logo

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 85 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 4:11 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:08 pm
Posts: 8394
Continuing the discussion for those who have more to say.

_________________
Click here to check out all the people who have realized the truth. Someday you will, too.

"I would really, really like to not have anything else happen at the end of the round other than things just ending." -- Sithborg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 5:26 pm 
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 7:17 am
Posts: 2931
To answer your question would I still choose the same side if it wasn't Tim?

Yes. I have done it myself in wrestling and I know others have done it in different competitions. When seeding for a tourny and I was neither the first or second seed. Ive wrestled the first seed before in a very close match and strongly felt I could beat him in a rematch. On the other hand I knew absolutely nothing about the second seed and never once faced him. I lost the match to determine my seed so that I could have a rematch with the guy who was first seed and if be fate then face the unfamiliar 2nd seed in the finals. I won that tourny over the 2nd seed in the finals so as it turned out I would have won it regardless but still felt it was in my best interest.

I have seen it numerous times by others as well, sometimes just to get a rematch against someone who beat them before. hell my brother did it because our cousin was the second seed and thought wouldn't it be cool if we were in the finals together.

As Bill said before, in a tournament setting, you are allowed to do anything in the rules to give you an advantage.

In short, to answer your question, Yes, I would still hold the same stance.

I don't know if you or anyone else would accept my answer or if you will just chalk it up to being biased, but I have no control over what you think of my opinions so I'll just stop there for now.

_________________
"But one thing I have learned in this process is that flavor can't override the good of the game."
-urbanshmi2-


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 6:24 pm 
Really Cool Alien from a Cantina
Really Cool Alien from a Cantina

Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 8:17 pm
Posts: 186
I was under the impression that Tim lost the game because doing so gave Jake, his friend and traveling buddy, the best chance to get into the top 4. Not to get a better matchup in the finals, or whatever motives everyone else is throwing around. Trust me, there was maybe one squad at that tournament that could have beaten Tim in a serious game, and that person had no chance at the top 4. Jake ended up losing his game, is all.

In any event, if someone wants to lose a game on purpose, so be it. I really don't understand all the fuss. Tim's skillful play put him in a position where he could afford to lose a game and still make the playoffs. If he thought, for whatever reason, that losing the fifth game was better than winning it, who are we to say otherwise? The theoretical player who would have gotten 4th place but didn't is no more punished by this decision than the other theoretical player who did get 4th would have if he hadn't thrown the game.

_________________
Image
GMB from ATL


Last edited by greentime on Mon Jun 04, 2012 6:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 6:26 pm 
Black Sun Thug
Black Sun Thug

Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 75
Alright sorry i have had a question all day and work has been extemly busy today and havent had the chance to ask this, however now is the best time for it.

Is the argument about not being sportsmanlike or attempting to manipulate the pairings because it has bounced between both subjects. The reason i ask this is because whos opinion does it come down to being unsportsmanlike.

The reason i ask this is not because i am offended by any means or want to call anyone out but would like to know where things were to sit at in a situation as such, Because being if it is then up to the player then i think my opponent would have called it unsportsmanlike of what i had done in the finals.

Lets go back to that evening i sat down against Wes. Wes had a great squad and i know that the damage out put in it was immense and not to mention the fact that the absorb energy would have given me fits. So i knew that personnaly my only chance of winning without compromising my chance at 3rd place was by lock out and that is what i did. I killed off the ugnaughts and lobot ran for cover and locked him out as i sat in gambit. It is a legal win however definatly not the best way to finish a game, especially if you are the one getting locked out. I admit it was a pretty crappy way for me to take 3rd but it was how it happened.

Well later that evening, Im not exactly deaf i can hear quite a lot, i heard him explaining to his friends what happened, after appologizing to him during the match and after it as well, how i beat him and how it was real sportsmanlike of me to do that. i know that the method sucks to be beaten by but if it is ruled by the player or could be conveyed to the judge that it was unsprotsmanlike should i have been disqualified as well?

Wes, this had just been something that had bothered me seeing this discustion going on. Like i said then at the event and i will say it now sorry about how i went about it, was it very in the "spirit of the game", No was it for me to win yes. but if it wasnt for that you would have mopped the floor of me left and right. Corran eats ercs and han for lunch and doesnt mention as back up cad was there. Wes you have a great squad man, your a good guy and i liked playing against you sorry the game ended the way that it did. But there is danville's regional and i look forward to seeing what you bring and schooling me.

_________________
"We can't start yet. My opponent had to get a new pair of pants."-Gunther


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 7:27 pm 
Really Cool Alien from a Cantina
Really Cool Alien from a Cantina

Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 8:17 pm
Posts: 186
Grand Moff Boris wrote:
It wasn't all that long ago he[Tim] was on the "watch list" for slow play at major events. When slow play was dealt with, then it just became some other manipulative trick that he found a way to abuse.


Grand Moff Boris wrote:
No one said anything disparaging about Tim as a person that I can see in this thread.


This is some sanctimonious nonsense. You blatantly accuse Tim of habitually cheating in one breath, of deviously digging out any chance to twist the rules he can find, then clutch your breast and wail that you just can't believe that anyone could possibly think that you're making any kind of attack. Gimmie a break.

_________________
Image
GMB from ATL


Last edited by greentime on Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 7:31 pm 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:29 am
Posts: 773
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
I have had one time I can remember where if I lost on purpose I could greatly help my opponent (and friend). Last year at GenCon in the last game of the Jedi Challenge my friend Tony Mullins was in 2nd place behind Tim and needed to win and have Tim lose to win the entire challenge. There was an entire custom VSet of minis for the winner on the line and I was playing Tony in an almost mirror match game. I had Luminara, Baris, R2astro, and 55 pt. saber throwing Yoda and Tony had the same with 55 point GOWK. Just a few minutes into our game with nothing really going yet, Tim (immediately behind Tony with his match) lost and conceded. Right then I considered throwing the game to help Tony win the entire custom set...unknown to him as he said nothing about it. I decided not to do it and wound up smoking him and insuring that he finished in 2nd place and Tim won the custom set. To this day I feel a bit bad for Tony for beating him, but would have felt worse if I had let him win. Tony never complained once about it and got really nice prize support for his excellent 2nd place finish. This was the only time I can remember being in a position to influence anything. Not sure if it would have been wrong to throw our game, but to me I just decided not to do it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:06 pm 
Name Calling Internet Bully
Name Calling Internet Bully
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:10 pm
Posts: 6172
Location: Gurnee, IL
WacoBlaze wrote:
This was the only time I can remember being in a position to influence anything. Not sure if it would have been wrong to throw our game, but to me I just decided not to do it.


I know I said I was done with this topic, and I am, but I wanted to comment on this one thing you said here, and I think it nails the issue.

You had the choice as the player. You chose one way to go about it. No judge should take that choice away from you. If you had chose to lose on purpose, no judge should take that choice away from you. It really doesn't matter what the particular motivation of the player is whether it be altruistic or selfishly motivated. Exactly like conceding a game early on for ANY reason.

If Matt and I were in such a position that him beating me, or me beating him at Gencon would get both of us in the finals, I would certainly make the best outcome happen for us. I have no problem with another player doing the opposite. But no one, no judge, and no other player has the right to take that away from you. It is your choice to do so, or not to do so. And no rule you can make can force me one way or the other. All it would do is simply make me do it quietly. And with that, I've said my piece.

_________________
Image

http://www.bloomilk.com/Squads/Search.aspx?UserID=29


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:28 pm 
Sith Apprentice
Sith Apprentice
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:27 am
Posts: 282
Location: swming in the 716.
@ SBSV... The same "sportsmanship" logic applies to what could have occured in our match eh? What if I elected "consciously" to avoid correcting your notion that you were up 6 pts for two Brutes brought in by Lobot? I could have easily turned that to my advantage and let you believe you were up in points and then drop the bombshell, assuming you held back.

Looking at the extensive commentary the problem as I see it is one of semantics vs ethics. If there is no clear way to address something that is "gray" then it is what it is. With a myriad of personalities within the SWM community all it takes is salient & respectful debate on subjects such as this for change to germinate, if warranted.

Lastly, for those of you who have met me this regional season; you know I play to win but that's the type-A showing his colors. Although I'll be routing for my compatriots, I will try to special order 937 them just as soon as look at them should I draw them. After all we are competing and at a regional event with the field that was just assembled...

Priority One...

Gather First Place Trophy for Mantle...

All Other Considerations Secondary...

Crew Expendable...

_________________
You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll kiss three bucks goodbye...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:38 pm 
Black Sun Thug
Black Sun Thug

Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 75
@Gerry thanks once again for the help, sometimes when reading everything it just becomes a complete mess in the head to decipher everything. And thanks once again for reminding me that those d*mn rodian brutes were not worth much except to eliminate you activations. lol

_________________
"We can't start yet. My opponent had to get a new pair of pants."-Gunther


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:42 pm 
Sith Apprentice
Sith Apprentice
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:27 am
Posts: 282
Location: swming in the 716.
Shawn no worries...

I was just using our recent encounter as an example to further illustrate the concept of choice in the thread.

_________________
You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll kiss three bucks goodbye...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:59 pm 
One of the Sith on Malgus' Shuttle
One of the Sith on Malgus' Shuttle
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 11:31 pm
Posts: 3575
Location: Cincinnati, OH
SvenBlackSunVigo wrote:
i know that the method sucks to be beaten by but if it is ruled by the player or could be conveyed to the judge that it was unsprotsmanlike should i have been disqualified as well?

What you did is perfectly legal and a simple strategy. It's not exactly fair, but there are no rules against winning by lockout.

I've had a similar win, where my opponent had a small squad and brought in the Muun Tactics Broker. About a fourth of the way through the game I realized that his fodder was extremely small to kill for the MTB. Then, instead of focusing my attacks on taking out his main attackers, I instead killed the rest of his fodder and forced him to take out his main attackers with the MTB. It felt a bit dickish for me to do it, but it was a fair strategy.

Now in neither of our cases did we do this to affect how later games could be affected. We were only thinking of our game, and our opponents were not losing on purpose to help us out. That's where it gets unsportsmanlike, when your opponent knows that by manipulating you he can get you unfairly into a place you should be and sets himself up for a potential easy win later by screwing up all the ratings.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 9:16 pm 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:17 pm
Posts: 5934
SvenBlackSunVigo wrote:

Lets go back to that evening i sat down against Wes. Wes had a great squad and i know that the damage out put in it was immense and not to mention the fact that the absorb energy would have given me fits. So i knew that personnaly my only chance of winning without compromising my chance at 3rd place was by lock out and that is what i did. I killed off the ugnaughts and lobot ran for cover and locked him out as i sat in gambit. It is a legal win however definatly not the best way to finish a game, especially if you are the one getting locked out. I admit it was a pretty crappy way for me to take 3rd but it was how it happened.


Dude there is nothing unsportsmanlike in what you did IMO. This rule has been around for years and if top players are not aware of it, that is there own fault. I would have done the same thing in your shoes. You took advantages of the situation and killed all of his door control. Then used the mechanics of the game to win. Nothing wrong with that. I have known others to do the same thing.

_________________
Really???....... DRINK


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 9:43 pm 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
billiv15 wrote:
Sorry Trevor, you are dqed from the 2008 National Championship because you didn't move Boba away for evade.

Actually, to set the record straight, I think what you're referring to is that I forgot to declare Draw Fire with R2P0 when your Han Scoundrel attacked Boba. My 20 hp Boba had just made 2 evade saves vs Luke's SS, and then when you said that Han is shooting at Boba too, I forgot to say "Draw Fire." :P

Anyway, now that the record is set straight, I've gotta say that I agree with Bill. :)

When we're speaking of "the spirit of the game" what is it that we're talking about? I know that Dennis has said that Tim's style of play (outactivate and then pound like crazy, then lock doors) was "against the spirit of the game" and unfair. My response is that Tim's style was entirely legal, and completely within the spirit of the game (defeat your opponent's pieces while minimizing the chances of your pieces being defeated). If that's the "spirit of the game" angle that people are taking in this debate, then I have to disagree heartily...it has nothing to do with the spirit of anything, but it's instead a matter of competitive-vs-noncompetitive mindsets.

We need to give some credit to Tim. It is patently unfair to accuse Tim of unsportsmanlike play. Wasn't it just a couple of weeks ago when Tim chose to accede to his opponent's desire in a rules dispute at another regional because "I wouldn't have felt right if I had won that way"? I said (and still believe) that Tim deserves the Uber-Sportsmanship Award for that Regional...and now people are accusing him of unsportsmanlike play here. Do leopards really change their spots that quickly? I certainly cannot see Tim trying to cheat here at all, and I even find it a massive stretch to say that he was trying to unfairly manipulate the tournament standings. Why?

Because the goal of every player, from the moment the tournament begins, is to do his/her best to advance to the playoff rounds, hopefully with a chance of making it to the final and winning it all. Normally (ie, 99.54% of the time) that [very] sportsmanlike goal equates to the tactic of, "Get a 3pt win every game that you can." In a very real sense, we're ALL trying to manipulate the standings with every game we play: we want to manipulate them by pushing ourselves to the top of the heap! :P

But Tim recognized in this tournament a situation where that same sportsmanlike goal led to a different tactic for achieving his goal. Tim had not stopped trying to win the tournament for a moment, but rather, his intentional loss was a carefully-calculated tactic to improve his chances at winning the tournament. His tactics changed for the last game, but his goal never did. He was fully in control of his tactics throughout the entire tournament, and he didn't make any decisions in collusion with anyone else. He simply looked at the tournament situation and (accurately) discovered that his best move was to lose his last game, rather than win. He broke no rules and engaged in no manipulative efforts at all, beyond what everyone else does in every game (ie, trying to improve their chances of winning the tourney).

If we're going to say that Tim was being unsportsmanlike by throwing the last game in order to increase his chances in the playoff rounds, then I think we also have to agree that Dr.Divot was unsportsmanlike by bringing a horrible map [Geonosis Arena] as his map for the Championships in 2007. Because it was a map that nobody else ever played on, it gave him an unfair advantage and was a tactic that nobody else had thought of. Or was he being unfair because he broke the unwritten rule of "Always bring a good map"? [I think it was a stroke of genius, for the record.] Likewise, it is not wrong to use override to your advantage when you've eliminated all of your opponent's door-control...this is just how the competitive game is played. Enough examples for now. ;)

So I want to reverse the question back to those who say that Tim's change of tactics was unsportsmanlike: What gives you the right to dictate which tactics a player uses to increase his odds of winning a tournament? Just because most players CHOOSE TO seek after 3pt wins 100% of the time doesn't mean that they MUST. IMO, changing the rules to say they must is absolutely a step in the wrong direction. I thought Russian communism died in 1989, lol....

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:00 pm 
Unnamed Stormtrooper
Unnamed Stormtrooper

Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 8:14 am
Posts: 2
Normally, I wouldn't comment. But I feel that I should comment, because I think this discussion is leading to a very unfair potential floor rules change.

Let's go into the theoretical for a moment. Let's say that the squad Tim put out of the top four would stomp him without question. 99% of the time he played that squad he would lose. And he knew that he would most likely play against that squad next should he win.

So, here we have Tim in a situation where losing is his best option. And you have just proposed implementing a rule where Tim has to work against his own best interest. Somehow, that doesn't seem very fair to me.

What's worse is that you've also created a situation where Tim is damned if he wins, but he could still be damned if he actually loses legitimately. Because now the judge could interpret a play mistake as intentional, and disqualify him for actually losing.

You are essentially forcing judges into a situation where they would have to evaluate the games of the top tier players to determine if their losses were legitimate or not. That doesn't seem to have a happy ending to it.

If you want to avoid situations like this in the future, then you should simply take the choice out of the hands of the players.

Let players play until they are definitely in the top 4/top 8, and then they sit out the last round to let the rest of the players earn their way into the top 4/8 by themselves.

Tim was undefeated with 12 points. The best that anyone else could have done was tie with him. At this point winning and losing only effect who else will be top 4, and nothing else. If you say, "Hey Tim, you've got a bye, and you're in top 4," he no longer can affect who can and can't get into top 4.

Plus, Tim wouldn't have to come to the boards and hear about how many people think he's a cheater/unsportsmanlike/etc for doing what he thought would help him win the tournament. Which is what everyone there was also trying to do.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:18 pm 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
Well-reasoned and argued. +1 :)

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:38 pm 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:45 pm
Posts: 3886
Back to the unfun subject.

I do think that this thread will lead to an unfair view on Tim. He is a very good player, and a great guy.

That said, it doesn't sit well with me. Okay, player A is trying to give himself an advantage by getting player B into the top 4. But what about all the other players? Affecting the standings doesn't affect only two players. It affects a whole range of players in the standings. But, it is almost unenforcable, along with coming up in extremely few situations. The bigger the tournament, the less likely this could become an issue. I don't think a "Tim's Law" would do anything more than make people a little less honest about it. Judges are human too. I don't anyone would be willing to DQ on such a proposed rule without being 110% sure. And I doubt that is possible without being outright told.

But, I may not be the most competitive mind. Lockout victories are perfectly legal, but they also don't sit well with me. To me, this is a game, meant to be played. It's why I didn't particularly enjoy my last two games, because even not making the game a complete NPE for my opponents, there was still nothing they could do to beat me.

I understand the thinking. I understand why some wouldn't have an issue with it. But other people have to understand why others don't like it. "Winning by any methods necessary" doesn't necessarily mean fun, which is why most got into this game to begin with.

_________________
Bloomilk Ambassador


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:45 pm 
Warmaster
Warmaster
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 2:35 pm
Posts: 677
Location: Danville IL
Sithborg wrote:
Back to the unfun subject.
I understand the thinking. I understand why some wouldn't have an issue with it. But other people have to understand why others don't like it. "Winning by any methods necessary" doesn't necessarily mean fun, which is why most got into this game to begin with.


I do as well. Believe me I'm all about having fun at tournaments which is why I have ran Belth Allusis, Leviathan and other just down right awful figs at local events. However there is at time and place for fun and a time to be serious and do what it must be done to win. I think a regional, especially a regional of the magnitude of Kokomo you are doing a disservice to yourself as well as the event if you are not doing your best to win the entire tournament.

_________________
Winning a tournament always allows doing whatever is within the rules to win. - Billiv15


[===0=]=============>


Sentinel for Life!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 11:03 pm 
Jedi Knight
Jedi Knight

Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 10:16 am
Posts: 328
From Sven
Quote:
Lets go back to that evening i sat down against Wes. Wes had a great squad and i know that the damage out put in it was immense and not to mention the fact that the absorb energy would have given me fits. So i knew that personnaly my only chance of winning without compromising my chance at 3rd place was by lock out and that is what i did. I killed off the ugnaughts and lobot ran for cover and locked him out as i sat in gambit. It is a legal win however definatly not the best way to finish a game, especially if you are the one getting locked out. I admit it was a pretty crappy way for me to take 3rd but it was how it happened.


I call BS here. Not against Sven but because I was specifically told I could not do this last year at the Tennessee Regional in the finals. I was told I could not lock out my opponent because I had the points lead and thus win the entire regional. I was playing Graham last year at the Tennessee regional and I had gotten a strong enough points lead, and calculated out that he could not catch me in the game and locked myself in the turbolift to eek out the cheap win. I am aware that it would be a cheap way to win, but I was under the impression that it wasn't legal for me to win by lockout because Daniel said I had to be making an effort to win the game by killing pieces. So would someone please clarify this rule for me. Is a Lockout win a legal win or not.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 11:52 pm 
Name Calling Internet Bully
Name Calling Internet Bully
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:10 pm
Posts: 6172
Location: Gurnee, IL
spryguy1981 wrote:
From Sven
Quote:
Lets go back to that evening i sat down against Wes. Wes had a great squad and i know that the damage out put in it was immense and not to mention the fact that the absorb energy would have given me fits. So i knew that personnaly my only chance of winning without compromising my chance at 3rd place was by lock out and that is what i did. I killed off the ugnaughts and lobot ran for cover and locked him out as i sat in gambit. It is a legal win however definatly not the best way to finish a game, especially if you are the one getting locked out. I admit it was a pretty crappy way for me to take 3rd but it was how it happened.


I call BS here. Not against Sven but because I was specifically told I could not do this last year at the Tennessee Regional in the finals. I was told I could not lock out my opponent because I had the points lead and thus win the entire regional. I was playing Graham last year at the Tennessee regional and I had gotten a strong enough points lead, and calculated out that he could not catch me in the game and locked myself in the turbolift to eek out the cheap win. I am aware that it would be a cheap way to win, but I was under the impression that it wasn't legal for me to win by lockout because Daniel said I had to be making an effort to win the game by killing pieces. So would someone please clarify this rule for me. Is a Lockout win a legal win or not.


It's legal. The punishment during swiss is typically that you'd get a 2 point win. That wouldn't apply in a final. You could get a warning for slow play (as in not attempting to win the game in the time allowed), but that's a bit of a stretch for the scenario you mentioned.

_________________
Image

http://www.bloomilk.com/Squads/Search.aspx?UserID=29


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Online
 Post subject: Re: Losing on purpose
PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 12:00 am 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:00 pm
Posts: 6583
Location: Southern IL
I've been reading this discussion all day, and after thinking about it a lot, I'm still rather conflicted. There are strong points on both sides of the debate.

Sithborg wrote above "To me this is a game, meant to be played". That's pretty much how I feel about it as well. I get the thought behind playing to set yourself up to win the whole tournament, but at the same time it just seems a bit odd to me to not go through each game trying to win it outright if possible.

The only times I've ever been "given" a win were in games with Jim Fraser, where he was the TO and judge and just wanted to play and enjoy himself along with everyone else, so it was basically like having a bye (but way more fun :) ). I highly doubt I'll ever find myself on either side of the situation being discussed here at a serious tournament, but if I do I hope I'll be trying to win that game, and save worrying about the next opponent until the pairings are announced. I don't see where facilitating someone who should have been soundly beaten to move on is good for the environment of the tourney as a whole. Possibly getting bad match ups is part of the deal.

Anyway, in spite of how I personally view this, I do think the choice belongs with the players who may find themselves in that position. I don't see anything good happening from trying to make rules against deliberately losing a game to get a better placement in subsequent rounds. If it doesn't meet the definition of stalling, then it is what it is. It may color the opinions of some players about other players based on their individual sense of what the "spirit of the game" is, but that too is a choice. It's a grey area, neither light nor dark.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 85 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Jedi Knights style by Scott Stubblefield