Major Tournaments Agree to Rules Standardization on Play Collusion

[Niko_K]

http://shoryuken.com/2013/07/30/maj...determined-by-rule-inclusion-and-enforcement/

 

[KishPrime]

Cool.

I still see reason to allow open collaboration/teams up front simply to allow for the covering of expenses, given that for 99% of people this is a money-losing hobby. But for purposes of serious competition and sponsored events, I'm surprised this is so long in coming. Any kind of match-throwing has no place in broadcast sport or esport.

 

[Djent]

Will Apex have an anti-collusion rule? Figure it might matter b/c SRK has actually covered the event the past two years. Not like we need them to make it a success, but it'll certainly help the FGC side of the event.

 

[Strong Badam]

Alex posted on facebook that APEX is on board with it.

 

[smashmachine]

didn't Brawl basically have this after that MLG fiasco

 

[Mr.Jackpot]

I like the idea but I feel like it's vague enough to DQ people for the dumbest ****.

Does this mean that we'll never see Scorpion Master or M2K's Mewtwo again? What's the fine line between choking (lolunknown) and "underperforming"? Someone could easily say that Mango was "intentionally underperforming" for picking Mario against KoopaTroopa, even though he was obviously playing to win those games and it was a cool set.

 

[smashmachine]

I like the idea but I feel like it's vague enough to DQ people for the dumbest ****.

Does this mean that we'll never see Scorpion Master or M2K's Mewtwo again? What's the fine line between choking (lolunknown) and "underperforming"? Someone could easily say that Mango was "intentionally underperforming" for picking Mario against KoopaTroopa, even though he was obviously playing to win those games and it was a cool set.

I would assume if something like Mango vs Armada using Mario and Luigi respectively happened, that would probably draw suspicion
it takes two to split though

 

[SacaSuMoto]

I would assume if something like Mango vs Armada using Mario and Luigi respectively happened, that would probably draw suspicion
it takes two to split though

Take entry fee and venue fee out of the equation, where there is only sponsored money at play. And only then can you punish players for: playing the game "incorrectly", having fun in their own way, or for having ulterior motives.

 

[Juggleguy]

I like the idea but I feel like it's vague enough to DQ people for the dumbest ****.

Does this mean that we'll never see Scorpion Master or M2K's Mewtwo again? What's the fine line between choking (lolunknown) and "underperforming"? Someone could easily say that Mango was "intentionally underperforming" for picking Mario against KoopaTroopa, even though he was obviously playing to win those games and it was a cool set.

That's the entire point of creating this code of conduct. It's at the TO's discretion. It's not so important where the fine line is drawn, but more so that the threat of being DQ'd for sandbagging or bracket manipulating should be enough to deter anyone from even thinking about doing that.

 

[pidgezero_one]

I really think that can be determined on a case-by-case basis. We're all at the point know where TOs and top players know each other well enough to suspect appropriately most of the time. Or maybe I'm just farting out of my mouth.

 

[GTZ]

The day Smash is regarded as a respected fighting game, will be the day I ever even consider jumping on board with any ideas of this sort.

 

[Europhoria]

So what exactly happens to the extra money that's not given out? Do you give it to the people who placed lower and didn't earn it? Or will the T.O. just keep the money? (Inb4 someone calls bull**** collusion cause he has bills to pay)