|
On March 14 2019 11:57 jy_9876543210 wrote:
Macsed's response:
"说下当时情况吧，第一盘打完我觉得这个人很菜，当然所有人都和我这么说，我也觉得他很菜，然后第二盘才会选择一个低保rush因为我觉得只要过去把他门口的兵营打了就能赢，但是我过去看到他家里有个兵营没开气我以为他要开2矿，我就封了他得气，一旦封了他拿什么打我低保？可我万万没想到他这个战术是rail教他的，因为在职业内战里面这种战术是不成立的，所以我就没多想。打完这场比赛rail跑过来疯狂炫耀说是我教的，因为他知道我会觉得他是菜鸟肯定会想快点结束，然后就家里一个兵营外面3个兵营来骗我。果真我被骗到了，当时被骗到了乱导致各种失误，但是我认为就算不失误这一盘我也赢不了，因为我家里已经挡不住了，他只要在外面开个基地农民传出来也是随便赢。哎都怪我，太丢人了"
My translation:
"The situation was, after the first map I thought this guy is weak, of course that's also what everyone's been telling me, and I felt the same. So on the second map I decided to cannon rush since I thought I could win by destroying the gateway in his base, but when I saw his base, there's a gateway but no gas, so I thought he's gonna expand, and I blocked his gas, so he can't stop my cannon rush. But what I didn't know was that it's rail who taught him this strategy, because he knew that I would try to finish this game quickly since I thought my opponent is weak, and he tricked me by one gateway in main base and 3 proxies outside. That totally got me, and resulted in a lot of mistakes from me. But I think even if I didn't make those mistakes, I still wouldn't win that map, since I couldn't defend my base, he could just make another base and recall the probes. It's my fault, this is an embarrassing game." |
On March 16 2019 04:03 opisska wrote:
Now I know that some of you see everything in bloody colours when it comes to matchfixing, but hear me out here. I recently realized that matchfixing, while unpleasant, isn't as big of a deal as it seems - simply because for it to have any purpose, it needs to be rare. There is no risk of "every match being fixed", just because nobody would bet on that. The millisecond a sport gets the rap of being heavily fixed, the any bettor with half a brain must move to something else, no? And without bettors, there is noone to win money from - the betting companies aren't going to subsidize the fixers by their own money and will just close shop and move on when normal bettors leave.
Well, hoping for all (e)sport gamblers to only have rational minds seems dubious, no ?
People even gamble on pro wrestling where it is 100% know to be 100% fixed by nature, lol.
Plus, if one match on 30 is fixed but players play well the comedy, public will maybe be suspicious on 1/10th of this, so with one match on 300 suspect it still not get a rep of being "heavily fixed".
|
On March 16 2019 04:54 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Pilot912, do you think that macsed did or did not deliberately lose the game?
Whether he was persuaded by a substantial amount of money or not does not matter.
I feel that he did not deliberately lose the game. I acknowledge all the doubts people raised about the VOD, but we have to take his "personal face" into consideration as well.
Back to Group F, the Chinese community wasn't expecting MacSed could advance from it since it is also impossible for him to beat Scarlett and DNS. This has been discussed within the Chinese forum extensively before the start of WESG. Chinese fans felt that MacSed could struggle against Bly in a "dog fight" scenario (Bly was not as established as DNS and Scarlett), but losing to EnDerr and Seventy91, given how unknown they are, would be unacceptable (back to the nationalistic point I mentioned).
For people following the Chinese SC2 forum, MacSed has been a “谐星” (Comedian) for the past three years as he aged and dropped practice. He surprised Chinese fans by winning the WESG spot. In general sense, the Chinese SC2 community regards Time as the best Chinese player (iASonu announced that he is semi-retired, so he would be still around the sense, but as hard as he used to try), and "老逼" (old folks) such as iGXY, TooDming, and iGMacSed, as "gatekeeper" who can be beaten by any young serious pro-player. The only reason these "old folks" still linger around is because SC2 wasn't attracting a lot of young players, such folks went to Dota2, LOL, etc.
MacSed himself is in the process of transitioning into a commentator/coach/streamer role. So take this into consideration, I am not persuaded that he would do a match-fix to risk his future career. In fact, the consensus emerging from Chinese SC2 online community is that MacSed had been over-estimated too much by TL... His actual MMR, after dropping practice following win the WESG spot around the end of last year, could be 5500 or even worse.
I believe MacSed was streaming occasionally at Douyu, just check it out, and see since last year, how little he played SC2 alive... The hours he had spent was on Autochess, etc.
|
That's all irrelevant. Compare his performance in G2 vs G3.
Than consider that the betting odds shows a surge of bets being placed on his loss in game 2 and there's really no debating. It was a matchfixing.
|
Man, i really need a new, second TL account to help the MacSed did nothing wrong crowd.
On topic, who knows how much money MacSed got out of that. Just consider borrowing money from friends and family members and use every available legal/illegal platform for your deed. Here 1k there 1k, it adds up i guess.
|
On March 16 2019 03:58 Aegwynn wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 03:52 SC-Shield wrote:On March 16 2019 03:36 Aegwynn wrote:
This is the most fixed game i've ever seen.
I don't find what MacSed did wrong btw, cheers to him for ez money of people who are gambling on a video game.
One should have right to throw his own games, because anything you do to throw intentionally can be counted as "playing bad" or vice versa anyways. Just look how ridiculously naive these comments here about a %101 fixed game. No, throwing games on purpose should be illegal not "one should have right to throw his own games". It ruins trust, it ruins bets although gamble is forbidden in some countries (e.g. South Korea?), hence less viewership. That's exactly what sport organisers don't want. I disagree, i believe legal throwing would eventually kill map score based bettings and this kind of pointless discussions.
Yeah, pretty much this. Basically bet on your own risk even if it is fixed. Up till now I haven't seen an argument which convinces me that matchfixing should be illegal (though it probably is?).
|
On March 16 2019 06:43 DSh1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 03:58 Aegwynn wrote:On March 16 2019 03:52 SC-Shield wrote:On March 16 2019 03:36 Aegwynn wrote:
This is the most fixed game i've ever seen.
I don't find what MacSed did wrong btw, cheers to him for ez money of people who are gambling on a video game.
One should have right to throw his own games, because anything you do to throw intentionally can be counted as "playing bad" or vice versa anyways. Just look how ridiculously naive these comments here about a %101 fixed game. No, throwing games on purpose should be illegal not "one should have right to throw his own games". It ruins trust, it ruins bets although gamble is forbidden in some countries (e.g. South Korea?), hence less viewership. That's exactly what sport organisers don't want. I disagree, i believe legal throwing would eventually kill map score based bettings and this kind of pointless discussions. Yeah, pretty much this. Basically bet on your own risk even if it is fixed. Up till now I haven't seen an argument which convinces me that matchfixing should be illegal (though it probably is?).
Think of match-fixing as lying to investors. You put money on A with the understanding that A has a % chance of giving you a return. You place your bets because you think you have a good chance of getting a good return. But turns out your chance of winning was 0% all along because the game has already been decided by the match fixer. Would you bet 1k on a game that you have 0% chance of winning?
|
On March 16 2019 05:25 Pilot912 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 04:54 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Pilot912, do you think that macsed did or did not deliberately lose the game?
Whether he was persuaded by a substantial amount of money or not does not matter.
I feel that he did not deliberately lose the game.
Then you cannot see the obvious. Everything you have written, which may be true, is irrelevant to that he has deliberately chosen to lose.
Macsed could had just as easily been blackmailed, or the betting ratio changing was just a coincidence, and so macsed gets no money, and has to endure "losing face", but that game can only be a game where Macsed chose to lose.
|
On March 16 2019 06:43 DSh1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 03:58 Aegwynn wrote:On March 16 2019 03:52 SC-Shield wrote:On March 16 2019 03:36 Aegwynn wrote:
This is the most fixed game i've ever seen.
I don't find what MacSed did wrong btw, cheers to him for ez money of people who are gambling on a video game.
One should have right to throw his own games, because anything you do to throw intentionally can be counted as "playing bad" or vice versa anyways. Just look how ridiculously naive these comments here about a %101 fixed game. No, throwing games on purpose should be illegal not "one should have right to throw his own games". It ruins trust, it ruins bets although gamble is forbidden in some countries (e.g. South Korea?), hence less viewership. That's exactly what sport organisers don't want. I disagree, i believe legal throwing would eventually kill map score based bettings and this kind of pointless discussions. Yeah, pretty much this. Basically bet on your own risk even if it is fixed. Up till now I haven't seen an argument which convinces me that matchfixing should be illegal (though it probably is?).
Amazed I have to explain this. Here's your 1st grade lesson.
1) Ruins the experience for spectators which is what esports is fundamentally about. Entertaining the spectators. This is sufficient reason in itself
2) Could be considered a kind of thievery as those who are expecting a fair match would be robbed of their money if they chose the correct side but they lose because it was rigged for the opponent
3) Will destroy the sport if anyone can simply do this at will without consequences
etc...
|
I mean with the gameplay footage, there's just no good outcome here for MacSed, no matter what people are trying to argue. He's either a matchfixer, a player who has absolutely no fucking clue what he's doing and shouldn't have participated in the tournament to begin with, or he had a seizure mid-game and should have been sent to the ER.
His "explanation" is also no bueno.
|
|
|
Im pretty sure I wouldnt make the mistakes that he did.
And I havent played a single ladder game of SC2 since WoL.
|
If a player simply does a worker rush then loses can we conclude he lost on purpose? maybe if he completely miss microes his workers in a way they arent atacking? what if the player, as was already mentioned here,before mining any minerals just kills his own nexus? Then of course right?
So at some point we can conclude by in game evidence that the player lost on purpose. That byun vs mkp game that had lot of people were dead sure i still had imo reasonable doubt, this one though... so many blatant plays he had to make, one after the other, to make sure he coudnt win by mistake against a player so much worse than him.
Of course in the early part, if I were watching live, to give him the benefit of the doubt i could possibly consider that the first mistakes was him playing with his food, (like letting his opponent know he was canon rushing) making the game harder or something, since he would be still be confident he would win. Even failing the canon rush or letting one zealot in. But then repeatedly letting the zealots in and eventualy losing the game? i mean is there anyone that doubts that he knows that a cannon woudnt close the ramp???
99.5% he lost on purpose. Why is the matter for an investigation. Hope it doesn't find anything.
On March 14 2019 13:14 hiro protagonist wrote:
I would love to know if we can find out if anyone bet for a 2-1 outcome on any other of seventy91’s series. I would also like to know if more than one bet was made or it was just one bet that changed the line so much. Like, giving his MMR disparity from everyone else in his group, you could have picked anyone he played against as it was a long shot he would win regardless.
Knowing this info would make things a lot clearer imo.
Nice name. When will they make the series or movie?
edit: damnit byul not byun
|
i think the most troubling part was when he made a pylon in his base when he was being attacked by zealots in his mineral line. His supply was already fine by a good margin. I think he started to panic and was trying to bring his minerals down, so it wouldn't be an obvious match fix. Amateur hour.
|
On March 16 2019 07:09 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:25 Pilot912 wrote:On March 16 2019 04:54 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Pilot912, do you think that macsed did or did not deliberately lose the game?
Whether he was persuaded by a substantial amount of money or not does not matter.
I feel that he did not deliberately lose the game. Then you cannot see the obvious. Everything you have written, which may be true, is irrelevant to that he has deliberately chosen to lose. Macsed could had just as easily been blackmailed, or the betting ratio changing was just a coincidence, and so macsed gets no money, and has to endure "losing face", but that game can only be a game where Macsed chose to lose.
This would be my final post in the line as I feel that no one seems to try to engage in a meaningful discussion. Here's my final thought on this 400+ thread of conversations.
The primary motivation of me joining the conversation is that I am criticizing the "rush logic" that many people have been following in make the "guilty" call against MacSed. My defence for MacSed could be wrong, and I'm happy to admit my mistake if formal investigation results proved suspicious money movement around his account.
Don't want to reveal much of my personal info here, but my daily job involves analyzing the factors that influence people's decision-making behaviour. Humans are complex animals, but we could analyze and make educated speculation on them when they are doing risk-taking behaviours. Participating in illegal gamble is a risk-taking action. In a basic economic 101 sense, people tend to maximize their gains while avoiding risks.
Where I depart from most accusers here is that I believe the VOD evidence and all the circumstantial issues I raised are both circumstantial evidence. The only decisive evidence would be money movement when we try to reach the verdict.
I wrote these long posts to highlight the fact that, the loss (humiliation from fans, potential career risks) for MacSed "match-fixed" with Seventy91 would be higher than most people assume,
I provided the details in my previous posts. If he decided to do this, it has to involve huge amount of money, which is difficult to leave no trace. Taken together, using only VOD and the changing bet line on pinnacle won't be sufficient to reach the conclusion.
For me, all the conversations here are a classic example of confirmation bias. Once the consensus was built among several posters, then they stop listening to the other side of story, and take people's input as offence.
In a perfect world of robot versus robot, MMR4000 could not win MMR6000, but as we know, people can make a serious of mistakes in a short time. The decisive evidence should be the money in the case of match-fix, otherwise, MacSed remains innocent according to the justice system in most Western countries, and the rushed conclusions are at least inappropriate as we still wait for the official investigation result.
|
I listened. I didn't write anything when you decided that the accusations were racism motivated. I didn't say anything about how you framed your argument as chinese culture making matchfixing unlikely. I didn't say anything about macsed having money (whether foreign or otherwise) being deposited into any accounts.
What I don't understand is how anybody can watch the vod (did you watch the vod?) and claim that Macsed didn't try to lose.
|
On March 16 2019 07:45 Pilot912 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 07:09 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 05:25 Pilot912 wrote:On March 16 2019 04:54 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Pilot912, do you think that macsed did or did not deliberately lose the game?
Whether he was persuaded by a substantial amount of money or not does not matter.
I feel that he did not deliberately lose the game. Then you cannot see the obvious. Everything you have written, which may be true, is irrelevant to that he has deliberately chosen to lose. Macsed could had just as easily been blackmailed, or the betting ratio changing was just a coincidence, and so macsed gets no money, and has to endure "losing face", but that game can only be a game where Macsed chose to lose. For me, all the conversations here are a classic example of confirmation bias. Once the consensus was built among several posters, then they stop listening to the other side of story, and take people's input as offence.
Nope. For me at least what anyone else argues about this doesn't have any effect on my belief that the evidence is very strong against him. And I'm all for investigating this more deeply before coming to a conclusion...
However, I don't know how they could attain your decisive evidence of money movement. The only reason they were able to do that in Life's case was because the Korean police launched a huge investigation. Are the investigators here really going to have the power to uncover that kind of thing?
|
That's about the strongest possible evidence for matchfixing I could think of, short of seeing a check that says it's for "matchfixing."
|
On March 16 2019 07:53 NinjaNight wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 07:45 Pilot912 wrote:On March 16 2019 07:09 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 05:25 Pilot912 wrote:On March 16 2019 04:54 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Pilot912, do you think that macsed did or did not deliberately lose the game?
Whether he was persuaded by a substantial amount of money or not does not matter.
I feel that he did not deliberately lose the game. Then you cannot see the obvious. Everything you have written, which may be true, is irrelevant to that he has deliberately chosen to lose. Macsed could had just as easily been blackmailed, or the betting ratio changing was just a coincidence, and so macsed gets no money, and has to endure "losing face", but that game can only be a game where Macsed chose to lose. For me, all the conversations here are a classic example of confirmation bias. Once the consensus was built among several posters, then they stop listening to the other side of story, and take people's input as offence. Nope. For me at least what anyone else argues about this doesn't have any effect on my belief that the evidence is very strong against him. And I'm all for investigating this more deeply before coming to a conclusion... However, I don't know how they could attain your decisive evidence of money movement. The only reason they were able to do that in Life's case was because the Korean police launched a huge investigation. Are the investigators here really going to have the power to uncover that kind of thing?
OK, I get both you and Dangermousecatdog's perspectives and let's disagree with respect. As far as I know from online conversations in Chinese forums, there are internal forces pushing within China's SC2 online community to get things clear out, and WESG organizer now feels a little humiliated by the noise we created here at TL. MacSed himself probably wants to get his name cleared too if he's truly innocent. We will see some official result soon, and which should show more inside evidence (e.g. Rail's comment about providing Seventy91 the strategy, etc.). Keep an eye on the updates.
|
United States12238 Posts
It's certainly true that some posters are more zealous than others with regard to convicting MacSed in the court of public opinion. What I believe you may be missing is the game in the greater context of the match. If you take Game 2 out of context, then it could be reasonably assumed that he was just messing around for the first half of the match and had mentally given up in the second half.
However, things get much more damning when we look at the skills he showed in the other two games. Even if we say that he's a rusty GM player and that 6000 MMR doesn't accurately describe his current ability, we would have a very difficult time making that argument when we are watching Game 3 which immediately followed. Game 3 looks like he's in good competitive shape, a modern contender in SC2.
There is a "mental defeat threshold" that exists in games. This is a threshold which defines a state of mind that prevents a player from rallying because of a perceived foregone conclusion. If you're playing basketball and you're 40 points down with 2 minutes remaining in the final quarter, that's statistically impossible to win. 40 points down with 5 minutes remaining? Not absolutely impossible, but so extremely unlikely that you probably crossed your mental defeat threshold. You've already written off the outcome, so you just stop trying. I think we can probably outline whether that was a factor in this game:
1. Poor pylon placement (in plain view): MacSed might be feeling confident.
2. Poor cannon placement (easily thwarted): MacSed might still be feeling confident.
3. Cannon to seal the ramp opening: ???
4. Probes fail to kill Zealots: Mentally defeated. "Even if I kill them, I can't win. GG."
I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt in #4, but #3 is where I can't in good faith reasonably say that MacSed was in an unwinnable position. That was salvageable by even average players, let alone 4000-MMR players, not to mention 6000-MMR players. If you seal that wall with a Gateway, you'll fully recover, stabilize, and potentially win. Nobody would make a decision to seal that choke with a Cannon.
Lots of players in tournaments do risky or wacky builds when they're ahead in a series. However, the riskier the build, the faster they concede when it fails because whatever happens, the result occurs quickly. But they still try to win those high-risk games. If someone cannon rushes and it completely fails, they GG and go to the next game. If it does moderate damage, they transition into the mid-game and things eventually start to play out more normally. That transition was possible for MacSed, but he didn't even make an effort. The outcome of the game was already determined not by the actions of his opponent, but by his own decisions. And then when you factor in the suspicious bet lines, it becomes very difficult to argue that this was anything but orchestrated.
|
On March 16 2019 07:16 NinjaNight wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 06:43 DSh1 wrote:On March 16 2019 03:58 Aegwynn wrote:On March 16 2019 03:52 SC-Shield wrote:On March 16 2019 03:36 Aegwynn wrote:
This is the most fixed game i've ever seen.
I don't find what MacSed did wrong btw, cheers to him for ez money of people who are gambling on a video game.
One should have right to throw his own games, because anything you do to throw intentionally can be counted as "playing bad" or vice versa anyways. Just look how ridiculously naive these comments here about a %101 fixed game. No, throwing games on purpose should be illegal not "one should have right to throw his own games". It ruins trust, it ruins bets although gamble is forbidden in some countries (e.g. South Korea?), hence less viewership. That's exactly what sport organisers don't want. I disagree, i believe legal throwing would eventually kill map score based bettings and this kind of pointless discussions. Yeah, pretty much this. Basically bet on your own risk even if it is fixed. Up till now I haven't seen an argument which convinces me that matchfixing should be illegal (though it probably is?). Amazed I have to explain this. Here's your 1st grade lesson. 1) Ruins the experience for spectators which is what esports is fundamentally about. Entertaining the spectators. This is sufficient reason in itself 2) Could be considered a kind of thievery as those who are expecting a fair match would be robbed of their money if they chose the correct side but they lose because it was rigged for the opponent 3) Will destroy the sport if anyone can simply do this at will without consequences etc...
I see why it is a first grade lesson: because it is probably not really correct when analyzed more thoroughly.
I don't see how 1 and 3 are true. These are just your assumptions which I can counter assume:
- We would still be entertained.
- (It's not like someone would try to lose in every game we watch.)
- Will NOT destroy the sport if anyone can simply do this at will without consequences.
2 is also not necessarily correct
- CANNOT be considered thievery, because you can expect it to happen.
On March 16 2019 07:03 phodacbiet wrote:
Think of match-fixing as lying to investors. You put money on A with the understanding that A has a % chance of giving you a return. You place your bets because you think you have a good chance of getting a good return. But turns out your chance of winning was 0% all along because the game has already been decided by the match fixer. Would you bet 1k on a game that you have 0% chance of winning?
I can understand that then when I think of it as gambling financing (e)sports. Though for me this seems like a practical consideration rather than an ideological one. Basically (e)sports trading part of its freedom for money if I'm allowed to phrase it like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
