|
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 20 2019 00:33 ZenithM wrote:
I agree that the opinion of "betting experts" here is not worth shit against what Pinnacle ends up concluding.
Yes, this is my point. Not only does Pinnacle know more about suspicious betting patterns on their website better than everybody in this thread, they also have all the information about those bets that we don't.
Pinnacle most likely looked at the accounts that made the bets, the financial information attached to those accounts, the location and IP address from the bettors when they made the bet, the history of the bettors' accounts, the exact time of the bets, etc. This is all information that we don't have access to. And at the end of the day, they decided there was no foul play in the bets made.
|
On March 20 2019 01:36 Shuffleblade wrote:
Nothing is investigated and nothing is proven but the circumstantial evidence are very convincing.
That's not what I read. I don't know how you came to this conclusion. This was the quote from Pinnacle's reply to WaxAngel's:
I emailed Pinnacle regarding the bet, and I was told "Please be advised that as per investigation department, we did not find anything suspicious on the said match." in response.
Sounds like this case went through the investigation department. Pinnacle's investigation department did not find anything suspicious. It is pretty clear to me.
|
On March 20 2019 01:43 xelnaga_empire wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 01:36 Shuffleblade wrote:
Nothing is investigated and nothing is proven but the circumstantial evidence are very convincing. That's not what I read. I don't know how you came to this conclusion. This was the quote from Pinnacle's reply to WaxAngel's: Show nested quote +
I emailed Pinnacle regarding the bet, and I was told "Please be advised that as per investigation department, we did not find anything suspicious on the said match." in response.
Sounds like this case went through the investigation department. Pinnacle's investigation department did not find anything suspicious. It is pretty clear to me.
You see what you want to see, try emailing Pinnacle about the Serral vs Innovation match and ask them if they found anything suspicious in the betting line. You know what they would do? They would ask their investigation department which would tell them that they didn't find anything suspicious (since it didn't trip their automated system). Then they would write you this:
"Please be advised that as per investigation department, we did not find anything suspicious on the said match"
You assume much without any real base for it, you are allowed to whatever opinion you have but just because you want proof doesn't mean you can turn a blank statement into a meaningful one.
Edit: Also consider that Pinnacle is likely used to getting emails from unhappy bettors that lost money that complain about matchfix. This looks to me a blankett statement meant to calm upset betters that lose money, referencing that the investigation department has looked into it but not really saying that they have.
|
On March 20 2019 01:49 Shuffleblade wrote:
You assume much without any real base for it, you are allowed to whatever opinion you have but just because you want proof doesn't mean you can turn a blank statement into a meaningful one.
That's 90% of this thread. People are making so many assumptions and now that Pinnacle has conducted an investigation, and WESG has looked into this too (as per the comments from the WESG referee that posted in this thread), people are disregarding the new facts because they already painted MacSed was guilty before the rest of the facts had come out.
Are you part of the 90% of this thread? Because the new facts don't support the OP's case. And unless there is new evidence presented to support the OP's case, it is inconclusive that MacSed did any match fixing and he should be afforded the assumption of innocence unless further proof is presented.
BTW, I continue to question the OP's integrity. Maybe the OP has some ulterior motive? Now that Pinnacle presented their conclusion, why didn't the OP update this in the first message of this thread? The OP clearly knows of Pinnacle's findings, but refuses to update the message with Pinnacle's findings.
|
I found OP quite well made actually. He obviously holds the opinion that there was match fixing, sure, but he presented us with facts only as they were given to him. I don't see any foul play here. Obviously he might be a little sour that he lost $300 on this but he wouldn't make such a sillly bet on such a low profile game if he weren't ready to lose it in the first place.
|
On March 20 2019 01:39 xelnaga_empire wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 00:33 ZenithM wrote:
I agree that the opinion of "betting experts" here is not worth shit against what Pinnacle ends up concluding. Yes, this is my point. Not only does Pinnacle know more about suspicious betting patterns on their website better than everybody in this thread, they also have all the information about those bets that we don't. Pinnacle most likely looked at the accounts that made the bets, the financial information attached to those accounts, the location and IP address from the bettors when they made the bet, the history of the bettors' accounts, the exact time of the bets, etc. This is all information that we don't have access to. And at the end of the day, they decided there was no foul play in the bets made.
On the other hand, people might argue that the betting volume was small and that Pinnacle might not have seen it to be worth their time to investigate properly. They do not share any details about their investigation process, so your guess is as good as mine. Take this quote from Wax who originally posted about this:
+ Show Spoiler +Given that there have been past suspicious line-movements that warranted cancellation from Pinnacle, and others that were allowed to stand, I can't say it sheds much more light on the situation.
I have not really seen anything that has greatly changed any of the original points I made, so I have decided not to make any edits to the OP.
|
On March 20 2019 02:05 xelnaga_empire wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 01:49 Shuffleblade wrote:
You assume much without any real base for it, you are allowed to whatever opinion you have but just because you want proof doesn't mean you can turn a blank statement into a meaningful one.
That's 90% of this thread. People are making so many assumptions and now that Pinnacle has conducted an investigation, and WESG has looked into this too (as per the comments from the WESG referee that posted in this thread), people are disregarding the new facts because they already painted MacSed was guilty before the rest of the facts had come out. Are you part of the 90% of this thread? Because the new facts don't support the OP's case. And unless there is new evidence presented to support the OP's case, it is inconclusive that MacSed did any match fixing and he should be afforded the assumption of innocence unless further proof is presented. BTW, I continue to question the OP's integrity. Maybe the OP has some ulterior motive? Now that Pinnacle presented their conclusion, why didn't the OP update this in the first message of this thread? The OP clearly knows of Pinnacle's findings, but refuses to update the message with Pinnacle's findings.
I am indeed assuming a lot, but I at least try to do this based on the facts and I clearly explain my thought pattern.
You keep referencing things that do not exist, the "new" facts you talk about actually do not exist. There are no new facts besides the ones you have fabricated.
As I clearly explained above Pinnacle hasn't "presented their conclusion", they have merely answered the outside question of if they bets will be voided with the answer that they will not. If they have investigated or not they haven't said anythng about. I keep explaining this but you seem to not comprehend it?
The OP have no new facts to add, everything is there, I don't understand why so many posters keep shifting the topic of conversation. Rail has been accused, Seventy has been accused, even Wardi and now you are shifting it towards OP? How about discussing the facts, the actual facts which are looking very grim for Macsed, he is most likely guilty and the question is if anyone actually is doing an investigation or if it will just pass by like nothing happened.
Regarding WESG referee, you spread so much misinformation, please keep to the facts, remeber you wrote this?
On March 19 2019 20:05 xelnaga_empire wrote:
Investigations were done. One by Pinnacle. I assume WESG also already looked into it. And neither Pinnacle nor WESG provided evidence that furthered the OP's point.
You assume investigations were made (they were not as far as we know), you assume he was found innocent? You come here and rage at us for believing him to be guilty and you argue that you "assume" an organization has investigated it and found him innocent? How about I say I assume the police has investigated and arrested him, we just don't know about it so he is guilty!
As the WESG referee last wrote in this thread:
On March 14 2019 12:28 VanCaspel wrote:
WESG admin here, still on-site as one of the two non-Chinese referees. I made a post in this topic before, but would like to add something in response to the latest posts. Seventy91 did do a strategy that was suggested to him by Rail in that second game. Immediately after game 2 he told me so, and Rail, separately, told me the same (that he had advised Seventy91 to do that build, and that he could win with it).
By the way: I'm not involved with any official investigation, but from what I can tell it's being handled well.
So he doesn't know and he is not involved but he thinks it is "being handled well", notice he is not stating that there actually is an investigation under way just that it is being "handled". If there was a investigation it would have been released unless it is still ongoing, therefore there is two options. An investigation were never really done OR the investigation is not yet concluded. Notice how none of these options are that the investigation has been done and the conclusion was that he was innocent.
|
On March 20 2019 02:05 xelnaga_empire wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 01:49 Shuffleblade wrote:
You assume much without any real base for it, you are allowed to whatever opinion you have but just because you want proof doesn't mean you can turn a blank statement into a meaningful one.
That's 90% of this thread. People are making so many assumptions and now that Pinnacle has conducted an investigation, and WESG has looked into this too (as per the comments from the WESG referee that posted in this thread), people are disregarding the new facts because they already painted MacSed was guilty before the rest of the facts had come out. Are you part of the 90% of this thread? Because the new facts don't support the OP's case. And unless there is new evidence presented to support the OP's case, it is inconclusive that MacSed did any match fixing and he should be afforded the assumption of innocence unless further proof is presented. BTW, I continue to question the OP's integrity. Maybe the OP has some ulterior motive? Now that Pinnacle presented their conclusion, why didn't the OP update this in the first message of this thread? The OP clearly knows of Pinnacle's findings, but refuses to update the message with Pinnacle's findings.
The OP is well made, much better than most non staff entries. It's also rather hypocritical to question the OP's integrity while calling out people who are questioning something much more likely to be foul play. Why are you doing that? Trying to put out a dumpster fire for someone you know? I don't actually believe this last part but see what I did there?
I'm actually curious as to what you yourself think about the evidence given by the OP, it doesn't seem you have actually really considered it. The only thing I got from you is that you easily conform to (perceived) authority.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
From my perspective, Pinnacle's message to wax was mostly a blanket statement. As for WESG, there hasn't been any mention of an investigation . The post by VanCaspel seems to imply that the situation is being handled well, not that there's an investigation going on. In other words, this can be interpreted as WESG is proceeding and obviously that was the case if MacSed helped with the casting. It doesn't in any way imply that he has been cleared assuming that they would end up doing an investigation.
|
On March 20 2019 01:39 xelnaga_empire wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 00:33 ZenithM wrote:
I agree that the opinion of "betting experts" here is not worth shit against what Pinnacle ends up concluding. Yes, this is my point. Not only does Pinnacle know more about suspicious betting patterns on their website better than everybody in this thread, they also have all the information about those bets that we don't.
You're basing everything on the thought that Pinnacle's statement means he did nothing wrong. Your logic is actually based on a huge assumption. We have much stronger evidence suggesting he did matchfix. There are many potential reasons why Pinnacle might not actually care to go after the truth of this situation. I believe it's most likely that they never launched an actual serious investigation and just desire to make the matchfixing drama go away.
1) CSGO is a massively more active e-sport than SC2 right now. No doubt they receive way more action on that game and would be vastly more likely to take things seriously there.
2) This was just an "irrelevant" group stage match that the viewers didn't even care about because it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that Macsed would win.
3) I'm betting they just offer SC2 lines for icing on the cake profit rather than relying on serious profits from SC2 betting in any major way. I've seen very strange things in SC2 that I've never seen in any other betting section like leaving the original pre-game line up when the player is already up 1-0 or 2-0 in the series (seen this happen twice in the past and the bets weren't voided). This perhaps suggests they don't care about SC2 much and get lazy keeping up with it.
4) Very possible that they still made a profit on this (or at least didn't lose much) because they very drastically increased the value on Macsed's line after receiving heavy action on Seventy. And I bet a lot of people were willing to put money on Macsed at such a reduced juice line seeing as how he's leagues above Seventy's skill level.
5) The Pinnacle bets could've been someone/some people who weren't involved in it catching wind of the matchfix and placing money on Seventy. They would be found innocent regardless since they had no involvement in arranging the fix. Possible Macsed's side who were actually involved in the fix placed their money elsewhere.
etc. etc. I could go on and on but don't have the time...
Moral of the story Pinnacle doesn't have to seriously investigate this if they have no desire to. They can just give you a statement saying they looked into it and found nothing without actually doing much.
|
Also completely baffles me how a couple people (including xel'naga_empire) apparently think Rotti is more credible than people like BeastyQT and Snute who are already nearly 100% convinced this was not a legitimate game. Turkeydano is another strong player who completely disagreed with Rotti and he knows all about cannon rushing specifically.
Many of Rotti's arguments are weak and I'll get into that in proper depth later when I have some time to play with.
|
On March 20 2019 04:32 NinjaNight wrote:
Also completely baffles me how a couple people (including xel'naga_empire) apparently think Rotti is more credible than people like BeastyQT and Snute who are already nearly 100% convinced this was not a legitimate game. Turkeydano is another strong player who completely disagreed with Rotti and he knows all about cannon rushing specifically.
Many of Rotti's arguments are weak and I'll get into that in proper depth later when I have some time to play with.
Do you know what happens when 11 jurors vote "guilty" and 1 votes "not guilty"? The defendant isn't convicted.
Furthermore, note what terms are used. It's "guilty" or "not guilty," there is no mention of "innocent." Because innocence is not the question here; the defendant doesn't need to be innocent, they just need to be not guilty. If the best argument you can make is "Well, him being innocent looks unlikely," or "he's more likely to be guilty than innocent," you better be prepared for a disappointing verdict.
Trials are not an equal balance between guilt and innocence. It's much, much harder to prove guilt than disprove it, and that is by very deliberate design. A design, I might add, that is specifically intended to counter what a lot of people in this thread are trying to do.
|
On March 20 2019 05:12 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 04:32 NinjaNight wrote:
Also completely baffles me how a couple people (including xel'naga_empire) apparently think Rotti is more credible than people like BeastyQT and Snute who are already nearly 100% convinced this was not a legitimate game. Turkeydano is another strong player who completely disagreed with Rotti and he knows all about cannon rushing specifically.
Many of Rotti's arguments are weak and I'll get into that in proper depth later when I have some time to play with. Do you know what happens when 11 jurors vote "guilty" and 1 votes "not guilty"? The defendant isn't convicted. Furthermore, note what terms are used. It's "guilty" or "not guilty," there is no mention of "innocent." Because innocence is not the question here; the defendant doesn't need to be innocent, they just need to be not guilty. If the best argument you can make is "Well, him being innocent looks unlikely," or "he's more likely to be guilty than innocent," you better be prepared for a disappointing verdict. Trials are not an equal balance between guilt and innocence. It's much, much harder to prove guilt than disprove it, and that is by very deliberate design. A design, I might add, that is specifically intended to counter what a lot of people in this thread are trying to do.
i think that biggest problem with macsed in that game that found him guilty is the fact, that he tried to wall with a cannon, not once but twice !!! hes playing sc2 for 8years and yet he doesnt know how to properly wall..
|
Yeah guys, sorry to interrupt your circlejerk, but I just watched Maru vs. Scarlett g1. If you want to condemn people for willingly throwing games, where is the petition to ban Maru from competitive esports? Or is he too beloved, unlike a random Chinese guy and that's it?
|
On March 20 2019 06:31 opisska wrote:
Yeah guys, sorry to interrupt your circlejerk, but I just watched Maru vs. Scarlett g1. If you want to condemn people for willingly throwing games, where is the petition to ban Maru from competitive esports? Or is he too beloved, unlike a random Chinese guy and that's it?
that is not in any way comparable...
|
On March 20 2019 06:36 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 06:31 opisska wrote:
Yeah guys, sorry to interrupt your circlejerk, but I just watched Maru vs. Scarlett g1. If you want to condemn people for willingly throwing games, where is the petition to ban Maru from competitive esports? Or is he too beloved, unlike a random Chinese guy and that's it? that is not in any way comparable...
Indeed it isn't. While Macsed had to make decisions on timescale of seconds to minutes, no matter how questionable, Maru had a literal half an hour, including a break of his own creation, dedicated to the discussion of the very topic, to just pres "l" and fly some of his more than a dozen building into one of the largest dead airspaces on current competitive maps.
I am not saying that Maru fixed the game, but I am saying that Macsed did not even commit the most blatant act of "playing to lose" in the tournament in question, so any further "gameplay analysis" presented as evidence, is quite silly.
|
Difference is Maru played an 80 min game where both appeared to be doing their damnest to win (though we can't be too sure about the first 18 mins lol). Mental exhaustion is a valid reason when that one game took longer than a series. If Maru was doing his best to lose against a near peer opponent he hid it well to last the entire time to the 80th minute.
I don't know about matchfixing, as I am not a better, but I don't see how it is possible for anybody to watch Macsed vs Seventy91, and think Macsed wasn't try to lose. It's as obvious as if he had no micro probe rushing. macsed statement if correctly translated sure makes him seem like he chose to lose.
|
On March 20 2019 06:39 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 06:36 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 06:31 opisska wrote:
Yeah guys, sorry to interrupt your circlejerk, but I just watched Maru vs. Scarlett g1. If you want to condemn people for willingly throwing games, where is the petition to ban Maru from competitive esports? Or is he too beloved, unlike a random Chinese guy and that's it? that is not in any way comparable... Indeed it isn't. While Macsed had to make decisions on timescale of seconds to minutes, no matter how questionable, Maru had a literal half an hour, including a break of his own creation, dedicated to the discussion of the very topic, to just pres "l" and fly some of his more than a dozen building into one of the largest dead airspaces on current competitive maps. I am not saying that Maru fixed the game, but I am saying that Macsed did not even commit the most blatant act of "playing to lose" in the tournament in question, so any further "gameplay analysis" presented as evidence, is quite silly.
Well then agree to disagree. I think forgetting about the possibilty of forcing a draw via lifting buildings after an exhausting 1 hour game is a hundred times more understandable than what Macsed did. Scarlett didn't think of that either and thought she will win if she can kill the planetaries.
|
On March 20 2019 06:39 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 06:36 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 06:31 opisska wrote:
Yeah guys, sorry to interrupt your circlejerk, but I just watched Maru vs. Scarlett g1. If you want to condemn people for willingly throwing games, where is the petition to ban Maru from competitive esports? Or is he too beloved, unlike a random Chinese guy and that's it? that is not in any way comparable... Indeed it isn't. While Macsed had to make decisions on timescale of seconds to minutes, no matter how questionable, Maru had a literal half an hour, including a break of his own creation, dedicated to the discussion of the very topic, to just pres "l" and fly some of his more than a dozen building into one of the largest dead airspaces on current competitive maps. I am not saying that Maru fixed the game, but I am saying that Macsed did not even commit the most blatant act of "playing to lose" in the tournament in question, so any further "gameplay analysis" presented as evidence, is quite silly.
Seems I need to quote myself to answer this one.
On March 20 2019 01:36 Shuffleblade wrote:
As for the parellel drawn to Marus game are just sad, it shows an extreme lack of even the most basic of understanding of match fixing.
Macsed was 1-0 in the game where he might have matchfixed, if he were to win it would be 2-0 and then all the bettors would have lost and Macsed would (if guilty) be in deep shit with people you don't want to be in deep shit with. If Macsed matchfixed it is likely he tried to lose the first game smoothly but since his opponent was diamond he couldn't help but win it. Therefore the second game with his back to the wall he had to lose and therefore he made it this blatant.
How does this logic work for Maru, what bet was on the line here? Maru obviously tried to win the game through his playing the game, there is no way he tried to lose the first game on purpose and even if Rotti wants to argue the opposite. Maru obviously tried to win and did win the series, not to mention there is actually a lot of money on the line here. In macseds match there was no money on the line, there are here. There is no suspicious betting line and there are nothing else suspicious besides that one action that he GGed. In Macseds situation there just happens to be 30 suspicions things at the same time, the opponent in diamond, the betting line moved weirdly and his comment just makes things worse. Also according to the WESG rules book (as was pointed out to me on youtube sc2hl video of the game) in case of a tie the judge will count units. Maru would lose either way, there was no way to tie to the game since Scarlett had way more units even without Maru throwing about those vikings. Marus suspicion level 0, Macseds suspicion level 99.7.
So why are we here again, with posters trying to divert the discussion onto people that has nothing to do with the topic at hand? Macseds game is so suspicious I fail to find the words, if you then add on the circumstances of his comment, the betting line and Seventy being a diamond player it absolutely insane if this was not a matchfix.
There is not a single argument for why Marus match is the least bit suspicious, either way he would lose. People that state otherwise haven't read the WESG handbook. So the only suspicious thing in Marus situation is based on your ignorance of the situation.
|
floating buildings into corners is for diamond plebs. it is not becoming of a gsl champion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
