Apparently Macsed the GM player doesn't think that he can win the game even if he didn't make a mistake. What a joke.
Suspicious betting-odds changes at WESG 2018? - Page 19
Forum Index > SC2 General |
On March 14 2019 11:57 jy_9876543210 wrote: Macsed's response: "说下当时情况吧,第一盘打完我觉得这个人很菜,当然所有人都和我这么说,我也觉得他很菜,然后第二盘才会选择一个低保rush因为我觉得只要过去把他门口的兵营打了就能赢,但是我过去看到他家里有个兵营没开气我以为他要开2矿,我就封了他得气,一旦封了他拿什么打我低保?可我万万没想到他这个战术是rail教他的,因为在职业内战里面这种战术是不成立的,所以我就没多想。打完这场比赛rail跑过来疯狂炫耀说是我教的,因为他知道我会觉得他是菜鸟肯定会想快点结束,然后就家里一个兵营外面3个兵营来骗我。果真我被骗到了,当时被骗到了乱导致各种失误,但是我认为就算不失误这一盘我也赢不了,因为我家里已经挡不住了,他只要在外面开个基地农民传出来也是随便赢。哎都怪我,太丢人了" My translation: "The situation was, after the first map I thought this guy is weak, of course that's also what everyone's been telling me, and I felt the same. So on the second map I decided to cannon rush since I thought I could win by destroying the gateway in his base, but when I saw his base, there's a gateway but no gas, so I thought he's gonna expand, and I blocked his gas, so he can't stop my cannon rush. But what I didn't know was that it's rail who taught him this strategy, because he knew that I would try to finish this game quickly since I thought my opponent is weak, and he tricked me by one gateway in main base and 3 proxies outside. That totally got me, and resulted in a lot of mistakes from me. But I think even if I didn't make those mistakes, I still wouldn't win that map, since I couldn't defend my base, he could just make another base and recall the probes. It's my fault, this is an embarrassing game." | ||
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
Apparently Macsed the GM player doesn't think that he can win the game even if he didn't make a mistake. What a joke. | ||
Charoisaur
Germany15617 Posts
Ah yes, the classic gasless expand build in PvP, now I understand how he fell for it. | ||
NinjaNight
428 Posts
On March 15 2019 06:27 Charoisaur wrote: "but when I saw his base, there's a gateway but no gas, so I thought he's gonna expand" Ah yes, the classic gasless expand build in PvP, now I understand how he fell for it. Lmao, yes, even this is solid evidence that he's playing dumb. Anyone who believes a professional SC2 player can actually think in such a dumb way has a poor understanding of this game and has definitely not played it at a high level. I don't think I've ever seen someone directly arguing that Macsed is innocent. I've only seen people saying in game evidence shouldn't count, but those people are still dead wrong. The unanimous consensus is that he is guilty. The problem we have to solve is that some people argue that we don't have enough evidence yet. The reality is we have more than enough. BeastyQT took one look at that game and said there's no way he isn't matchfixing. It's beyond reasonable doubt when combined with the betting line evidence. I would actually be defending Macsed instead of going after him if the evidence wasn't so strongly against his case here. I had no problem with him prior to this incident. | ||
unrev
Canada46 Posts
Macsed said that he was tricked by the single gateway at main and that rail taught Seventy91 this build. But VanCaspel is saying that Senventy91 told him that he built this gateway by accident. | ||
AusProbe
Australia235 Posts
Source: talking to both of them over breakfast. Also in general, the pro Protoss players who have watched the replay at the venue seem to all think it wasnt match fixing. | ||
ZGLayr
2 Posts
On March 15 2019 06:42 unrev wrote: There seems to be a contradiction between Macsed's statement and WESG admin VanCaspel. Macsed said that he was tricked by the single gateway at main and that rail taught Seventy91 this build. But VanCaspel is saying that Senventy91 told him that he built this gateway by accident. I'd imagine macsed got "told" that rail showed the build to seventy91 without the information that the gateway was a mistake. | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12181 Posts
2. The changing of the betting lines is notable in degree, but not necessarily in amount. At first I thought maybe it wouldn't take a very large bet in order to change the betting lines that much (since, as others have said, this is one match out of many). But then I realized the amount is essentially immaterial when it comes to motive: a famous case is when Dota 2 player Solo threw a tournament game because he bet $322 against his team. 3. After reviewing the game, it is extremely odd to me that Pinnacle did not invalidate the bets. The events of this game are beyond suspicious. The cannon wall and pulling away the Probes that were about to kill both invading Zealots are just extremely incriminating examples. A Bronze player might do the former -- maybe -- but nobody, absolutely nobody would do the latter. 4. On the topic of MMR, I don't know exactly what 2000 MMR translates to in terms of win probability, but using the old 315 = 75 wins out of 100 games marker, 2000 would be what... 99%? 99.9%? Extremely improbable. 5. Confirmation bias exists. It is much easier to see suspicious behavior when you are looking for it. I'm just stating this as fact for the sake of general awareness, not relating it affirmatively or negatively to this instance. We should all just keep that in mind during discussions like this. | ||
Apom
France654 Posts
On March 15 2019 08:05 Excalibur_Z wrote:4. On the topic of MMR, I don't know exactly what 2000 MMR translates to in terms of win probability, but using the old 315 = 75 wins out of 100 games marker, 2000 would be what... 99%? 99.9%? Extremely improbable. If that metric is correct, -315 means 0.25 win rate, so -1890 means 0.25^6 win rate (approximately 0.02%). I'm not sure MMR is multiplicative that way but that should be the ballpark idea. | ||
Rob-Zero
Germany438 Posts
On March 15 2019 06:36 NinjaNight wrote: Lmao, yes, even this is solid evidence that he's playing dumb. Anyone who believes a professional SC2 player can actually think in such a dumb way has a poor understanding of this game and has definitely not played it at a high level. I don't think I've ever seen someone directly arguing that Macsed is innocent. I've only seen people saying in game evidence shouldn't count, but those people are still dead wrong. The unanimous consensus is that he is guilty. The problem we have to solve is that some people argue that we don't have enough evidence yet. The reality is we have more than enough. BeastyQT took one look at that game and said there's no way he isn't matchfixing. It's beyond reasonable doubt when combined with the betting line evidence. I would actually be defending Macsed instead of going after him if the evidence wasn't so strongly against his case here. I had no problem with him prior to this incident. So it seems you are investigator, police, lawyer and judge all in one person ? YOU don´t have anything to solve or any evidence to find. I´m not saying he did matchfix, nor am i saying he did not, but I´m pretty sure it is rather irrelevant what you personally think about all of this. If this is really a thing, then there will be some guys taking care of this, just like it happened with the ladder qualifiers some months ago. I find it absolutely okay when you or anyone else speculates and argues about this, but saying that "the unanimous consensus is that he is guilty" is not right, and it´s not okay. That is just a typical internet witchhunt of the lowest calibre possible. | ||
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On March 15 2019 08:05 Excalibur_Z wrote: 1. The accusations of matchfixing are life-altering and not to be thrown around lightly. Significant evidence is necessary to prove the existence of matchfixing. Just so we're on the same page about the gravity of the situation. . I think most of the people posting here know that even allegations of match fixing are extremely serious and are not to be taken lightly. the only reason i would post here is because the situation is so clear-cut and obvious. this isn't a 15 year old mkp losing his cool; macsed is a grown ass man who threw a match and no one would say so if it weren't so blatant | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12181 Posts
On March 15 2019 08:17 Alejandrisha wrote: I think most of the people posting here know that even allegations of match fixing are extremely serious and are not to be taken lightly. the only reason i would post here is because the situation is so clear-cut and obvious. this isn't a 15 year old mkp losing his cool; macsed is a grown ass man who threw a match and no one would say so if it weren't so blatant I know, it's just important to stipulate in order to alleviate bandwagoning. I know you and many others in this thread have been arguing in good faith and citing proper examples. | ||
NinjaNight
428 Posts
On March 15 2019 08:15 Rob-Zero wrote: So it seems you are investigator, police, lawyer and judge all in one person ? YOU don´t have anything to solve or any evidence to find. I´m not saying he did matchfix, nor am i saying he did not, but I´m pretty sure it is rather irrelevant what you personally think about all of this. If this is really a thing, then there will be some guys taking care of this, just like it happened with the ladder qualifiers some months ago. I find it absolutely okay when you or anyone else speculates and argues about this, but saying that "the unanimous consensus is that he is guilty" is not right, and it´s not okay. That is just a typical internet witchhunt of the lowest calibre possible. You're way off base here. It doesn't matter what I am. What matters is the evidence that I present. It's no coincidence that a few hours ago BeastyQT made a video analyzing this that happened to agree with everything I have already been claiming here for the last few days. If you won't accept my statements, accept his. He's a very intelligent strong former professional player. I say the unanimous consensus is that he is guilty because I have literally read every thread on every forum I'm aware of about this issue and I have yet to see a single person claim that he is innocent. There are many who claim he is guilty. However it's fine if you want to disagree with that because I can't see absolutely everything that is said about this match. Once again I wouldn't mind having my role reversed and being the only person defending Macsed's innocence if I wasn't nearly 100% sure he is matchfixing. I had no problem with the guy and things like this can only hurt the scene which I do not want, but integrity comes first. | ||
NinjaNight
428 Posts
On March 15 2019 08:05 Excalibur_Z wrote: 1. The accusations of matchfixing are life-altering and not to be thrown around lightly. Significant evidence is necessary to prove the existence of matchfixing. Just so we're on the same page about the gravity of the situation. 2. The changing of the betting lines is notable in degree, but not necessarily in amount. At first I thought maybe it wouldn't take a very large bet in order to change the betting lines that much (since, as others have said, this is one match out of many). But then I realized the amount is essentially immaterial when it comes to motive: a famous case is when Dota 2 player Solo threw a tournament game because he bet $322 against his team. 3. After reviewing the game, it is extremely odd to me that Pinnacle did not invalidate the bets. The events of this game are beyond suspicious. The cannon wall and pulling away the Probes that were about to kill both invading Zealots are just extremely incriminating examples. A Bronze player might do the former -- maybe -- but nobody, absolutely nobody would do the latter. 4. On the topic of MMR, I don't know exactly what 2000 MMR translates to in terms of win probability, but using the old 315 = 75 wins out of 100 games marker, 2000 would be what... 99%? 99.9%? Extremely improbable. 5. Confirmation bias exists. It is much easier to see suspicious behavior when you are looking for it. I'm just stating this as fact for the sake of general awareness, not relating it affirmatively or negatively to this instance. We should all just keep that in mind during discussions like this. Great post. The only thing I'd disagree with is the amount bet not being relevant. It's relevant because the logical deduction is that only a person who knows the match is prearranged would bet a huge amount of money on a player who is at such a massive skill disadvantage. Maybe you meant something else? | ||
cpower
228 Posts
| ||
Jarree
Finland1004 Posts
On March 15 2019 08:05 Excalibur_Z wrote: 3. After reviewing the game, it is extremely odd to me that Pinnacle did not invalidate the bets. The events of this game are beyond suspicious. The cannon wall and pulling away the Probes that were about to kill both invading Zealots are just extremely incriminating examples. A Bronze player might do the former -- maybe -- but nobody, absolutely nobody would do the latter. What happened in the game doesn't affect Pinnacle voiding bets or not. Nobody at Pinnacle watched the game. When a booker voids a bet, it's done because of betting patterns. There's couple of things the booker looks at (and these are automated by triggers): 1. Who placed the bets. This is the most important one. If it was done by regular bettors that have been using the site for a long time and often bet against the lines, it's not suspect. Low level matchfixers usually are pretty dumb and just create dummy accounts for the exact event and place bets on the games. That's extremely suspect and always a clear sign of faul play. Often they even operate several accounts from the same IP address. 2. Line movements. When and how fast did the line move, did some new information come out just then? Like if Messi breaks his leg 10mins before a Barcelona game, the odds shift as soon as the information gets out. But most importantly, how much does the line move, does it go to beyond absurd figures. The more well known the players (or teams) are, the less the lines can move, without new information. My initial guess what happened is that the information about MacSeD throwing the game leaked out of the inner circle of the fixers. The real fixers place bets mostly on illegal gambling sites in China. But as the information leaked, some more regular bettors used the information on Pinnacle. That's why the lines moved slower and didn't raise the alarm bells. There's even a good possibility that regular outsider bettors realized from the lines themselves that a fixing is happening and joined the betting. It's sort of like investing in a pyramid scheme knowing it's a pyramid scheme, but that you're one of the first and will get your money back, unlike others who lose. My 2 cents from being in the industry for 10+ years. edit: edited because the line was more confusing the helpful. | ||
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On March 15 2019 08:39 cpower wrote: Not sure if Macsed was matching-fixing but from what I know about this player, he pretty much goes all in early game every time and he sux at microing his units/multiple pronged attacks, how did he get to 6000 MMR in the first place? Am I missing something? he is the most notable chinese player at the moment. probably the best chinese protoss since LoveTT. the level of suckage at microing things goes beyond the norm here. it's not like he was playing against sOs. he was playing against a normal/hard AI in single player and making those mistakes. | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12181 Posts
On March 15 2019 08:39 NinjaNight wrote: Great post. The only thing I'd disagree with is the amount bet not being relevant. It's relevant because the logical deduction is that only a person who knows the match is prearranged would bet a huge amount of money on a player who is at such a massive skill disadvantage. Maybe you meant something else? I meant just from a motive point of view. If there is such a thing as a "sure bet" for a person, then that person will place the bet. I'm actually of two minds on it. You would want to bet high to maximize your return, but not high enough to arouse suspicion and void the bet. In the Solo example I gave, $322 certainly isn't life-changing money, but I don't know whether he simply couldn't afford a larger bet or if he chose a smallish bet to try and avoid suspicion. In any case, he was caught, so in that context throwing your career away for $322 sounds hilariously irresponsible. On March 15 2019 08:40 Jarree wrote: What happened in the game doesn't affect Pinnacle voiding bets or not. Nobody at Pinnacle watched the game. When a booker voids a bet, it's done because of betting patterns. There's couple of things the booker looks at (and these are automated by triggers): 1. Who placed the bets. This is the most important one. If it was done by regular bettors that have been using the site for a long time and often bet against the lines, it's not suspect. Low level matchfixers usually are pretty dumb and just create dummy accounts for the exact event and place bets on the games. That's extremely suspect and always a clear sign of faul play. Often they even operate several accounts from the same IP address. 2. Line movements. When and how fast did the line move, did some new information come out just then? Like if Messi breaks his leg 10mins before a Barcelona game, the odds shift as soon as the information gets out. But most importantly, how much does the line move, does it go to beyond absurd figures. The more well known the players (or teams) are, the less the lines can move, without new information. My initial guess what happened is that the information about MacSeD throwing the game leaked out of the inner circle of the fixers. The real fixers place bets mostly on illegal gambling sites in China. But as the information leaked, some more regular bettors used the information on Pinnacle. That's why the lines moved slower and didn't raise the alarm bells. There's even a good possibility that regular outsider bettors realized from the lines themselves that a fixing is happening and joined the betting. It's sort of like investing in a pyramid scheme knowing it's a pyramid scheme, but that you're one of the first and will get your money back, unlike others who lose. My 2 cents from being in the industry for 10+ years. edit: edited because the line was more confusing the helpful. Thanks for the info! I did have a feeling large swings trigger automated actions, but I also assumed there was some degree of manual review for suspicious cases after the fact. Maybe those only happen when the stakes are really high? Really great point about the identity of the bettor and their betting history. I never thought about the pyramid scheme angle, but it's logical. Good post! I saw your other post earlier in the thread outlining some of this stuff. Really cool to know. | ||
BigFan
TLADT24918 Posts
Macsed's explanation also isn't really helping his case imo. I am really curious now to see what comes of this. Beastyqt seemed really sure that he was matchfixing considering that he's a GM player with 8 year experience, but was careful about saying it. Guess we'll have to wait and see. | ||
cpower
228 Posts
On March 15 2019 08:44 Alejandrisha wrote: he is the most notable chinese player at the moment. probably the best chinese protoss since LoveTT. the level of suckage at microing things goes beyond the norm here. it's not like he was playing against sOs. he was playing against a normal/hard AI in single player and making those mistakes. according to aligulac, he is #8 in China and outside of top 100 non-korean. He's pretty underwhelming to me for someone who has 6000 MMR... http://aligulac.com/players/145-MacSed/ | ||
Jarree
Finland1004 Posts
On March 15 2019 08:51 Excalibur_Z wrote: I meant just from a motive point of view. If there is such a thing as a "sure bet" for a person, then that person will place the bet. I'm actually of two minds on it. You would want to bet high to maximize your return, but not high enough to arouse suspicion and void the bet. In the Solo example I gave, $322 certainly isn't life-changing money, but I don't know whether he simply couldn't afford a larger bet or if he chose a smallish bet to try and avoid suspicion. In any case, he was caught, so in that context throwing your career away for $322 sounds hilariously irresponsible. Thanks for the info! I did have a feeling large swings trigger automated actions, but I also assumed there was some degree of manual review for suspicious cases after the fact. Maybe those only happen when the stakes are really high? Really great point about the identity of the bettor and their betting history. I never thought about the pyramid scheme angle, but it's logical. Good post! I saw your other post earlier in the thread outlining some of this stuff. Really cool to know. You're correct about the manual review. That's of course possible and does happen, but that takes manpower and work so it's done usually in cases where the stakes are high. I read that Wax emailed them and got reply. I believe the support person just looked at the game from their system and there was no automatic triggers set. I don't believe they really went into it deeper. There was a large scandal in Finnish "pesäpallo" league (almost baseball :p), where the pyramid scheme type of thing happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_pesäpallo_match-fixing_scandal The scam was unveiled a year later. Finnish police interrogated 460 persons involving the scandal. Most of them were never charged due to lack of evidence or for the reason that they were only lucky gamblers who had a hint on the results of meaningless games. The information about the fix leaked and tons of people took advantage of it. Not everyone knew about it being 100% fix, but rumours spread easily the betting lines confirmed it for them. | ||
| ||