|
On March 20 2011 08:01 VuFFeR wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:40 ftd.rain wrote:On March 20 2011 07:27 VuFFeR wrote:
I think there is something ethically wrong with giving the win to BoxeR. I realize that he had 99% chance to win, but taking that 1% chance of turning the game around away from Nightend, is like punishing him for something he didn't do. Imo. it should have been a rematch.
That being said I suppose i'm just more of a theorist than a practician. I don't like to have subjectivity influence the tournament if it can be avoided in any way.
Another point, i want to make, is, that I'm not sure wether you can be absolutely sure that this is the proper way to do it, even if the majority of people in here agrees with the decision. Since there is no doubt about BoxeR having the biggest amount of fans among those two.
As a sidenote: If you are going to keep this rule, your way of doing it is absolutely brilliant. You've done an excellent job - no doubt about that - I just dont agree with the rule, that's all. So, by your logic, taking the win away from BoxeR with his 99% chance to win would be ethically fair?Okay chap. It would yeah. It's not Nightend's fault that BoxeR disconnects. Yet he's the one who gets punished.
And it wasn't Boxer's fault either, in less you are saying he intentionally disconnected his internet, which is just absurd. So instead of straight up punishing people for a disconnect, they do something 100% better. Nice logic.
|
On March 20 2011 08:03 integral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:01 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:58 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:55 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:50 integral wrote: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:
[quote]
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? Wow, now you're being intentionally obtuse. Go to TLPD for SC2 Korea and international and sort by ELO for each race. See how many there are not in the tournament? Are most of them not already in the TSL? How would you go about contacting players NOT in the TSL for their opinions? oGs and teamliquid share a team house. How do you think they contacted minchul? I'm facepalming so hard right now.
Who would you have picked then?
|
I believe the TSL team have done a great job with this. The transparency and obvious respect for the fans displayed here are quite awesome. The organisation, rules and the ruling itself are all impressive.
However, although I don't believe it was a significant factor here, the willingness to use other players still competing in the tournament as judges on the panel - being even clearer - other players with a vested interest in the outcome of the game they are judging, might be something the team want to avoid in future.
Unless of course the games have been played and MC and morrow both got knocked out?! Not sure quite how long in advance these things are played...
|
On March 20 2011 08:05 SpiZe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:03 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 08:01 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:58 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:55 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:50 integral wrote: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:
[quote]
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? Wow, now you're being intentionally obtuse. Go to TLPD for SC2 Korea and international and sort by ELO for each race. See how many there are not in the tournament? Are most of them not already in the TSL? How would you go about contacting players NOT in the TSL for their opinions? oGs and teamliquid share a team house. How do you think they contacted minchul? I'm facepalming so hard right now. Who would you have picked then?
ANYONE NOT IN THE TOURNAMENT THAT IS A HIGH-LEVEL PLAYER.
lol... srsly.
|
On March 20 2011 08:06 integral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:05 SpiZe wrote:On March 20 2011 08:03 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 08:01 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:58 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:55 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:50 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:49 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:47 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:44 mizU wrote:
[quote]
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? Wow, now you're being intentionally obtuse. Go to TLPD for SC2 Korea and international and sort by ELO for each race. See how many there are not in the tournament? Are most of them not already in the TSL? How would you go about contacting players NOT in the TSL for their opinions? oGs and teamliquid share a team house. How do you think they contacted minchul? I'm facepalming so hard right now. Who would you have picked then? ANYONE NOT IN THE TOURNAMENT THAT IS A HIGH-LEVEL PLAYER. lol... srsly.
You didn't get what I mean't. Names.
|
On March 20 2011 08:03 integral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:01 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:58 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:55 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:50 integral wrote: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:
[quote]
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? Wow, now you're being intentionally obtuse. Go to TLPD for SC2 Korea and international and sort by ELO for each race. See how many there are not in the tournament? Are most of them not already in the TSL? How would you go about contacting players NOT in the TSL for their opinions? oGs and teamliquid share a team house. How do you think they contacted minchul? I'm facepalming so hard right now.
But by your argument, wouldn't the teammates (if they were asked to be panelists also) vote in favor of their teammates, thus skewing the decision?
|
I think for everyone unsure of how the game was going, MC's explanation serves as a sort of "TL;DR" because of it's conciseness.
I appreciate the game being given to BoxeR. When a player has what is (basically) a 100% chance to win a game, then is forced to play a rematch with essentially 50-50 odds, it's easy for anyone to see how that player would be discouraged.
|
On March 20 2011 08:04 SpiZe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:01 VuFFeR wrote:On March 20 2011 07:40 ftd.rain wrote:On March 20 2011 07:27 VuFFeR wrote:
I think there is something ethically wrong with giving the win to BoxeR. I realize that he had 99% chance to win, but taking that 1% chance of turning the game around away from Nightend, is like punishing him for something he didn't do. Imo. it should have been a rematch.
That being said I suppose i'm just more of a theorist than a practician. I don't like to have subjectivity influence the tournament if it can be avoided in any way.
Another point, i want to make, is, that I'm not sure wether you can be absolutely sure that this is the proper way to do it, even if the majority of people in here agrees with the decision. Since there is no doubt about BoxeR having the biggest amount of fans among those two.
As a sidenote: If you are going to keep this rule, your way of doing it is absolutely brilliant. You've done an excellent job - no doubt about that - I just dont agree with the rule, that's all. So, by your logic, taking the win away from BoxeR with his 99% chance to win would be ethically fair?Okay chap. It would yeah. It's not Nightend's fault that BoxeR disconnects. Yet he's the one who gets punished. How does NightEnd is being punished? He had lost. + It's not BoxeR fault either if he gets disconnected.
Isn't it pretty obvious... they remove his 1% chance of winning. As little as that may seem it's still a chance. That combined with the whole issue of blending subjectivity into a rule is a bad cocktail if you ask me.
EDIT: And no! i do not think he dc'ed deliberately.
|
That disconnect felt like a punch in the gut. Every game needs a "gg" moment instead of a "huh, what happened?" Although I think the decision was fair and correct from my limited knowledge, I find the process problematic.
I do not disagree with the rules. They seem pretty good, actually. I do however think it is unfortunate that 3 of the 5 initial panel members are competitors in the same tournament, and that is something it would be wise to avoid in the future. It's hard for me to know if this could have been done better though because I'm sure there were time constraints involved.
Good job on the transparency and thoroughness though.
|
On March 20 2011 08:08 SpiZe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:06 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 08:05 SpiZe wrote:On March 20 2011 08:03 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 08:01 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:58 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:55 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:50 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:49 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:47 integral wrote:
[quote]
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? Wow, now you're being intentionally obtuse. Go to TLPD for SC2 Korea and international and sort by ELO for each race. See how many there are not in the tournament? Are most of them not already in the TSL? How would you go about contacting players NOT in the TSL for their opinions? oGs and teamliquid share a team house. How do you think they contacted minchul? I'm facepalming so hard right now. Who would you have picked then? ANYONE NOT IN THE TOURNAMENT THAT IS A HIGH-LEVEL PLAYER. lol... srsly. You didn't get what I mean't. Names.
Wtf, why would I need to list all the viable candidates? ... I'm not running this tournament, it's not my responsibility to come up with a list of players that are neutral, respected, independent parties. That responsibility is TL's. Anyone in good standing not in the tournament is fine.
|
On March 20 2011 08:05 mizU wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:01 VuFFeR wrote:On March 20 2011 07:40 ftd.rain wrote:On March 20 2011 07:27 VuFFeR wrote:
I think there is something ethically wrong with giving the win to BoxeR. I realize that he had 99% chance to win, but taking that 1% chance of turning the game around away from Nightend, is like punishing him for something he didn't do. Imo. it should have been a rematch.
That being said I suppose i'm just more of a theorist than a practician. I don't like to have subjectivity influence the tournament if it can be avoided in any way.
Another point, i want to make, is, that I'm not sure wether you can be absolutely sure that this is the proper way to do it, even if the majority of people in here agrees with the decision. Since there is no doubt about BoxeR having the biggest amount of fans among those two.
As a sidenote: If you are going to keep this rule, your way of doing it is absolutely brilliant. You've done an excellent job - no doubt about that - I just dont agree with the rule, that's all. So, by your logic, taking the win away from BoxeR with his 99% chance to win would be ethically fair?Okay chap. It would yeah. It's not Nightend's fault that BoxeR disconnects. Yet he's the one who gets punished. It's not Nightend's fault he disconnects, no. But he isn't awarded the win, becuase he was LOSING.
This proves you truly not get it. Giving Nightend the win was never the question.
If Nightend has 1% of winning the game and Boxer D/C you can't punish Nightend for it by taking away that 1% so a regame would be the only option.
|
On March 20 2011 08:03 integral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:01 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:58 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:55 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:50 integral wrote: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:
[quote]
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? Wow, now you're being intentionally obtuse. Go to TLPD for SC2 Korea and international and sort by ELO for each race. See how many there are not in the tournament? Are most of them not already in the TSL? How would you go about contacting players NOT in the TSL for their opinions? oGs and teamliquid share a team house. How do you think they contacted minchul? I'm facepalming so hard right now.
Why are you assuming that it would be easy for the TSL organizers to get non-TSL related top progamers to comment and write an indepth exposition about their decision? The people related to the TSL have an obligation to do anything they can do keep it running smoothly and fairly. The people who aren't? lol... And, coming back to my first point - do you think any top progamer not in Prae or Slayers would have given a shit about doing this? Unless TSL is paying their judges, I don't see why they would.
|
On March 20 2011 08:09 VuFFeR wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:04 SpiZe wrote:On March 20 2011 08:01 VuFFeR wrote:On March 20 2011 07:40 ftd.rain wrote:On March 20 2011 07:27 VuFFeR wrote:
I think there is something ethically wrong with giving the win to BoxeR. I realize that he had 99% chance to win, but taking that 1% chance of turning the game around away from Nightend, is like punishing him for something he didn't do. Imo. it should have been a rematch.
That being said I suppose i'm just more of a theorist than a practician. I don't like to have subjectivity influence the tournament if it can be avoided in any way.
Another point, i want to make, is, that I'm not sure wether you can be absolutely sure that this is the proper way to do it, even if the majority of people in here agrees with the decision. Since there is no doubt about BoxeR having the biggest amount of fans among those two.
As a sidenote: If you are going to keep this rule, your way of doing it is absolutely brilliant. You've done an excellent job - no doubt about that - I just dont agree with the rule, that's all. So, by your logic, taking the win away from BoxeR with his 99% chance to win would be ethically fair?Okay chap. It would yeah. It's not Nightend's fault that BoxeR disconnects. Yet he's the one who gets punished. How does NightEnd is being punished? He had lost. + It's not BoxeR fault either if he gets disconnected. Isn't it pretty obvious... they remove his 1% chance of winning. As little as that may seem it's still a chance. That combined with the whole issue of blending subjectivity into a rule is a bad cocktail if you ask me.
They're removing his 1% chance of winning as opposed to boxer's 99% chance of winning. Which is false as boxer had already won, maybe you should read the first post in the thread before you start to comment.
|
On March 20 2011 08:09 VuFFeR wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:04 SpiZe wrote:On March 20 2011 08:01 VuFFeR wrote:On March 20 2011 07:40 ftd.rain wrote:On March 20 2011 07:27 VuFFeR wrote:
I think there is something ethically wrong with giving the win to BoxeR. I realize that he had 99% chance to win, but taking that 1% chance of turning the game around away from Nightend, is like punishing him for something he didn't do. Imo. it should have been a rematch.
That being said I suppose i'm just more of a theorist than a practician. I don't like to have subjectivity influence the tournament if it can be avoided in any way.
Another point, i want to make, is, that I'm not sure wether you can be absolutely sure that this is the proper way to do it, even if the majority of people in here agrees with the decision. Since there is no doubt about BoxeR having the biggest amount of fans among those two.
As a sidenote: If you are going to keep this rule, your way of doing it is absolutely brilliant. You've done an excellent job - no doubt about that - I just dont agree with the rule, that's all. So, by your logic, taking the win away from BoxeR with his 99% chance to win would be ethically fair?Okay chap. It would yeah. It's not Nightend's fault that BoxeR disconnects. Yet he's the one who gets punished. How does NightEnd is being punished? He had lost. + It's not BoxeR fault either if he gets disconnected. Isn't it pretty obvious... they remove his 1% chance of winning. As little as that may seem it's still a chance. That combined with the whole issue of blending subjectivity into a rule is a bad cocktail if you ask me. EDIT: And no! i do not think he dc'ed deliberately.
If you read the analyses, you'll see that most of the judges felt it wasn't even a 1% chance of winning.
It was pretty concrete of the outcome.
|
It's a horrible thing to happen, but it's hard to disagree with the decision. All of those panelists are respected and gave really, really nice detailed explanations for their decisions.
As others have said, it's a credit to TSL that they provided us with all of this information and admitted what they feel are the flaws in the system (to be revised later).
|
On March 20 2011 08:10 Qaatar wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:03 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 08:01 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:58 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:55 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:50 integral wrote: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:
[quote]
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? Wow, now you're being intentionally obtuse. Go to TLPD for SC2 Korea and international and sort by ELO for each race. See how many there are not in the tournament? Are most of them not already in the TSL? How would you go about contacting players NOT in the TSL for their opinions? oGs and teamliquid share a team house. How do you think they contacted minchul? I'm facepalming so hard right now. Why are you assuming that it would be easy for the TSL organizers to get non-TSL related top progamers to comment and write an indepth exposition about their decision? The people related to the TSL have an obligation to do anything they can do keep it running smoothly and fairly. The people who aren't? lol... And, coming back to my first point - do you think any top progamer not in Prae or Slayers would have given a shit about doing this? Unless TSL is paying their judges, I don't see why they would.
I'm not assuming it would be easy any more than you're assuming it would be hard. I'm saying it needs to happen regardless.
|
Can someone representing TSL please respond to my issue with Cloud? Will his analysis be released?
|
On March 20 2011 08:10 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:05 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 08:01 VuFFeR wrote:On March 20 2011 07:40 ftd.rain wrote:On March 20 2011 07:27 VuFFeR wrote:
I think there is something ethically wrong with giving the win to BoxeR. I realize that he had 99% chance to win, but taking that 1% chance of turning the game around away from Nightend, is like punishing him for something he didn't do. Imo. it should have been a rematch.
That being said I suppose i'm just more of a theorist than a practician. I don't like to have subjectivity influence the tournament if it can be avoided in any way.
Another point, i want to make, is, that I'm not sure wether you can be absolutely sure that this is the proper way to do it, even if the majority of people in here agrees with the decision. Since there is no doubt about BoxeR having the biggest amount of fans among those two.
As a sidenote: If you are going to keep this rule, your way of doing it is absolutely brilliant. You've done an excellent job - no doubt about that - I just dont agree with the rule, that's all. So, by your logic, taking the win away from BoxeR with his 99% chance to win would be ethically fair?Okay chap. It would yeah. It's not Nightend's fault that BoxeR disconnects. Yet he's the one who gets punished. It's not Nightend's fault he disconnects, no. But he isn't awarded the win, becuase he was LOSING. This proves you truly not get it. Giving Nightend the win was never the question. If Nightend has 1% of winning the game and Boxer D/C you can't punish Nightend for it by taking away that 1% so a regame would be the only option.
Why is punishing one player because he lost 1% of a chance to win more fair than punish a player that will lose 49%? No player has control when he disconnects, and both decisions will harm one player or the other, considering the facts of the game, it's obvious you have to make a decision.
What do you propose? Always having a regame? That's obviously abusable.
Always having a regame if the player who disconects has any real disavantage? That's already subjective.
Declaring a loss if someone disconnects? That's just unreasonable.
|
On March 20 2011 08:10 integral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:08 SpiZe wrote:On March 20 2011 08:06 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 08:05 SpiZe wrote:On March 20 2011 08:03 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 08:01 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:58 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:55 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:50 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:49 mizU wrote:
[quote]
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? Wow, now you're being intentionally obtuse. Go to TLPD for SC2 Korea and international and sort by ELO for each race. See how many there are not in the tournament? Are most of them not already in the TSL? How would you go about contacting players NOT in the TSL for their opinions? oGs and teamliquid share a team house. How do you think they contacted minchul? I'm facepalming so hard right now. Who would you have picked then? ANYONE NOT IN THE TOURNAMENT THAT IS A HIGH-LEVEL PLAYER. lol... srsly. You didn't get what I mean't. Names. Wtf, why would I need to list all the viable candidates? ... I'm not running this tournament, it's not my responsibility to come up with a list of players that are neutral, respected, independent parties. That responsibility is TL's. Anyone in good standing not in the tournament is fine.
You are the one the one saying they didn't handle it properly. I don'T ask you to make a 20 name lits, I say that you should say propose 5 other good players, that have credibility, deep understanding of the game that could have be chosen. It's not your responsability but the fact is that most of "neutral, respected, independent parties" are already in the tournament. They probably could have come up with some more people but time is also a factor. The issue needed to be adressed so they could move on. You also do not want information leaking out.
For my part, MC opinion was enough. If the best protoss in the world and arguably the best player in the world says there was no way for the protoss to win this game, then the protoss was done.
|
On March 20 2011 08:12 integral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 08:10 Qaatar wrote:On March 20 2011 08:03 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 08:01 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:58 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:55 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:50 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:49 mizU wrote:On March 20 2011 07:47 integral wrote:On March 20 2011 07:44 mizU wrote:
[quote]
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? Wow, now you're being intentionally obtuse. Go to TLPD for SC2 Korea and international and sort by ELO for each race. See how many there are not in the tournament? Are most of them not already in the TSL? How would you go about contacting players NOT in the TSL for their opinions? oGs and teamliquid share a team house. How do you think they contacted minchul? I'm facepalming so hard right now. Why are you assuming that it would be easy for the TSL organizers to get non-TSL related top progamers to comment and write an indepth exposition about their decision? The people related to the TSL have an obligation to do anything they can do keep it running smoothly and fairly. The people who aren't? lol... And, coming back to my first point - do you think any top progamer not in Prae or Slayers would have given a shit about doing this? Unless TSL is paying their judges, I don't see why they would. I'm not assuming it would be easy any more than you're assuming it would be hard. I'm saying it needs to happen regardless.
I'm not assuming anything that directly affects my judgment - your judgment (that it NEEDS to happen) is based on your assumption. There are a variety of other factors as well - the participants could very well bribe the judges, and probably many more possibilties of "bias" and "conflicts of interest" that you are so ardently arguing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
6359
3209
424
EPT
