's advantage. This is almost exactly the same a bookie placing odds on a match, which ultimately influences how much money people bet on one player vs another. The difference in match-fixing is that supposedly you secure a 100% chance the outcome goes one way, but even then the match fixer can decide to not go through with it.
You need probability to exist for gambling to exist. Apparently no matter how horrible the odds are, someone is very willing to place a bet on that slim chance that they may win.
From the institutional standpoint it's all about playing on a persons' rewards systems in the brain to lure them into situations in which the odds are stacked as unfairly as they can possibly make them without being called a thief by society.
If institutions could rig them 100% in their favor they would. Carnival games are a great example, you have about a 2% chance that you will throw the pingpong ball into that one red glass whose mouth is exactly the size of the ball resting among 30 more glasses, but the persons running the game will say, "I just gave away 2 of these teddy bears!"
My point is that you are punishing a person for counter rigging the system against a bunch of thieves who rigged a scam to win money. Gambling is a game of stacking the odds against someone and convincing them the game is even odds, legal thievery.
The only difference here is that these people did in one day what an institution does over a couple months to a year. They rigged the odds in their favor for one match vs. doing it over 20 matches. There is supposedly a 100% chance you win in match-fixing, but there is also a 100% odds that if you gamble in an institution over time the house wins the majority.
I think in the scope of crimes and acts that hurt people I rate thieves rigging a thieves game pretty low, the punishment is more that sufficient. A lifetime ban from the sport is enough.
The only real loser in gambling is the better, he's getting taken for his or her money because the fix is always in.
|
On April 06 2016 00:12 ShambhalaWar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2016 06:13 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:52 Apoteosis wrote:On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting. gambling is illegal in korea. arguing that they should get more punishment because of they "stole" money from the betting ppl is a pertty idiotic argument. it's like someone complaining because your pot was tea instead of real marijuana. I don't care if gambling is illegal in Korea. There are people outside Korea who bet on matches. How would you feel if you bet on player A when player A played to lose? It's not nice but I guess kids like you go to their mom for money rather than see how hard it is to earn some. User was warned for this post For sure, all systems of legal gambling are rigged in favor of the house or institution that is hosting the gambling. If you bet against the house, it is rigged over time that you will lose your money. The only chance you ever have in gambling is finding someone to host the bet and skim some money off the top for themselves as profit. If they have any other involvement I promise you they are manipulating the scenario to skew the results and amount of money they will take in their favor. Match-fixing is a counter manipulation on the side of person betting to neutralize the other person's advantage. This is almost exactly the same a bookie placing odds on a match, which ultimately influences how much money people bet on one player vs another. The difference in match-fixing is that supposedly you secure a 100% chance the outcome goes one way, but even then the match fixer can decide to not go through with it. You need probability to exist for gambling to exist. Apparently no matter how horrible the odds are, someone is very willing to place a bet on that slim chance that they may win. From the institutional standpoint it's all about playing on a persons' rewards systems in the brain to lure them into situations in which the odds are stacked as unfairly as they can possibly make them without being called a thief by society. If institutions could rig them 100% in their favor they would. Carnival games are a great example, you have about a 2% chance that you will throw the pingpong ball into that one red glass whose mouth is exactly the size of the ball resting among 30 more glasses, but the persons running the game will say, "I just gave away 2 of these teddy bears!" My point is that you are punishing a person for counter rigging the system against a bunch of thieves who rigged a scam to win money. Gambling is a game of stacking the odds against someone and convincing them the game is even odds, legal thievery. The only difference here is that these people did in one day what an institution does over a couple months to a year. They rigged the odds in their favor for one match vs. doing it over 20 matches. There is supposedly a 100% chance you win in match-fixing, but there is also a 100% odds that if you gamble in an institution over time the house wins the majority. I think in the scope of crimes and acts that hurt people I rate thieves rigging a thieves game pretty low, the punishment is more that sufficient. A lifetime ban from the sport is enough. The only real loser in gambling is the better, he's getting taken for his or her money because the fix is always in.
This would be true for traditional casino games like Roulette or Blackjack, but this isn't actually what happens in both sports betting and poker. Yes it's true that the house always take their cut, but odds are set only initially by the house. They aren't static, but dynamic based on the total amount bet on all outcomes. This means that while the house does indeed take their cut, you are basically playing against all the other bettors rather than the house. This is why, in sports betting and poker you can make money by having an edge over the playerbase that's greater than the house cut. There are plenty of people who consistently win money in both.
|
On April 06 2016 01:12 Mikau wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2016 00:12 ShambhalaWar wrote:On April 04 2016 06:13 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:52 Apoteosis wrote:On April 04 2016 01:33 Shield wrote:On April 04 2016 01:30 TRaFFiC wrote:On April 03 2016 22:03 weikor wrote:
Well considering that starcraft was their life, losing their reputation and the ability to compete is a pretty huge punishment.
Yeah perm ban from e-sports (if it holds) is more than enough. Ppl asking for more are insane lol. I thought I was tough on cheaters... ha Well, it's not enough because they stole money. The money of those who were betting. gambling is illegal in korea. arguing that they should get more punishment because of they "stole" money from the betting ppl is a pertty idiotic argument. it's like someone complaining because your pot was tea instead of real marijuana. I don't care if gambling is illegal in Korea. There are people outside Korea who bet on matches. How would you feel if you bet on player A when player A played to lose? It's not nice but I guess kids like you go to their mom for money rather than see how hard it is to earn some. User was warned for this post For sure, all systems of legal gambling are rigged in favor of the house or institution that is hosting the gambling. If you bet against the house, it is rigged over time that you will lose your money. The only chance you ever have in gambling is finding someone to host the bet and skim some money off the top for themselves as profit. If they have any other involvement I promise you they are manipulating the scenario to skew the results and amount of money they will take in their favor. Match-fixing is a counter manipulation on the side of person betting to neutralize the other person's advantage. This is almost exactly the same a bookie placing odds on a match, which ultimately influences how much money people bet on one player vs another. The difference in match-fixing is that supposedly you secure a 100% chance the outcome goes one way, but even then the match fixer can decide to not go through with it. You need probability to exist for gambling to exist. Apparently no matter how horrible the odds are, someone is very willing to place a bet on that slim chance that they may win. From the institutional standpoint it's all about playing on a persons' rewards systems in the brain to lure them into situations in which the odds are stacked as unfairly as they can possibly make them without being called a thief by society. If institutions could rig them 100% in their favor they would. Carnival games are a great example, you have about a 2% chance that you will throw the pingpong ball into that one red glass whose mouth is exactly the size of the ball resting among 30 more glasses, but the persons running the game will say, "I just gave away 2 of these teddy bears!" My point is that you are punishing a person for counter rigging the system against a bunch of thieves who rigged a scam to win money. Gambling is a game of stacking the odds against someone and convincing them the game is even odds, legal thievery. The only difference here is that these people did in one day what an institution does over a couple months to a year. They rigged the odds in their favor for one match vs. doing it over 20 matches. There is supposedly a 100% chance you win in match-fixing, but there is also a 100% odds that if you gamble in an institution over time the house wins the majority. I think in the scope of crimes and acts that hurt people I rate thieves rigging a thieves game pretty low, the punishment is more that sufficient. A lifetime ban from the sport is enough. The only real loser in gambling is the better, he's getting taken for his or her money because the fix is always in. This would be true for traditional casino games like Roulette or Blackjack, but this isn't actually what happens in both sports betting and poker. Yes it's true that the house always take their cut, but odds are set only initially by the house. They aren't static, but dynamic based on the total amount bet on all outcomes. This means that while the house does indeed take their cut, you are basically playing against all the other bettors rather than the house. This is why, in sports betting and poker you can make money by having an edge over the playerbase that's greater than the house cut. There are plenty of people who consistently win money in both.
I would agree with this statement only in the case of poker. I had a client once that won all his money playing poker and he always told me the only game you could stand to make money at was poker.
Poker is the only exception, because you are truly not playing against the house at all.
I'm not sure how online poker makes it revenue streams, but I imagine it is skimming off the top of every game and advertisements.
I promise you... sport betting would not exist at all if the institutions running the bets could not guarantee they would turn a profit on a series of bets. The reality is they probably turn a large profit on almost EVERY bet.
Alternatively you can just skim off the top of each bet and let people play against each other. *This kind of system is the only one that isn't rigged against you.
The only way you can consistently turn a profit on bets is if you have rigged the system in your favor, which destroys the "purity" of betting.
If companies aren't making their money through alternative methods (advertising or a flat rate per bet) the system has been rigged so they can promise a profit.
Seems to me the only pure bet I can make, is between me and my friend over a game "I think soO gonna win this time, $10 on it."
Anything else is thievery.
|
|
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES50143 Posts
KeSPA will not rest until they're all in maximum security KeSPA Jail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
