Is it a waste of time to play those who sandbag/play lame?

[Deleted member]

Just wanted to know people's stance on this. How do you feel about sandbaggers or those who decide to lame you out when at a disadvantage? Do you ever feel frustrated when someone doesn't play against you seriously or doesn't see you as a threat?

 

[Wintropy]

It depends on the context, if you ask me.

If you're playing to improve, then yeah, it's not worth your time. You'd be better off fighting somebody that's going to help you by putting up a real challenge. Even so, it can be rewarding in its own way to fight a staller: it's good experience for something that's not uncommon in tournaments.

If it's in a tournament and they don't even want to win, well hey, free victory for me. If they're just trying to lame me out, then they're probably playing to the clock and trying to time me out, in which case I can't really begrudge them. It's a legitimate, if irritating, strategy. Just makes me want to beat them even more.

 

[Sourbro]

Just wanted to know people's stance on this. How do you feel about sandbaggers or those who decide to lame you out when at a disadvantage? Do you ever feel frustrated when someone doesn't play against you seriously or doesn't see you as a threat?

Well yeah at times I do, but if you like to keep a serious reputation, just rekt them. For Glory and at times local play can be full of skrubs and memers.

 

[SeanS]

No, playing these players is absolutely necessary and you will find them to be much more common than you'd think at the high levels of play.

 

[Deleted member 269706]

In friendlies there's really no reason to go against someone who is sandbagging or intentionally losing, but in tourney play you can use the time to refresh your mind, go for some experimental stuff, etc. When I go against someone sandbagging in tourney, I mess around with combos I'm not all to confident with in hopes that I can get some exposure to them.

 

[Pale Tuna]

If it is mutually fun then I do not see it as a waste of time.

 

[Sourbro]

In friendlies there's really no reason to go against someone who is sandbagging or intentionally losing, but in tourney play you can use the time to refresh your mind, go for some experimental stuff, etc. When I go against someone sandbagging in tourney, I mess around with combos I'm not all to confident with in hopes that I can get some exposure to them.

I agree on that. At times you can be very lucky to discover a new tech with all that time. It also gives you time to improve on an actual human player rather than a cpu.

 

[Sonicninja115]

Sandbag, yes. Sandbagging is dumb. Playing lame is, however, not bad at all. It requires skill, and to some people, it can be very interesting to watch. Lame playstyles aren't a reason to rip anybody. Also, playing against them helps you learn how to fight it. Like Armada vs. Hbox camping. He started using Dtilt to punish jiggs ledge grabs.

 

[Ocarina Stealer]

Playing for fun? Not really.
Playing to improve? Yes.

 

[Raijinken]

While there's a big difference between sandbagging and laming, I wouldn't call it a waste of time to play either.

Playing deliberately lame (if by that you mean flighty and deliberately running the clock, instead of just standard defensive play) is a completely valid (regardless of how anyone feels about it) strategy in current tournament rules, and learning how to play against it is important.

Sandbagging has its time and place. In a tournament, maybe not so much. But when sparring with friends, it's completely acceptable, especially if you're trying to get them into the game. Very few people enjoy getting roflstomped repeatedly, and if you show no weakness and offer no other advice, it's more of a discouragement than anything to lose without making any evident progress. Playing off-character or going for risky things to train a newcomer in avoiding them is not bad.