|
On March 20 2011 07:42 mizU wrote:
I feel like people automatically jump to conclusions, such that a player asked to be a panelist would abuse said given power in order to further their own status in a tournament. For some reason, it is adamant in my mind that the panelists' never for a second regarded the players in question in relation to the tournament and how it would affect their standing.
It is a proven fact that even top level players will cheat by watching streams which I believe is ONE reason why they are casting replays instead of live matches. So if SOME players would cheat by stream watching why wouldn't those same players use a panel selection to their advantage and vote against a player they are afraid of facing?
|
On March 20 2011 07:47 integral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:44 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:41 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:38 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:34 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:19 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:17 HeavOnEarth wrote:On March 20 2011 07:13 SKC wrote:On March 20 2011 07:05 HeavOnEarth wrote:On March 20 2011 06:46 integral wrote:
[quote]
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. well they give their statements... with reasoning behind it. its not like they just picked someone and their reason is "oh boxer is weaker lets try to help him get through" I really think it would be hard to find a group of people that are professional gamers not related to anyone on the tournament. If you look at things like that, you shouldn`t accept teamates, friends and even countrymates from people on the tournament. That`s completelly unreasonable. They would also need to have a reputation inside the industry, including korea, and you would need much more than 5, since you would need 7 avaible for each game on a short notice. It was more professional than anything I`ve seen on tournaments of this level. It was much more reasonable than many things i`ve seen in sports that involve millions of dollars. Exactly! u want the best players judging this, and what's better than TSL 3 players, which probably are fairly easy to contact. Again, how far does TL have to go to prevent a conflict of interest? There's the possibility of foreigner/Korean bias, team bias, race bias, etc. It'd be literally impossible to rule out all bias and create a purely objective panel. "HOW FAR" as if finding qualified players that are not playing in the TSL is a difficult or strenuous task? There are only 32 players in the TSL and they picked THREE TSL players for the panelist? I mean, fair MINIMUM requirements seem to me to have at least two players of each represented race that are NOT IN THE TOURNAMENT. (lol... come on, srsly) This is not hard, they just overlooked it.You can mitigate conflict of interest far better than they did, especially considering they seem to have completely overlooked the fact that these players are in the same tournament. Nazgul isn't in the TSL. Uh. k. yeah dude, I know. Morrow, Tyler, MC. Three of five. One, two, three. 1 + 1 + 1 = 3. Why are you nitpicking (incorrectly I might add) when the other stuff is more important? Why would they need to get 2 players of each race? Looking at the numbers, top players and their distribution of races and excluding participants of the TSL would lessen the legitimacy of the panelists' decision, I feel. I'm starting to get annoyed here. How the FUCK would it lessen the legitimacy of the decision? What the hell?
Is MC not the best protoss in the world? What better judges than the top players in the world forking their opinion? If you find players of lesser skill level, it might be seen as a downplay to the legitimacy of the verdict.
|
On March 20 2011 07:19 mizU wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:17 HeavOnEarth wrote:On March 20 2011 07:13 SKC wrote:On March 20 2011 07:05 HeavOnEarth wrote:On March 20 2011 06:46 integral wrote: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. well they give their statements... with reasoning behind it. its not like they just picked someone and their reason is "oh boxer is weaker lets try to help him get through" I really think it would be hard to find a group of people that are professional gamers not related to anyone on the tournament. If you look at things like that, you shouldn`t accept teamates, friends and even countrymates from people on the tournament. That`s completelly unreasonable. They would also need to have a reputation inside the industry, including korea, and you would need much more than 5, since you would need 7 avaible for each game on a short notice. It was more professional than anything I`ve seen on tournaments of this level. It was much more reasonable than many things i`ve seen in sports that involve millions of dollars. Exactly! u want the best players judging this, and what's better than TSL 3 players, which probably are fairly easy to contact. Again, how far does TL have to go to prevent a conflict of interest? There's the possibility of foreigner/Korean bias, team bias, race bias, etc. It'd be literally impossible to rule out all bias and create a purely objective panel.
The player winning this series does not affect Tyler and MC at all. Nazgul is impartial. MorroW is affected in RO8 only if he makes it that far. MorroW also wrote the longest explanation and had strong arguments.
Cloud is impartial but whe don't know his thought process.
|
On March 20 2011 07:46 D_K_night wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:43 EnderSword wrote:My level of respect for the TSL and TeamLiquid just went up tremendously (Not that it was in anyway low before) Amazing explanation of exactly what happened, how it happened, what you've learned from it and how it would be addressed in the future. Nazgul actually going so far as to do a simulation of the closing fight shows an amazing attention to detail and this whole thing shows a level of professionalism that made me feel very good about this whole community. It did certainly look to me like the decision was correct, and I agree that if even Tyler or MC couldn't envision a way they could have comeback to win that game, than it wasn't going to Happen. One mild suggestion, and maybe it's silly or backwards...but I could see a situation where people might complain about race bias in this type of decision...You might want to make the panel of 5 all a non-playing race. In other words, get 5 Zergs to decide...or Just let TLO decide by himself who won since Random knows best.  I could see people complaining some day if a panel of 5 had 2 Terrans voting for the terran win and 3 Protoss voting for a regame etc... now THAT is a VERY interesting way of looking at it. In theory hey - why would zergs be biased in a matchup where they have no vested interest in seeing which way it goes? But it would have to be zergs who aren't participating in the event.
They are also have a lot less knowledge about the matchup. I believe protoss or terran players experienced that same situation dozens of times, and thus are able to say it was a lost cause. Bringing only zergs would definatelly be a bad idea in my eyes, people need to focus on the best way to find out if the situation is actually unwinnable, and forget all this talk about bias.
On March 20 2011 07:49 SpiZe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:19 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:17 HeavOnEarth wrote:On March 20 2011 07:13 SKC wrote:On March 20 2011 07:05 HeavOnEarth wrote:On March 20 2011 06:46 integral wrote: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. well they give their statements... with reasoning behind it. its not like they just picked someone and their reason is "oh boxer is weaker lets try to help him get through" I really think it would be hard to find a group of people that are professional gamers not related to anyone on the tournament. If you look at things like that, you shouldn`t accept teamates, friends and even countrymates from people on the tournament. That`s completelly unreasonable. They would also need to have a reputation inside the industry, including korea, and you would need much more than 5, since you would need 7 avaible for each game on a short notice. It was more professional than anything I`ve seen on tournaments of this level. It was much more reasonable than many things i`ve seen in sports that involve millions of dollars. Exactly! u want the best players judging this, and what's better than TSL 3 players, which probably are fairly easy to contact. Again, how far does TL have to go to prevent a conflict of interest? There's the possibility of foreigner/Korean bias, team bias, race bias, etc. It'd be literally impossible to rule out all bias and create a purely objective panel. The player winning this series does not affect Tyler and MC at all. Nazgul is impartial. MorroW is affected in RO8 only if he makes it that far. MorroW also wrote the longest explanation and had strong arguments. Cloud is impartial but whe don't know his thought process.
If Boxer reaches the final it will affect them, so that is not exactly right. But discuss their arguments, not their imaginary bias, you will never have a panel where someone can't find some reason to say X player would be biased. Hell, you could say westerns would be biased to decide against koreans and the oposite, which would kill any possible composition right away.
|
I think they picked those players as they had access to them as they were in the TSL.
If it was up to me, I'd ask those neutral players in this situation: Incontrol, MarineKing, Select, Tester and Nazgul.
But all in all, I think the decision was good, TL handled it perfectly and I don't see the controversy here. There were preset rules that players agreed on and TL has shows transparency on how the decision was made. Well done.
EDIT: I kind of don't understand the Nightend/Prae's comment.
|
On March 20 2011 07:49 mizU wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:47 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:44 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:41 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:38 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:34 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:19 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:17 HeavOnEarth wrote:On March 20 2011 07:13 SKC wrote:On March 20 2011 07:05 HeavOnEarth wrote:
[quote]
well they give their statements... with reasoning behind it.
its not like they just picked someone and their reason is "oh boxer is weaker lets try to help him get through"
I really think it would be hard to find a group of people that are professional gamers not related to anyone on the tournament. If you look at things like that, you shouldn`t accept teamates, friends and even countrymates from people on the tournament. That`s completelly unreasonable. They would also need to have a reputation inside the industry, including korea, and you would need much more than 5, since you would need 7 avaible for each game on a short notice. It was more professional than anything I`ve seen on tournaments of this level. It was much more reasonable than many things i`ve seen in sports that involve millions of dollars. Exactly! u want the best players judging this, and what's better than TSL 3 players, which probably are fairly easy to contact. Again, how far does TL have to go to prevent a conflict of interest? There's the possibility of foreigner/Korean bias, team bias, race bias, etc. It'd be literally impossible to rule out all bias and create a purely objective panel. "HOW FAR" as if finding qualified players that are not playing in the TSL is a difficult or strenuous task? There are only 32 players in the TSL and they picked THREE TSL players for the panelist? I mean, fair MINIMUM requirements seem to me to have at least two players of each represented race that are NOT IN THE TOURNAMENT. (lol... come on, srsly) This is not hard, they just overlooked it.You can mitigate conflict of interest far better than they did, especially considering they seem to have completely overlooked the fact that these players are in the same tournament. Nazgul isn't in the TSL. Uh. k. yeah dude, I know. Morrow, Tyler, MC. Three of five. One, two, three. 1 + 1 + 1 = 3. Why are you nitpicking (incorrectly I might add) when the other stuff is more important? Why would they need to get 2 players of each race? Looking at the numbers, top players and their distribution of races and excluding participants of the TSL would lessen the legitimacy of the panelists' decision, I feel. I'm starting to get annoyed here. How the FUCK would it lessen the legitimacy of the decision? What the hell? Is MC not the best protoss in the world? What better judges than the top players in the world forking their opinion? If you find players of lesser skill level, it might be seen as a downplay to the legitimacy of the verdict.
So find top players in the world that ARE NOT PLAYING IN THE TOURNAMENT. lol, how is this so hard for you to get...
|
On March 20 2011 07:49 AlienX wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:42 mizU wrote:
I feel like people automatically jump to conclusions, such that a player asked to be a panelist would abuse said given power in order to further their own status in a tournament. For some reason, it is adamant in my mind that the panelists' never for a second regarded the players in question in relation to the tournament and how it would affect their standing.
It is a proven fact that even top level players will cheat by watching streams which I believe is ONE reason why they are casting replays instead of live matches. So if SOME players would cheat by stream watching why wouldn't those same players use a panel selection to their advantage and vote against a player they are afraid of facing?
... Proven fact? Strong words for no citation or links to hard evidence to back up an accusation of "top level players" cheating.
|
On March 20 2011 07:46 D_K_night wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:43 EnderSword wrote:My level of respect for the TSL and TeamLiquid just went up tremendously (Not that it was in anyway low before) Amazing explanation of exactly what happened, how it happened, what you've learned from it and how it would be addressed in the future. Nazgul actually going so far as to do a simulation of the closing fight shows an amazing attention to detail and this whole thing shows a level of professionalism that made me feel very good about this whole community. It did certainly look to me like the decision was correct, and I agree that if even Tyler or MC couldn't envision a way they could have comeback to win that game, than it wasn't going to Happen. One mild suggestion, and maybe it's silly or backwards...but I could see a situation where people might complain about race bias in this type of decision...You might want to make the panel of 5 all a non-playing race. In other words, get 5 Zergs to decide...or Just let TLO decide by himself who won since Random knows best. I could see people complaining some day if a panel of 5 had 2 Terrans voting for the terran win and 3 Protoss voting for a regame etc... now THAT is a VERY interesting way of looking at it. In theory hey - why would zergs be biased in a matchup where they have no vested interest in seeing which way it goes? But it would have to be zergs who aren't participating in the event.
He?? this really confuses me. Why would you want to have people that don´t even play any race involved make the decision?!?! wouldn´t that lessen the legitimacy of the decision because people who are actually playing the races are more "educated" to make such a decision?
|
On March 20 2011 07:51 mizU wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:49 AlienX wrote:On March 20 2011 07:42 mizU wrote:
I feel like people automatically jump to conclusions, such that a player asked to be a panelist would abuse said given power in order to further their own status in a tournament. For some reason, it is adamant in my mind that the panelists' never for a second regarded the players in question in relation to the tournament and how it would affect their standing.
It is a proven fact that even top level players will cheat by watching streams which I believe is ONE reason why they are casting replays instead of live matches. So if SOME players would cheat by stream watching why wouldn't those same players use a panel selection to their advantage and vote against a player they are afraid of facing? ... Proven fact? Strong words for no citation or links to hard evidence to back up an accusation of "top level players" cheating.
I'm starting to get a picture of how clueless you are about the integrity of various players...
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=108352
|
On March 20 2011 07:51 mizU wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:49 AlienX wrote:On March 20 2011 07:42 mizU wrote:
I feel like people automatically jump to conclusions, such that a player asked to be a panelist would abuse said given power in order to further their own status in a tournament. For some reason, it is adamant in my mind that the panelists' never for a second regarded the players in question in relation to the tournament and how it would affect their standing.
It is a proven fact that even top level players will cheat by watching streams which I believe is ONE reason why they are casting replays instead of live matches. So if SOME players would cheat by stream watching why wouldn't those same players use a panel selection to their advantage and vote against a player they are afraid of facing? ... Proven fact? Strong words for no citation or links to hard evidence to back up an accusation of "top level players" cheating.
Just find and read a list of players that are banned from TL events, you might know some names...
|
I don't get the race issue. It's not like all terran players are best friends and have affiliation with each other. What if zergs vote against protoss because they hate that race more?
I dont think race has anything to do with it, in fact id prefer having more terran/toss players voice their opinions because they probably have a better understanding of the matchup.
|
Very unfortunate that the win was awarded this way, but I agree with the way the TSL staff dealt with the situation. Wish boxer good luck in the rest of the tournament, NightEnd good look in his sc2 future, and hope that the rest of TSL3 goes off without a hitch.
|
|
|
This was handled extremely professionally. There were clear rules ahead of time and they were followed. There were imperfections, many of which TL listed (and I'd add that using players in the tournament is another imperfection). It's correct to point out possible bias - there's room for improvement in the future. But it seems pretty clear to me that there was no corruption involved in this particular decision.
Take a minute and compare this to other tournaments. Has any other tournament ever provided written explanations from all their judges? Do they use panels of professional-level players. Even in GSL, I'm pretty sure it's up to one or two referees who I suspect don't have a professional's understanding of the game, and they give no defense of their decisions whatsoever.
|
Really it comes down to this.
1) It can be universally agreed that the rules of the tourney favor no one.
2) As a viewer, ask yourself who you wanted to to win, even if you have to admit to yourself deep down, that you have a personal bias.
3) A disconnect occurs.
If your champion wins, and you argue against the judges, you're just being nonsensical and clogging up the forums just to be different.
If your champion loses, and you disagree with the judges, think within yourself why you are disagreeing.
|
Melbourne5338 Posts
On March 20 2011 07:49 AlienX wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:42 mizU wrote:
I feel like people automatically jump to conclusions, such that a player asked to be a panelist would abuse said given power in order to further their own status in a tournament. For some reason, it is adamant in my mind that the panelists' never for a second regarded the players in question in relation to the tournament and how it would affect their standing.
It is a proven fact that even top level players will cheat by watching streams which I believe is ONE reason why they are casting replays instead of live matches. So if SOME players would cheat by stream watching why wouldn't those same players use a panel selection to their advantage and vote against a player they are afraid of facing?
Thats why a entire panel of multiple people was used, to reduce the influence of bias that a single player may have on the issue. In the future as mentioned, a full five person panel will be required for each decision.
Also, there is the veto option in place if players feel that one of the panelists will be bias or unfair.
|
On March 20 2011 07:50 integral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:49 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:47 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:44 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:41 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:38 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:34 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:19 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:17 HeavOnEarth wrote:On March 20 2011 07:13 SKC wrote:
[quote]
I really think it would be hard to find a group of people that are professional gamers not related to anyone on the tournament. If you look at things like that, you shouldn`t accept teamates, friends and even countrymates from people on the tournament. That`s completelly unreasonable. They would also need to have a reputation inside the industry, including korea, and you would need much more than 5, since you would need 7 avaible for each game on a short notice.
It was more professional than anything I`ve seen on tournaments of this level. It was much more reasonable than many things i`ve seen in sports that involve millions of dollars. Exactly! u want the best players judging this, and what's better than TSL 3 players, which probably are fairly easy to contact. Again, how far does TL have to go to prevent a conflict of interest? There's the possibility of foreigner/Korean bias, team bias, race bias, etc. It'd be literally impossible to rule out all bias and create a purely objective panel. "HOW FAR" as if finding qualified players that are not playing in the TSL is a difficult or strenuous task? There are only 32 players in the TSL and they picked THREE TSL players for the panelist? I mean, fair MINIMUM requirements seem to me to have at least two players of each represented race that are NOT IN THE TOURNAMENT. (lol... come on, srsly) This is not hard, they just overlooked it.You can mitigate conflict of interest far better than they did, especially considering they seem to have completely overlooked the fact that these players are in the same tournament. Nazgul isn't in the TSL. Uh. k. yeah dude, I know. Morrow, Tyler, MC. Three of five. One, two, three. 1 + 1 + 1 = 3. Why are you nitpicking (incorrectly I might add) when the other stuff is more important? Why would they need to get 2 players of each race? Looking at the numbers, top players and their distribution of races and excluding participants of the TSL would lessen the legitimacy of the panelists' decision, I feel. I'm starting to get annoyed here. How the FUCK would it lessen the legitimacy of the decision? What the hell? Is MC not the best protoss in the world? What better judges than the top players in the world forking their opinion? If you find players of lesser skill level, it might be seen as a downplay to the legitimacy of the verdict. So find top players in the world that ARE NOT PLAYING IN THE TOURNAMENT. lol, how is this so hard for you to get...
The point of the TSL is to get the top players in the world...
Let's see... top players that aren't in the TSL...
Terran: MKP?
Zergs: July?
Protoss: Hongun?
|
While I have no complaints about the events that occurred today, I do feel like it would be an improvement to the process if they were able to find high level players not involved in the tournament. I have a great deal of respect for what happened today so I have faith that TL will continue to improve this review process if they decide that it can or needs to be improved.
|
On March 20 2011 07:52 integral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:51 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:49 AlienX wrote:On March 20 2011 07:42 mizU wrote:
I feel like people automatically jump to conclusions, such that a player asked to be a panelist would abuse said given power in order to further their own status in a tournament. For some reason, it is adamant in my mind that the panelists' never for a second regarded the players in question in relation to the tournament and how it would affect their standing.
It is a proven fact that even top level players will cheat by watching streams which I believe is ONE reason why they are casting replays instead of live matches. So if SOME players would cheat by stream watching why wouldn't those same players use a panel selection to their advantage and vote against a player they are afraid of facing? ... Proven fact? Strong words for no citation or links to hard evidence to back up an accusation of "top level players" cheating. I'm starting to get a picture of how clueless you are about the integrity of various players... http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=108352
Gracias, I couldn't find the link.
|
Germany / USA16648 Posts
On March 20 2011 07:51 mizU wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:49 AlienX wrote:On March 20 2011 07:42 mizU wrote:
I feel like people automatically jump to conclusions, such that a player asked to be a panelist would abuse said given power in order to further their own status in a tournament. For some reason, it is adamant in my mind that the panelists' never for a second regarded the players in question in relation to the tournament and how it would affect their standing.
It is a proven fact that even top level players will cheat by watching streams which I believe is ONE reason why they are casting replays instead of live matches. So if SOME players would cheat by stream watching why wouldn't those same players use a panel selection to their advantage and vote against a player they are afraid of facing? ... Proven fact? Strong words for no citation or links to hard evidence to back up an accusation of "top level players" cheating.
He's not accusing anyone in particular, just pointing out what is true and known to be true.
When there's possibility to cheat (an easy and very hard to prove one no less) it will happen. Like... every competitive environment of mankind has shown this, I'm not even sure what you're questioning here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
