• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 21:44
CEST 03:44
KST 10:44
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4
Community News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack1Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0
StarCraft 2
General
Lost money due to a cryptocurrency investment scam Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation
Tourneys
[GSL 2025] Code S:Season 2 - RO8 - Group A Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 $3,500 WardiTV European League 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals RECOVER LOST BTC USDT FUNDS RECLAIMER COMPANY [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET NA Team League 6/8/2025
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread What do you want from future RTS games? Armies of Exigo - YesYes? Nintendo Switch Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 31287 users

[TSL] Day 1 Disconnect Situation - Page 33

Forum Index > PokerStrategy.com TSL3 Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 31 32 33 34 35 48 Next All
Vorenius
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
Denmark1979 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-03-20 01:22:46
March 20 2011 01:19 GMT
#641
On March 20 2011 10:00 VuFFeR wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 20 2011 09:46 JackDino wrote:
On March 20 2011 09:39 VuFFeR wrote:
On March 20 2011 09:27 JackDino wrote:
On March 20 2011 09:21 VuFFeR wrote:
On March 20 2011 09:12 JackDino wrote:
On March 20 2011 09:06 VuFFeR wrote:
On March 20 2011 08:55 Vorenius wrote:
On March 20 2011 08:46 VuFFeR wrote:
On March 20 2011 08:43 JackDino wrote:
[quote]
So, if the player is 99.99% losing it should be a regame because he shouldn't be punished for a dc, but if a player is losing 98% and he dcs it's his fault and he should get the loss? Yeah, makes perfect sense.

Please be so kind as to tell me why that doesn't make sense.
In the first case it should be a regame so he won't get punished
Now the other way around he loses so we don't encourage deliberate dcs.

You are still missing the point.
The judges ruled that boxer was gonna win the game with 100% certainty. If they had been in doubt at all it would have gone to regame.

Consider a game where a terran player refuses to leave after losing to a 4gate. He floats his CC away and AFKs.
Then the toss puts down a stargate makes a voidray flies it towards the last remaining building and then DCes on teh way there. Would you have that game be replayed aswell?

In both games the judges would have ruled that the guy had won with 100% certainty and awarded him the game, so it is in fact the same situation.
Just because you fail to realise boxer had the game won doesn't mean it wasn't true.

And if you would have a game like the one I outlined above re-played then you are either trolling or clueless. Either way there is no points arguing with you :s

EDIT: I only just realised you have 12 posts total >_<
Nvm, then. Enjoy you ban.


You cant have 100% certainty to win in sc2 only in "very few" scenarios (im sure there would be a way to work around that) besides i doubt any pro gamer with a sponsor would ever do that, it wouldn't exactly be good publicity. That he had won the game (100%) certain was an opinion, not a fact. If you refuse to comprehend that, then there is no point in discussing this.

Ps. Why should i get banned for giving my opinion? That's what the forum is here for now isn't it?

EDIT: @JackDino: there is no point in argueing about what would happen in an offline tournament. Simply because this isn't.

Yes there is, because it could just as well happen in an offline tournament, you saying this isn't an offline tourney is simply admitting you are wrong.

No there isn't. He would dc under completely different circumstances. I tell you there is no point in discussing it. Then we'd have to build up a whole new scenario... it would fx. be cruzial wether there were cameras on him so you could see if he deliberately left the game and so on.... Trying to merge all sorts of scenarios into the discussion isn't benefiting unless it has some kind of relevance to the topic. And i personally don't think that an offline tournament has that.

Exactly the same thing could've happened at an offline tournament. The only problem here is you thinking people dc on purpose, which is why there is a panel. If you would actually read the OP properly(You really haven't done that), you would know that dcing when you're winning wouldn't give you a win.
You want as little people as possible to judge yet you want to judge when to and when not to judge.
The people in the panel are professionals, if a single 1 of them would've said nightend could've won they would've rematched, a single one. If you would understand when people can and can't win you might make it up there.
Life isn't fair, better get used to it.


I have read the OP. Cheap shots aren't gonna get you anywhere. God i hate arguing with people who aren't interested in understanding eachother. There is no "winning" in this arguement if that's what you are looking for. We just have two way of seeing things.

That being said. BoxeR could (if he had known about this rule) have dc'ed deliberately to avoid that 1% chance of losing - even with the panel. You gotta take these things into account. Even if they are only hypothetical. Being a pro sc2 gamers doesn't neccesarily make you good at taking these kinds of decisions. They "can" be biased. I'd much rather watch BoxeR than NightEnd myself - if i were given the choice to let BoxeR go through... hell i would do it. Mainly because i'm such an irrational bastard. ^_^ - anyways ... only wasting time on this debate. I've made my point clear and so have you. I just hope that TL reevaluate the rules.

Good night.

The reason it's impossible to understand you is because you keep contradicting yourself, using different standarts that are fine according to YOU yet saying OTHERS aren't allowed to decide those exact things.


I see, my point is simply too advanced for you Jokes aside. Tbh. the only thing there is to understand is that i want to minimize the use of judges to the absolute minimum. To be VERY specific. And in this situation i didn't see the need for one, because there still was a chance of NightEnd winning. I think this game still was to uncertain to judge on. I think it should be even more obvious who is gonna win, before you go away from a rematch. I'm talking like 20 marauders vs 1 probe and a nexus. To me that would be okay to judge in BoxeR's favor. This game was still too open. Eventho' a panel said otherwise. - I know my opinion isn't "mainstream", but that's really how I feel. I'm not trying to piss anybody off, but this would just make so much more sense in "my" head. - In and ideal world we wouldn't need judges, but we do. The least we can do is to try to minimize the use of them.

EDIT: Typo

Yeah 20 marauders versus 1 probe and it's obvious who will win of course.
And 20 maraduers versus 1 stalker and it's still obvious.
Then 20 marauders versus 2 stalker. versus 10 stalkers. etc..

So you just need someone to come in and judge wether or not it's obvious who wins a certain game. Well guess what. That's exactly what happened!

The fact that you think you know better than Morrow, Nazgul and MC (yes, that is what you just said) really makes the mind boggle. They said boxer was obviously gonna win. You say he wasn't. Well sorry, if I take the double GSL champion's word over yours.

You are essentially proposing the exact thing that happened, you just haven't bothered to think it through and see what it would actually mean. You even admit this yourself in the latest post, even if you don't realise it yourself.

EDIT: You making jokes about people not understanding your posts, while you don't even understand what your own suggestion denotes = priceless
Kvothe
Profile Joined September 2010
201 Posts
March 20 2011 01:25 GMT
#642
On March 20 2011 10:00 VuFFeR wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 20 2011 09:46 JackDino wrote:
On March 20 2011 09:39 VuFFeR wrote:
On March 20 2011 09:27 JackDino wrote:
On March 20 2011 09:21 VuFFeR wrote:
On March 20 2011 09:12 JackDino wrote:
On March 20 2011 09:06 VuFFeR wrote:
On March 20 2011 08:55 Vorenius wrote:
On March 20 2011 08:46 VuFFeR wrote:
On March 20 2011 08:43 JackDino wrote:
[quote]
So, if the player is 99.99% losing it should be a regame because he shouldn't be punished for a dc, but if a player is losing 98% and he dcs it's his fault and he should get the loss? Yeah, makes perfect sense.

Please be so kind as to tell me why that doesn't make sense.
In the first case it should be a regame so he won't get punished
Now the other way around he loses so we don't encourage deliberate dcs.

You are still missing the point.
The judges ruled that boxer was gonna win the game with 100% certainty. If they had been in doubt at all it would have gone to regame.

Consider a game where a terran player refuses to leave after losing to a 4gate. He floats his CC away and AFKs.
Then the toss puts down a stargate makes a voidray flies it towards the last remaining building and then DCes on teh way there. Would you have that game be replayed aswell?

In both games the judges would have ruled that the guy had won with 100% certainty and awarded him the game, so it is in fact the same situation.
Just because you fail to realise boxer had the game won doesn't mean it wasn't true.

And if you would have a game like the one I outlined above re-played then you are either trolling or clueless. Either way there is no points arguing with you :s

EDIT: I only just realised you have 12 posts total >_<
Nvm, then. Enjoy you ban.


You cant have 100% certainty to win in sc2 only in "very few" scenarios (im sure there would be a way to work around that) besides i doubt any pro gamer with a sponsor would ever do that, it wouldn't exactly be good publicity. That he had won the game (100%) certain was an opinion, not a fact. If you refuse to comprehend that, then there is no point in discussing this.

Ps. Why should i get banned for giving my opinion? That's what the forum is here for now isn't it?

EDIT: @JackDino: there is no point in argueing about what would happen in an offline tournament. Simply because this isn't.

Yes there is, because it could just as well happen in an offline tournament, you saying this isn't an offline tourney is simply admitting you are wrong.

No there isn't. He would dc under completely different circumstances. I tell you there is no point in discussing it. Then we'd have to build up a whole new scenario... it would fx. be cruzial wether there were cameras on him so you could see if he deliberately left the game and so on.... Trying to merge all sorts of scenarios into the discussion isn't benefiting unless it has some kind of relevance to the topic. And i personally don't think that an offline tournament has that.

Exactly the same thing could've happened at an offline tournament. The only problem here is you thinking people dc on purpose, which is why there is a panel. If you would actually read the OP properly(You really haven't done that), you would know that dcing when you're winning wouldn't give you a win.
You want as little people as possible to judge yet you want to judge when to and when not to judge.
The people in the panel are professionals, if a single 1 of them would've said nightend could've won they would've rematched, a single one. If you would understand when people can and can't win you might make it up there.
Life isn't fair, better get used to it.


I have read the OP. Cheap shots aren't gonna get you anywhere. God i hate arguing with people who aren't interested in understanding eachother. There is no "winning" in this arguement if that's what you are looking for. We just have two way of seeing things.

That being said. BoxeR could (if he had known about this rule) have dc'ed deliberately to avoid that 1% chance of losing - even with the panel. You gotta take these things into account. Even if they are only hypothetical. Being a pro sc2 gamers doesn't neccesarily make you good at taking these kinds of decisions. They "can" be biased. I'd much rather watch BoxeR than NightEnd myself - if i were given the choice to let BoxeR go through... hell i would do it. Mainly because i'm such an irrational bastard. ^_^ - anyways ... only wasting time on this debate. I've made my point clear and so have you. I just hope that TL reevaluate the rules.

Good night.

The reason it's impossible to understand you is because you keep contradicting yourself, using different standarts that are fine according to YOU yet saying OTHERS aren't allowed to decide those exact things.


I see, my point is simply too advanced for you Jokes aside. Tbh. the only thing there is to understand is that i want to minimize the use of judges to the absolute minimum. To be VERY specific. And in this situation i didn't see the need for one, because there still was a chance of NightEnd winning. I think this game still was to uncertain to judge on. I think it should be even more obvious who is gonna win, before you go away from a rematch. I'm talking like 20 marauders vs 1 probe and a nexus. To me that would be okay to judge in BoxeR's favor. This game was still too open. Eventho' a panel said otherwise. - I know my opinion isn't "mainstream", but that's really how I feel. I'm not trying to piss anybody off, but this would just make so much more sense in "my" head. - In and ideal world we wouldn't need judges, but we do. The least we can do is to try to minimize the use of them.

EDIT: Typo


Your point isn't advanced at all, it's actually very simple. It's great that you want to minimize using judges, but that just is not the best solution. This is real life, where choices are not just black and white. This is why the whole civilized world uses judges. It is the best possible solution we have, TL used this solution. The only thing you can argue is that they didn't use the best possible judges, but with time constraints and both players agreeing to this, they used what they had.

You contradict yourself saying they should not rematch for disconnects that you yourself are judging to be 100% over. So why do you get to judge? You could actually say no game is 100% even one void ray vs a floating cc, if you want to be particular about it. Therefore you either have to claim every disconnect as a rematch or use outside judges to determine it.
skyrunner
Profile Joined August 2009
371 Posts
March 20 2011 01:40 GMT
#643
I would say this is the best protocol possible for dealing with a dc. Im no expert but the players arguments were definitely compelling enough. Still would've been interesting to se clouds arguments.

Anyway, clutch star-sense by boxer... picking cloud that is
VuFFeR
Profile Joined September 2010
Denmark38 Posts
March 20 2011 01:41 GMT
#644
The point of argueing is to make eachother smarter.
Now that being said, yeah i realize that i have changed my statements slightly, but the bottomline has been the same all along. Avoid subjective win/lose decisions at all costs. Now tbh. i can see it won't work to just play rematch no matter what, but in this specific case we still had two armies on the map. The fact that the panel had to write long posts about why and how boxer would have won, just proves that there was a chance of NightEnd winning. Else they wouldn't have had to go so much into details. Imagine them(the panel) doing the same thing if there was only a probe and a nexus left vs 20 marauders. They wouldn't now would they?

I have never stated that i know better than Morrow, Nazgul and MC... in fact i've done the exact opposite. I said I was an irrational bastard. I have no idea why you cant argue as an adult. Putting words in my mouth, threatning me with bans etc... not nice! T_T
The only thing I know, is that I don't know anything
PaladiN_23
Profile Joined August 2010
84 Posts
March 20 2011 01:42 GMT
#645
very good decision imo, and we as a community appreciate that you guys gave us all an explanation of the decision. keep up the good work.
Tiorda
Profile Joined May 2010
United States91 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-03-20 01:44:10
March 20 2011 01:43 GMT
#646
The players agree the rules beforehand, and had the opportunity to know who was on the panel, and given veto privileges.

Based on the fact that the rules were agreed upon by both players in advance of the games...I'd say any argument is irrelevant.

Props to TL for making this as transparent as possible.
BasilPesto
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Australia624 Posts
March 20 2011 01:45 GMT
#647
One of the reasons why I love TL.
"I before E...*sunglasses*... except after C." - Jim Carrey
HowitZer
Profile Joined February 2003
United States1610 Posts
March 20 2011 01:45 GMT
#648
I think the process is right but I don't agree with the judgement. I've watched thousands of replays and losing one battle doesn't always determine the outcome of the game. The p still had good eco and was reinforcing his cannoned expo. He would have been able to fend off boxer since he would be reinforcing from gateways close by where as boxer would have to send units across the map. The game ultimately would have been decided later on by something else. I think a replay of game 2 was the correct decision. My suggestion is to give the player with a disadvantage a little more benefit of the doubt.
Human teleportation, molecular decimation, breakdown and reformation is inherently purging. It makes a man acute.
PinkPrincess
Profile Joined July 2010
United States149 Posts
March 20 2011 01:47 GMT
#649
On March 20 2011 09:35 quirinus wrote:
Show nested quote +
For sake of discussion and transparency we will say that Tyler thought it was over and Cloud thought it was a re-game.


I think you should re-word this, it isn't clear enough that those are NOT Tyler's and Cloud's opinions. (if I understand correctly)

It's pretty clear that those were indeed their opinions.
Grumpity grump
pigscanfly
Profile Joined April 2010
Singapore147 Posts
March 20 2011 01:48 GMT
#650
On March 20 2011 10:41 VuFFeR wrote:
The point of argueing is to make eachother smarter.
Now that being said, yeah i realize that i have changed my statements slightly, but the bottomline has been the same all along. Avoid subjective win/lose decisions at all costs. Now tbh. i can see it won't work to just play rematch no matter what, but in this specific case we still had two armies on the map. The fact that the panel had to write long posts about why and how boxer would have won, just proves that there was a chance of NightEnd winning. Else they wouldn't have had to go so much into details. Imagine them(the panel) doing the same thing if there was only a probe and a nexus left vs 20 marauders. They wouldn't now would they?

I have never stated that i know better than Morrow, Nazgul and MC... in fact i've done the exact opposite. I said I was an irrational bastard. I have no idea why you cant argue as an adult. Putting words in my mouth, threatning me with bans etc... not nice! T_T


I find it funny that you admit that you're irrational in one sentence and ask us to argue like adults in the next.

Anyway, you still haven't answered who gets determines what a subjective win/loss situation is? What you're arguing for, and what other people have already pointed out, is that since you're no longer arguing for a rematch in all cases, in which case who decides when to rematch and when not to rematch? If you're going to say the people who are best qualified, that's exactly what TL have attempted to do in this case.
Candles
Profile Joined February 2011
United Kingdom103 Posts
March 20 2011 01:49 GMT
#651
While watching the match I thought the decision was wrong, but I can't argue with the process and people who know a lot more than I do seem to think the match is over.

Congratulations on dealing with this issue in not only a fair, but also transparent way.
Thingdo
Profile Joined August 2009
United States186 Posts
March 20 2011 01:49 GMT
#652
I appreciate the transparency on this.

Even during the games I agreed with the call, but its still nice to hear the thinking that went into it. <3 TL.
Kvothe
Profile Joined September 2010
201 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-03-20 01:53:12
March 20 2011 01:52 GMT
#653
On March 20 2011 10:41 VuFFeR wrote:
The point of argueing is to make eachother smarter.
Now that being said, yeah i realize that i have changed my statements slightly, but the bottomline has been the same all along. Avoid subjective win/lose decisions at all costs. Now tbh. i can see it won't work to just play rematch no matter what, but in this specific case we still had two armies on the map. The fact that the panel had to write long posts about why and how boxer would have won, just proves that there was a chance of NightEnd winning. Else they wouldn't have had to go so much into details. Imagine them(the panel) doing the same thing if there was only a probe and a nexus left vs 20 marauders. They wouldn't now would they?

I have never stated that i know better than Morrow, Nazgul and MC... in fact i've done the exact opposite. I said I was an irrational bastard. I have no idea why you cant argue as an adult. Putting words in my mouth, threatning me with bans etc... not nice! T_T


I think you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. Think of some physical sporting events and how they use judges. It might put this in better perspective. Sometimes it comes down to humans to make an opinion call, this happens all the time in the real world in all kinds of different sports. It's something that is inevitable. The rules were there before the event and they stood by them, if you can accept judges calling sports such as boxing, you should have no problem having matches being judged in SC2 where it's far more easier.
salvagebar
Profile Joined January 2011
United States10 Posts
March 20 2011 01:53 GMT
#654
If only many companies, especially those that ran MMO's, had panels that had this much in-depth knowledge about their game, and this much confidence in their authority and ability to mediate disputes. Most of all, I am very impressed at the willingness to act decisively and with so much transparency.

Kudos TeamLiquid. You just gained a lot of respect from me.
Hoson zes, phainou / Meden holos su lupou.
VuFFeR
Profile Joined September 2010
Denmark38 Posts
March 20 2011 01:55 GMT
#655
Well with two "okayish" armies left on the map, i think it's unfair to call it a win for BoxeR.
If i had just come to that conclusion right away, we had probably not been discussion now. But yeah, debating with my roomie made me realize a thing or two.

Cant you say you are an irrational bastard in an adult arguement? Im pretty sure you can.
The only thing I know, is that I don't know anything
bkrow
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Australia8532 Posts
March 20 2011 01:55 GMT
#656
On March 20 2011 10:41 VuFFeR wrote:
The point of argueing is to make eachother smarter.
Now that being said, yeah i realize that i have changed my statements slightly, but the bottomline has been the same all along. Avoid subjective win/lose decisions at all costs. Now tbh. i can see it won't work to just play rematch no matter what, but in this specific case we still had two armies on the map. The fact that the panel had to write long posts about why and how boxer would have won, just proves that there was a chance of NightEnd winning. Else they wouldn't have had to go so much into details. Imagine them(the panel) doing the same thing if there was only a probe and a nexus left vs 20 marauders. They wouldn't now would they?

I have never stated that i know better than Morrow, Nazgul and MC... in fact i've done the exact opposite. I said I was an irrational bastard. I have no idea why you cant argue as an adult. Putting words in my mouth, threatning me with bans etc... not nice! T_T

We get it; you want all results decided in game.. But how can you just ignore the 19min that happened and the clear advantage that BoxeR had. Personally i tipped Nightend in an upset, so the outcome doesn't make me happy but at the end of the day TL has taken the most professional and unbias approach to the situation.

Subjective decisions are never going to be the best method of determination but that is why there is a panel; your whole argument is based on an entire 19min game (which is a long game in SC2 standards) to be ignored, which is simply unacceptable.

We appreciate the way you have approached this TL and the ways that you have kept the community informed

<3333
In The Rear With The Gear .. *giggle* /////////// cobra-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA!!!!
VuFFeR
Profile Joined September 2010
Denmark38 Posts
March 20 2011 01:58 GMT
#657
On March 20 2011 10:52 Kvothe wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 20 2011 10:41 VuFFeR wrote:
The point of argueing is to make eachother smarter.
Now that being said, yeah i realize that i have changed my statements slightly, but the bottomline has been the same all along. Avoid subjective win/lose decisions at all costs. Now tbh. i can see it won't work to just play rematch no matter what, but in this specific case we still had two armies on the map. The fact that the panel had to write long posts about why and how boxer would have won, just proves that there was a chance of NightEnd winning. Else they wouldn't have had to go so much into details. Imagine them(the panel) doing the same thing if there was only a probe and a nexus left vs 20 marauders. They wouldn't now would they?

I have never stated that i know better than Morrow, Nazgul and MC... in fact i've done the exact opposite. I said I was an irrational bastard. I have no idea why you cant argue as an adult. Putting words in my mouth, threatning me with bans etc... not nice! T_T


I think you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. Think of some physical sporting events and how they use judges. It might put this in better perspective. Sometimes it comes down to humans to make an opinion call, this happens all the time in the real world in all kinds of different sports. It's something that is inevitable. The rules were there before the event and they stood by them, if you can accept judges calling sports such as boxing, you should have no problem having matches being judged in SC2 where it's far more easier.


Ye well i get your point. I just think it was a wrong call and hence a wrong use of judges that could and should have been avoided.
The only thing I know, is that I don't know anything
Truthful
Profile Joined January 2011
United States38 Posts
March 20 2011 01:58 GMT
#658
your professionalism and transparency throughout handling this issued is unparalleled. great explanations with great analysis. gj
Makenshi
Profile Joined February 2010
Sweden2105 Posts
March 20 2011 01:59 GMT
#659
What i love about this thread is the best protoss in the world goes through it says 'no its just not winnable, boxer should be awarded the win GG'

but mr John Smith from Silver league, gold league, diamond or wherever they're from see's the games and goes 'NO! He's wrong. Nazguls evidence is wrong! Morrow is wrong! MC? He doesn't know shit about protoss!' can't help but laugh abit

And also loving the professionalism by TL, you're showing why you're the best community on the Internets. My hat is off to you sirs
Broodwich
Profile Joined February 2009
United States393 Posts
March 20 2011 02:07 GMT
#660
The best decision of the day award has to go to Boxer. Very prescient veto.
Prev 1 31 32 33 34 35 48 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
PiGosaur Monday
00:00
#35
PiGStarcraft545
CranKy Ducklings150
SteadfastSC122
davetesta35
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft521
RuFF_SC2 157
SteadfastSC 122
ROOTCatZ 52
Nina 47
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 26044
Sea 1965
Artosis 862
Icarus 8
Sharp 6
Dota 2
LuMiX1
League of Legends
tarik_tv9291
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor106
Other Games
summit1g10222
shahzam1360
WinterStarcraft215
ViBE213
Maynarde117
Sick68
Trikslyr18
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1051
BasetradeTV123
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH255
• rockletztv 59
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• Ler34
League of Legends
• Shiphtur1382
Other Games
• Scarra853
Upcoming Events
GSL Code S
7h 46m
Rogue vs GuMiho
Maru vs Solar
Online Event
22h 16m
Replay Cast
1d
GSL Code S
1d 7h
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
1d 8h
Replay Cast
1d 22h
WardiTV Invitational
2 days
OSC
2 days
Korean StarCraft League
3 days
SOOP
3 days
[ Show More ]
CranKy Ducklings
3 days
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
Cheesadelphia
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
GSL Code S
4 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Wardi Open
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.