UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-15-2014, 04:28 PM   #1
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Tournament Morality

I found an article on Nugget Bridge earlier today. I had originally planned on sharing it with Shuckle since just the other day he had been lamenting how he wants to use Mega Blastoise as an all-out attacker but he can't seem to make it work. But I wanted to read more of the article before posting. After all, who knows what I might find. Maybe the battler, Randy Kwa, would reveal that he was unhappy with Mega Blastoise's performance and that he had plans to drop it for something else. So I kept reading.

When I got to Kwa's final battle on the first day of the tournament -- one which he needed to win to qualify for Worlds -- I was disappointed to read this:
Quote:
For my 9th and final best-of-one swiss opponent, I faced Alec Rubin. This was a rare scenario where I was paired upwards for the final round, facing a player who was at 7-1. I had a few people mention to me that I should ask my opponent to throw the match, which I wasn’t particularly comfortable doing.

In the end, when we sat down at the table before our match, I mentioned the situation I was in. A loss for him didn’t mean much, but this match would decide whether my 2014 run would continue or not. Afterwards, he suggested that we would play the battle as normal, but if it looked like he would win the match, he would forfeit.
Translation: "I knew it was wrong to do, but I did it anyway because WORLDS, MAN! ;_;" Bleh. I sympathize, but I believe that Kwa made the wrong choice. Not only that, but if Nintendo finds out about this, I wonder if it could have negative consequences for Mr. Rubin (Kwa's final opponent) as well. In the greater world of tournament sports, spectators and entry-level players hate it when the top players throw their matches strategically in order to ensure that each of them makes it to the next round and not any of the up-and-coming newbies. In fact, it's in most tournament organizers' best interests to stamp out such collusion lest the public lose confidence in the fairness of their hosted events.

Perhaps you would differentiate between agreeing to throw a match and actually doing it. Well, unfortunately:
Quote:
Alec’s Rotom lands a critical hit with a -4 Overheat against my Venusaur, taking it out and all but sealing the game in his favour. On the next turn, he sticks to his word and forfeits the match.

7 – 2

I thanked Alec for what he did, of which he simply mentioned that he felt that I deserved to have a chance to play in Day 2. So, in an act of mercy, I ended Day 1 with a 7-2 record, keeping my dream alive for a Worlds invite.
Kwa admits that he would indeed have lost were it not for Rubin's strategic forfeit.

I understand that Rubin was just trying to be nice. Furthermore, I do not know for a fact that the mens' actions cost anyone a seat at Worlds. For all I know, even with a final score of 6-3 Kwa would have still placed 16th at Nationals and earned himself a spot at Worlds. But if they indeed cost someone else the seat, if perhaps there were some other 7-2 and this 7-2 got screwed out of advancing because their points were just shy of Kwa's, then Rubin's decision caused more harm than good in my opinion.

Thing is, I don't see anyone in the comments section echoing my sentiments. Everyone congratulates Kwa on advancing to Worlds, even those who draw attention to the fact that he only managed the feat owing to Rubin's gentlemanly forfeit. And don't get me wrong! I agree that Rubin, for his part in these affairs, acted the part of a gentleman. But I don't think that changes the fact that what they did is technically immoral in a tournament setting. If it's a casual event, okay, fine, do whatever. But when people's hopes and dreams of going to Worlds are pinned on this event, and when someone else has earned a score of 7-2 but he or she doesn't get to go to Worlds because there was Randy Kwa with a score of 7-2 thanks to Rubin's forfeit and with slightly better tiebreaker points than them, then it just doesn't feel right. Do you agree with me? Do you disagree with me? I could use the feedback, because I'm genuinely surprised that no one else brought this up in the comments section for the original article.

For those of you with experience in the VGC community and/or the Nugget Bridge community, tell me: is it common practice to do what Rubin did for Kwa? Is it considered sporting in the VGC community? Would Rubin have been vilified for taking the match seriously, not throwing it, and costing Kwa a guaranteed seat at Worlds?

If you want to use this thread to discuss non-VGC examples, feel free. It's why I opted to title it generically in the end. I figured that people may wish to reply to me by means of analogies with other tournaments. I also figured that people may prefer to discuss other tournaments period. One example that comes to mind right off the bat is the World Cup preliminaries where Germany and the United States found themselves in a similar position to Rubin and Kwa. I'm sure one can find many other similar examples.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2014, 10:19 PM   #2
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Anyone who's read Fukumoto would probably reach similar sentiments: if you cheat and get away with it, you deserve the spoil. It's Nintendo's responsibility to track down this kind of cheating and punish it accordingly. It's not like these guys made the collusion a huge secret, either.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 09:56 AM   #3
rotomotorz
Think ye can take me?
 
rotomotorz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Probably in the US
Posts: 2,524
Its was technically cheating but like Doppel said, if you cheat and get away with it, than so be it
__________________
o O O
o
TS__[O]
{======|_|""T""|_|""r""|_|""a""|_|""i""|_|""n""|
/o--000'"`-0-0-'"`-0-0-'"`-0-0-'"`-0-0-'"`-0-0-'
Squad Summary

rotomotorz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 10:22 AM   #4
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by rotomotorz View Post
Its was technically cheating but like Doppel said, if you cheat and get away with it, than so be it
Doppel's romanticizing a series of stories we enjoy reading/watching. Whether he wants to actually espouse that view or not is his own business, but for what it's worth it is incompatible with his religion's teachings, so ... (I'm pretty sure Catholicism doesn't condone sinful behavior that goes uncaught.)

As for you, let's put it this way: say you were the guy who got 17th place at Nationals this year. Would you be saying to me then what you're saying to me now? "Eh. It's okay. He didn't get caught, so dem's da brakes. No punishment necessary, no apology to me necessary. It's all cool. It's my own fault that I didn't make it to Worlds despite legitimately fairing better than he did." I feel like the fact that the players colluded like this and that they are so open about it -- that he has the audacity to blog about it on Nugget Bridge for all to see! -- speaks volumes about either Nintendo's apathy or else their lack of awareness. And given the company's track record with tournaments they organize, I think it's fairly safe to say that it's the latter, not the former. These are the same people who officially flip out if you use a legal but hack-generated Pokémon. (Even though generations of VGC tournament goers have used lol-obvious Pokésaved creatures.) I'm supposed to believe that they're not okay with that yet they're okay with collusion? Nn-nn.

I imagine that both of the players involved are otherwise nice people. Especially the one who forfeit, as he was the one in the position of granting a favor, trying to be sporting, etc. But that doesn't change the fact for me that if their action cost someone a seat at Worlds then they should be punished for what they did. Barred for one year from tournament play would be an appropriate punishment. One year isn't that long in the grand scheme of things, but it's not so short either as to be utterly meaningless. It would also send a clear message to other players. "If you forfeit when you're clearly winning, our judges reserve the right to bring this to the attention of the committee in charge of disqualifying players. And if they find that you had no good reason to forfeit at the time you did, then you will be disqualified from the tournament. In the course of their investigation, if they should also discover evidence that the person who you forfeit against was involved in arranging your forfeit, then that player will also be disqualified from the tournament."
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 11:34 AM   #5
phoopes
Double Dragon
 
phoopes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,776
Interesting. Sounds a bit like yaocho to me. Though the big difference here is that afaik there's no limit to the amount of sumo wrestlers that can move up a rank, whereas there's obviously a limit in making Top 16 at VGCs.
__________________
phoopes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 11:53 AM   #6
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoopes View Post
Interesting. Sounds a bit like yaocho to me. Though the big difference here is that afaik there's no limit to the amount of sumo wrestlers that can move up a rank, whereas there's obviously a limit in making Top 16 at VGCs.
And if you know anything about sumo, you know that cheating has nearly ruined the sport. I don't mean in my personal opinion: I mean in the eyes of the vast majority of Japanese. The Japan Sumo Association was forced to act in 2011 when undeniable evidence became public that several stablemasters and wrestlers were guilty of strategically throwing matches. Had the JSA not acted, it would have only further decimated the public's enthusiasm for the sport. And even though they did act, I think most people today still aren't too fond of sumo since it's seen as 1) rigged and 2) a favorite of the underworld. (The latter, ironically, despite the fact that it was also the favorite sport of the late Showa emperor.)

But yeah, your sumo analogy is right on the money. Quoting Wikipedia:

Quote:
Popularized in Levitt's book Freakonomics, the study found that 70% of wrestlers with 7–7 records on the final day of the tournament (i.e., seven wins and seven losses, and one fight to go) won. The percentage was found to rise the more times the two wrestlers had met, and decrease when the wrestler was due to retire. The study found that the 7–7 wrestlers win around 80% of the time when statistics suggest they have a probability of winning only 48.7% of the time against their opponents. Like Benjamin, the authors conclude that those who already have 8 wins collude with those who are 7–7 and let them win, since the 8-win wrestlers have already secured their ranking.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 12:28 PM   #7
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
I know nothing about the issue so have avoided the thread but... what? You're ok with cheating as long as no-one finds out? You can make that argument for going 80 on the motorway but cheating in any kind of game is surely completely unacceptable?
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 11:07 PM   #8
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Doppel's romanticizing a series of stories we enjoy reading/watching. Whether he wants to actually espouse that view or not is his own business, but for what it's worth it is incompatible with his religion's teachings, so ... (I'm pretty sure Catholicism doesn't condone sinful behavior that goes uncaught.)
Actually a theme in Jinsei wa Hikikomogomo!. My conclusion is it depends on the type of cheating, and who is harmed.

For example, let's say someone has the chance to cheat with a high chance of not getting caught on a standardized test. It's their last attempt allowed by organizational mandate. This test determines if one becomes licensed for some profession. You are highly intelligent and capable at your job, but are weak against this style of test. Let's say that you, the test taker, face huge financial penalties (loans) if you don't pass, which you have no way to pay off, and nobody else is disenfranchised by you passing the exam. In fact, it's probably a good thing for you to pass because your school gets you as a connection, reaps from you as a successful alumni donating back, and the workforce gains a valuable employee. Getting this job puts you in a position of power and authority with which you can provide many good deeds for other people, such as sponsorship or volunteering.

Nobody gets punished if you are cheat and are not caught. If you fail the exam or are caught cheating, the nature of the punishment differs, but the end result is still devastating to you (and society). You could risk passing on your own, but you've already failed a bunch of times and knowingly have a weakness for the exam. The only tangible benefit to you from a secular perspective for not cheating is you feel good about finally overcoming a big hurdle for you. From a religious perspective, especially the Roman Catholic, the argument is obeying God's will in not cheating lead to your passing.

I personally don't believe in the justification for the latter, because what if you failed? Does that mean that God deemed you un-worthy, in spite of all your talents, effectively damning you to a horrific end on Earth? That this punishment you are about to experience for what is effectively a minor sin that won't even guarantee you a ticket to heaven when you die because it's so minor, was worth remaining honest? No way.

Religion pretends to ignore the tails side of that coin flip, instead stressing on the success and how it was all due to God. I'm more of the opinion that faith in God provides the motivation and confidence to do what you have to do to pass the test, and in this rational cheating - or overcoming the obstacle - is a fairly viable alternative path to success.

Now, in something like Pokemon, I take the pro-cheating position only because I think that Nintendo screwed up by not being able to police this kind of thing. Humans are fairly predictable in how they behave in scenarios like this. There's no reason to expect every person is honest, and that competitive people look for every advantage possible. Given this, while traditionally one would ascribe the cheater at fault for cheating, I think within this context Nintendo is more at fault since they should have foreseen it coming, and have the resources to protect against it. It's one thing to expect honour and integrity out of an organization or school that makes an ideology out of it. It's another to expect it from adults playing a kid's video game about cock-fighting.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2014, 09:33 PM   #9
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
Well I personally don't condone cheating of any form, and I don't know what Dopple is on about.

Secularly, civilization is all about preventing cheating of any kind. If cheating is allowed, even if it's "as long as you don't get caught," then the winners aren't the ones who legitimately do well - it's the ones who cheat. There should always be a huge crackdown on cheating. Companies and innocent people lose millions of dollars a year from embezzlers and fraudsters.

From a religious perspective, cheating is EVEN WORSE: how did everyone treat Judas, who turned Jesus in for 40 pieces of silver? Betrayal and fraud are the two inner rings of Dante's Inferno for a pretty damn good reason (ha).
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2014, 04:00 AM   #10
Slash
Silver LO
 
Slash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Tokyo Underground Sewage Facility
Posts: 6,760
Send a message via Yahoo to Slash Send a message via Skype™ to Slash
Pretty sure it was 30 pieces of silver, not 40. Then again I'm not a Christian.

I honestly don't see how this is cheating. He merely explained his situation and his opponent made a choice.

And Doppel makes a good point. And by good I mean terrible. Clearly in any situation where one ends up getting something they otherwise would not have, someone else who didn't do what they did, who might be legitimately deserving of it on merit, does not. You getting the theoretical job means that someone who may have been better qualified but did not cheat doesn't get that job, and therefore misses out. And this theoretical person who is more honest than the one cheating probably makes an even more positive impact on society with his or her newfound position that they actually earned.

However, I don't see this specific circumstance in that way. The opponent was the one who made the choice to forfeit, of his own free will, and it looks like Kwa didn't even actually ask him to take a dive, either, but merely explained his situation.

As well, many competitive players get upset with hax, and a -4 Overheat critting a Venusaur to take it out is most definitely hax. Maybe this detail is what made Alec decide to stick to what he had said and forfeit. Or maybe he was just a nice guy and decided to help someone out. Either way, I don't see it as wrong or as Kwa cheating.
Slash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2014, 04:14 PM   #11
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kairne View Post

Clearly in any situation where one ends up getting something they otherwise would not have, someone else who didn't do what they did, who might be legitimately deserving of it on merit, does not.
The world is not homogenously zero-sum, zero-sum is always a special case of real world interactions, therefore the premise of this observation is invalid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kairne View Post

You getting the theoretical job means that someone who may have been better qualified but did not cheat doesn't get that job, and therefore misses out.
My issue with this is why you superficially allow for the possibility of there being no one more qualified, but you don't really acknowledge it as a valid permutation. What if one is legitimately the most meritous person, but still can't pass the exam and meet society's demand? You would deny them on the failures of the other students, from which you (with no basis) claim that one of them could have more potential?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kairne View Post

And this theoretical person who is more honest than the one cheating probably makes an even more positive impact on society with his or her newfound position that they actually earned.
You can't claim this without showing that honesty is tangibly better for society than dis-honesty, and given the ruthless, backstabbing and impersonal nature of business I don't agree. Given the petty politics and involved in academia and middle management, I don't agree. Given the huge increases in revenue and technological advancement since the middle ages, the last era where spiritual integrity was highly prized, I don't see it at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kairne View Post

However, I don't see this specific circumstance in that way. The opponent was the one who made the choice to forfeit, of his own free will, and it looks like Kwa didn't even actually ask him to take a dive, either, but merely explained his situation.
Look down:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kairne View Post

Clearly in any situation where one ends up getting something they otherwise would not have, someone else who didn't do what they did, who might be legitimately deserving of it on merit, does not.
Since Kwa didn't earn his win, he shouldn't have had it, at least according to this sentence (which I might add, does not account for luck either). QED, right?
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2014, 04:32 PM   #12
SoS
Ducks gonna duck
 
SoS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kairne View Post
Pretty sure it was 30 pieces of silver, not 40. Then again I'm not a Christian.
It was indeed 30. Carry on.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Concept View Post
Why are you always a pretty princess?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son_of_Shadows View Post
Because I look damn good in a dress.
Fizzy Bubbles Team
PASBL
Wild Future
SoS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2014, 08:12 PM   #13
Loki
The Path of Now & Forever
 
Loki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,304
The strategic forfeit is extremely common in tournaments. I have personally seen it and done it in Magic tournaments myself and it is not discouraged by tournament runners. It all comes down to how the system of advancement is set up.

If X wins are needed to advance to the next round, why should I bother wasting my time and effort to win all Y of my matches?

Perhaps the more wins I have, the higher my likelihood of being placed with a stronger opponent. While this would make for better games, I would risk getting less wins in the next stage because of an potential upcoming loss, reducing my chances of a higher prize tier.

Perhaps I have a special secret I have yet to reveal. If I play more matches, people will eventually see it and I potentially lower my chances to win the following stage of the game.

Perhaps I'm tired and don't want to play anymore. If I conserve my strength, I can have more in the next level of the tournament. Fatigue is a large part of long tournaments and can affect your decision making, your skill, your overall performance.

For me, it comes down to whether it hurts me to help someone in such a situation. If I win this upcoming game, I gain ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, but if my opponent gets a win, he gets a higher prize tier. Clearly if he was only one win away, it really isn't like he was completely incompetent. So in a sense, this forfeit is an act of altruism. I've given him the gift of continuing in the tournament rather than becoming the evil boogeyman who ended his tournament life.
Loki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2014, 05:30 AM   #14
Slash
Silver LO
 
Slash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Tokyo Underground Sewage Facility
Posts: 6,760
Send a message via Yahoo to Slash Send a message via Skype™ to Slash
Loki, I think I love you in a totally heterosexual way.
Slash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2014, 05:50 AM   #15
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
I generally don't agree with any kind of cheating, but I don't think what Rubin or Kwa did in their situation was necessarily wrong. If Nintendo investigated, I don't think Kwa should be punished. He wasn't necessarily coercive towards Rubin.

But this does bring another point, on a slightly smaller scale. Loki talked about strategic forfeiting and I know that in YGO, going second the first game, forfeiting, and going first the second game is often done for quite a few reasons (otherwise known as scooping). It's not on the same level of throwing a win away, but it was done enough that Konami disallowed at some point (it was in a recent tournament and Dopple made a somewhat angry post about it). But I think it makes a good point on even on a small scale, forfeiting like this is looked down upon.
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2014, 12:53 PM   #16
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
All of that sounds like hand-waiving the moral issue of the scoop denying another entry into the tournament to clear conscience of wrongdoing, which I personally find more despicable than simply being honest about it.

I won't deny the strategic importance of the scoop - heck, I do it ALL THE TIME on Dueling Network to intentionally screw my opponent out of satisfaction and information - but that's not quite the topicality Talon's looking for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87
Thing is, I don't see anyone in the comments section echoing my sentiments. Everyone congratulates Kwa on advancing to Worlds, even those who draw attention to the fact that he only managed the feat owing to Rubin's gentlemanly forfeit. And don't get me wrong! I agree that Rubin, for his part in these affairs, acted the part of a gentleman. But I don't think that changes the fact that what they did is technically immoral in a tournament setting. If it's a casual event, okay, fine, do whatever. But when people's hopes and dreams of going to Worlds are pinned on this event, and when someone else has earned a score of 7-2 but he or she doesn't get to go to Worlds because there was Randy Kwa with a score of 7-2 thanks to Rubin's forfeit and with slightly better tiebreaker points than them, then it just doesn't feel right. Do you agree with me? Do you disagree with me? I could use the feedback, because I'm genuinely surprised that no one else brought this up in the comments section for the original article.
It isn't about Rubin, who could have scooped for his own strategic reasons. It was about Kwa and the collusion with Rubin, and how Kwa unfairly displaced another player with a win he didn't deserve. Even pointing out to Rubin how it's strategically in his benefit to scoop is immoral from Kwa's point of view because of the benefit to him. An analogy would be to hint to a bank robber your dad was at the bank during the robbery, hoping the robber kills him and nets you life insurance. Even if the robber doesn't put two and two together, you attempting that was immoral.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2014, 05:18 PM   #17
Slash
Silver LO
 
Slash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Tokyo Underground Sewage Facility
Posts: 6,760
Send a message via Yahoo to Slash Send a message via Skype™ to Slash
We're talking about a video game, let's not compare this to legitimately illegal actions where someone could easily get murdered.
Slash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2014, 09:40 PM   #18
Loki
The Path of Now & Forever
 
Loki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,304
Um... That's not a good analogy at all.

The Swiss system is actually pretty awful because of how wild the results can be. The failings of the system is what allows things like this to happen.

I can advance to the next round in a Swiss system by being luckily placed in a group of entirely inferior players. Meanwhile, all the players superior in skill to me could be placed in a different grouping. Did I deserve to advance to the 2nd tier of the tournament even though I have inferior in skills than the entirety of another group?

And what if I score high enough in the earlier stages of noobslaying in the tournament that when I am finally placed in a higher skilled group that my undefeated record up to that point is now so strong that all my coming losses still don't knock me out of the lead. My opponent has faced players of much higher caliber and only just got by with their skills. Now he crushes me and yet I am still looking to take the championship title.

These flaws are built into the Swiss system. Luck is unfortunately a part of it aside from things like critical hits or misses or poor draws or masterful top decks. Pairings is ultimately out of the players hand in every way because at least when you lose to hax or mana screw or shit draws, you made that Pokemon Team or deck and knew the chances.

Your chance of being stuck in the group of death at a Swiss tournament is entirely out of your hands. And if you're lucky enough to be paired off with a player willing to forfeit to allow you to advance, that's another sign of luck on your side the same as other factor could help you advance.

EDIT: A better analogy for the situation would be two people drowning. Both are trying to swim but won't last long. You can only save one. One is closer to you. You save him and had to let the other guy drown. Are you a murderer? No.

Last edited by Loki; 08-21-2014 at 09:50 PM.
Loki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2014, 10:19 PM   #19
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki View Post
Um... That's not a good analogy at all.
How isn't it? I don't agree with yours:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki View Post
A better analogy for the situation would be two people drowning. Both are trying to swim but won't last long. You can only save one. One is closer to you. You save him and had to let the other guy drown. Are you a murderer? No.
How are you, the rescuer, at fault in this scenario? You are trying to do something noble by saving a person, not attempting to do something you know is wrong and benefits you. Maybe if one of the people drowning was a hot girl, and you saved her with the expectation of some 'reward' over the other person, would this analogy actually incorporate some conflict of interest moral bent.

The point of my analogy was attempting to cheat is dishonest - whether you did or not, you not only wanted to, you tried to, and that should be punished. Someone who brings in a cheat sheet to an exam but never actually uses it is still being dishonest. Most governments criminalize attempts at other crimes even if they never manifest, like "attempted murder" or "conspiracy to...".

What I said earlier in the thread about "if you cheat and get away with it, kudos" already assumes an immoral person and places fault on the system not catching the illegality. So, blaming the system for being unfair and driving Kwa to cheat doesn't somehow absolve him of any wrongdoing, it just shows that Nintendo's system sucks and encourages abuse. I dunno enough about this organized Pokemon but I assume this is a Smogon-based tournament, so if that's the case people should be rightfully pissed since the entire Smogon philosophy is anti-luck. The system not only disrespects what Smogon stands for, it encourages behaviour that no one stands for.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2014, 10:23 PM   #20
Heather
Naga's Voice
 
Heather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: somewhere gay idk
Posts: 3,279
I will supplement that VGCs are thankfully not regulated by Smogon and only by Nintendo/Game Freak themselves.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveTheFishGuy View Post
Quoth the Honchkrow (nevermore!).
Fizzy Member Post: Catherine Park
Heather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2014, 11:15 PM   #21
Loki
The Path of Now & Forever
 
Loki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,304
Sorry dude, but I don't think my chances are high enough to play against a hot girl and scoop to her to let her get a win in a MTG tournament so I get to hook up with her later.

I'm saying luck threw them into the ocean of unfairness. Maybe the ebb and flow of the tide might bring one out, but there's no way of knowing. If I can help one, why wouldn't I?

As for Talon's supposed other "7-2 who earned it." We actually don't even know if such a person exists. What if everyone else at the tournament was 6-3 or worse? What if Kwa didn't make it and the point cut off meant the last spot wouldn't be filled and instead the next round people would get BYEs? If that's the case, by letting Kwa through, Rubin has effectively increased his chances of losing because he no longer receives a BYE.

We can never know what would have been. All we know is this: Rubin decided to give Kwa the chance. Did he have ulterior motives? Not that we know of. He was being nice. Kwa didn't ask him to do it. And Rubin didn't walk over to the other guys who might have had qualified and snapped their necks.

Is it cheating? Sure. Is it morally wrong? I'd say no.
Loki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2014, 11:54 PM   #22
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki View Post
I'm saying luck threw them into the ocean of unfairness. Maybe the ebb and flow of the tide might bring one out, but there's no way of knowing. If I can help one, why wouldn't I?
You risk drowning yourself. That's a big argument against Rubin helping out Kwa, but from what you've said there was almost no risk on his side. I think if there's a moral fault here, Rubin has less stain since he actually has a strategic reason for scooping himself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki View Post
As for Talon's supposed other "7-2 who earned it." We actually don't even know if such a person exists. What if everyone else at the tournament was 6-3 or worse? What if Kwa didn't make it and the point cut off meant the last spot wouldn't be filled and instead the next round people would get BYEs? If that's the case, by letting Kwa through, Rubin has effectively increased his chances of losing because he no longer receives a BYE.
I made this exact argument against Kairne, so here's my answer: it doesn't matter if that person exists or not. You were willing to screw someone over, so the intent was there, so it's immoral. If Kwa had never asked Rubin for help, but Rubin reasoned out the benefit to himself and still scooped, we still have the same issue of an "unqualified" player making it through the elimination round, but neither Kwa nor Rubin are anymore immoral. They didn't try to get around the rules. The intent and intent alone is what makes them guilty in this case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki View Post
Is it cheating? Sure. Is it morally wrong? I'd say no.
I think it's morally wrong, but I don't necessarily see it as cheating.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2014, 06:16 PM   #23
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Looks like TPCi did take note. In their latest copy of the 2015 Play! Pokémon rulebook, they note in the appendix:

Quote:
Changes for August 1, 2014
  • Updated general info and formatting
  • Updated section 4. to add rules regarding sales at Pokémon venues.
  • Updated section 6.1:
    • Updated and clarified player responsibilities.
  • Updated section 10.:
    • Concessions may be offered but not requested.
    • Clarified that choosing methods like Paper, Rock, Scissors count as random determination of a match.
So I went up to look at Section 10 and found this:

Quote:
10.1. Conceding a Match
Players may offer to concede a match to their opponents if they wish, and judges should allow players the opportunity to offer a concession if time is called on an incomplete match but before the players sign their match slip. Players are not permitted to request their opponents concession. Repeated requests of this nature may be perceived as coercion and penalized as such.

If a player wishes to concede a match to his or her opponent, a judge or score runner must be called immediately and notified of the concession so that the result can be recorded appropriately. Once the match slip has been signed by both players, the result of the match cannot be changed.
So while you are still allowed to forfeit, TPCi has specifically added a new rule forbidding the requesting of forfeits. Unfortunately, the rule seems rather vague and wishywashy: "repeated requests," they note, "may be perceived as coercion and penalized as such." So you have to do it multiple times -- and there's no clearly defined minimum on what that means. Two times? Three times? Ten times? And as if that weren't bad enough, they're saying that you only "may" be penalized. Not that you will be penalized. So that's a little unfortunate. Adding the rule is a step in the right direction imo and shows that they at least care to the extent of placating players like myself ... but the current wording makes me feel like I'm just being smiled at and nodded to by an organization that has no real plans for punishing such players. I guess we'll just have to see. I imagine that the next time this happens in a tournament setting and costs someone their advancement, they'll be over to the judges' table faster than you can say "Blitzle."
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:23 PM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.