EPTSeriously
[TSL] Day 1 Disconnect Situation - Page 15
| Forum Index > PokerStrategy.com TSL3 Forum |
|
SafeWord
United States522 Posts
Seriously | ||
|
VaultDweller
Romania132 Posts
I have one problem though... you could have posted this after the series and not after the match... reading Praetoriani's comment on the situation pretty much spoiled the results of the series since they clearly wouldn't have formulated it that way if NightEnD would have won  | ||
|
Aurdon
United States2007 Posts
On March 20 2011 06:36 n00b3rt wrote: Only 1 complaint : you should have posted this thread after all the games had been casted. The reaction by Prae spoiled the result of game 3 ;( Agreed. I had this same thought in chat. Seeing what their "no comment" was and that they didn't want to "throw stones" let me know that the entire series did not go their way. Just something to learn from for next time. | ||
|
Moonwrath
United States9568 Posts
| ||
|
BlazingInferno
India272 Posts
I am not a TL fanboy, just someone who can see how professionally handled this is. Nobody is saying you should not argue, but have respect for the original post and make the effort to prove why you think it might be the wrong decision. When the admins have taken so much effort to validate their points, you have to take at least as much effort to invalidate them. Just saying it is never 100% over is not going to cut it. | ||
|
nukde
United States3 Posts
| ||
|
Jonoman92
United States9104 Posts
| ||
|
thebike
United States157 Posts
I think that the disconnection issue was handled wonderfully and professionally. The one minor comment I would make is that I think the statement from Praetoriana was sort of a spoiler that BoxeR would end up the victor. After reading that statement, it seemed strongly implied to me that NightEnD was going to lose the series. I would have probably released that statement after the series was completed. In general, very good job guys! | ||
|
Zim23
United States1681 Posts
| ||
|
Slix36
United Kingdom145 Posts
That being said i wonder how long it took to completely analyse the situation and as such if it would be an appropriate system for something live like GSL. If it only took a few minutes then i think this sort of analysis would be a good idea for things like GSL and MLG. | ||
|
Enervate
United States1769 Posts
On March 20 2011 06:27 imaROBOT wrote: Rule #3 states... "If the disconnecting player had the game absolutely won then we will rule it a win for the disconnecting player. "Absolutely won" means that the player had the game won beyond all reasonable doubt and had an "absolute advantage."" Then Nazgul states the following... "A huge advantage however is not enough for an "absolute" win. " This just goes to show that you will NEVER know for sure if the player with the advantage would have won. There will always be a possibility of a come back no matter how small the chance, it's still possible. The game should have been replayed following the rules in the TSL handbook. The game was not won by BoxeR beyond all reason of doubt. Nightend had the gateways to remake his army, chrono boost stocked up, and BoxeR could have made some mistake. It's not fair to award a win to a player because you are just ASSUMING he wouldn't have made a mistake. People are really taking Nazgul's quote out of context. He is saying that the advantage alone isn't enough to award Boxer the win, but when you include the other factors that he goes on to list, such as no blink/charge or templar archives, then it is enough for him to award Boxer the game. | ||
|
integral
United States3156 Posts
On March 20 2011 06:31 Thrill wrote: Why isn't the fact that panel members are chosen in part from players still in the tournament [a huge deal]? Bias? Conflict of interest? Directly adverse interest? Also, an advantage for the players in the panel who get a tournament replay of someone they might meet themselves. If some players gain access to this replay, everyone else competing should? Not just the replay actually, but the early information as well. Really weird to me how everyone is calling this so professional - professional would have been having a ref pool ready BEFORE the tournament without players in the tournament. DC:s can and will happen in every tourney and admins should be very prepared for it. Admins should also be VERY clear on procedure - if TL is so transparent, why are we not informed (in this thread) about the time span? How long did it take from the DC 'til the next game was started? What were the players told as to when the next game would be played? -- :s This post really really needs a response. It sounds like TL just grabbed good players they had on hand without even considering that they were playing in the same tournament. Even if the decision is fair and accurate, the panel is frought with potential conflict of interest. Next time this happens, I strongly suggest having a truly independent panel, with absolutely no players that are playing in the tournament. | ||
|
syzygy
Canada14 Posts
| ||
|
mDuo13
United States307 Posts
I like the choice of top players as referees, the thorough decisions by the referees, the prepared and courteous approach taken by all involved... Very good job, TSL. You've raised the bar for foreign-run tournaments and I can only hope that future event organizers follow suit. | ||
|
leo23
United States3075 Posts
| ||
imaROBOT
United States81 Posts
On March 20 2011 06:41 BlazingInferno wrote: I am just surprised at the amount of nothing arguments popping in this thread. People arguing for the sake of arguing and saying that it is never 100% over until it actually is. If you are going to argue in a thread as professional as this, at least try to make the arguments sound as good as the original post is. I am not a TL fanboy, just someone who can see how professionally handled this is. Nobody is saying you should not argue, but have respect for the original post and make the effort to prove why you think it might be the wrong decision. When the admins have taken so much effort to validate their points, you have to take at least as much effort to invalidate them. Just saying it is never 100% over is not going to cut it. It's always funny when someone complains about worthless posts, while making one at the same time. How are we supposed to match the effort in validating the fact that it wasn't 100% over? Am I going to make a simulation video showing what BoxeR might have done? No. The point is I wish we could avoid disconnected, but we cant. Trying to argue what the two players were going to do next is impossible. You can make a video showing the outcome of a battle straight forward, but you don't know if they would have just moved right into each other. | ||
|
Froadac
United States6733 Posts
| ||
|
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
| ||
|
dobbersp
United States94 Posts
Even more than I appreciate the forethought of this system, I am overwhelmed with happiness that you guys decided to apply so much honesty and transparency to this post. When you mention cloud's decision to re-game, and openly indicate things that could possibly be considered mistakes on your part during this process, it shows a lot of the integrity of this site and this tournament. I commend you all for your efforts and I believe this issue was resolved adequately. Much love for TL, their Staff, the players who participated on this judging panel, and the TSL ♥ d:- D | ||
|
JoeSchmoe
Canada2058 Posts
On March 20 2011 06:27 imaROBOT wrote: Rule #3 states... "If the disconnecting player had the game absolutely won then we will rule it a win for the disconnecting player. "Absolutely won" means that the player had the game won beyond all reasonable doubt and had an "absolute advantage."" Then Nazgul states the following... "A huge advantage however is not enough for an "absolute" win. " This just goes to show that you will NEVER know for sure if the player with the advantage would have won. There will always be a possibility of a come back no matter how small the chance, it's still possible. The game should have been replayed following the rules in the TSL handbook. The game was not won by BoxeR beyond all reason of doubt. Nightend had the gateways to remake his army, chrono boost stocked up, and BoxeR could have made some mistake. It's not fair to award a win to a player because you are just ASSUMING he wouldn't have made a mistake. this should be bannable. people deliberately taking nazgul's quote out of context when his conclusion was obvious. | ||
| ||
