|
8 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 8:29PM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2010
|
just imagine if the rule wasn't there
the first thing your opponent will do before you start the match is offer you something in exchange for a win, maybe he wants the planeswalker points, maybe he wants the bragging rights of having been in the final (or even "won"), there are lots of reasons to win besides just the price which he will have to give away as bribes
that's not a scenario I'd enjoy
I'd rather just play for playing's sake and not being bribed or possibly bullied into conceding
proud member of the 2011 community team
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 6:57AM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Sep 16, 2008
|
just imagine if the rule wasn't there
the first thing your opponent will do before you start the match is offer you something in exchange for a win
I have sat down at a table many a time in the last 2 rounds of a tourney and been immediately offered a split, which is perfectly legal under the existing rule. I don't see the difference.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 7:05AM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2011
|
The difference between a split and a bribe is that with the split, they are not asking you to concede. You offer the split, then if that's accepted or denied, the players can decide to play the game out, who concedes or intentionally draw. The decisions are seperate.
Compare these situation:
The opponent sits down and says "If you scoop, I'll split the prize with you"
The opponent sites down and says "Would you like to split?" You accept. They say "Ok, now, do you want to play this out?"
The first situation is a bribe because they are offering you something of value (half the prize) for conceding. The second isn't because the discussion of splitting the prize and playing the match are seperate.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 10:19AM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Sep 16, 2008
|
The difference between a split and a bribe is that with the split, they are not asking you to concede. You offer the split, then if that's accepted or denied, the players can decide to play the game out, who concedes or intentionally draw. The decisions are seperate.
Compare these situation:
The opponent sits down and says "If you scoop, I'll split the prize with you"
The opponent sites down and says "Would you like to split?" You accept. They say "Ok, now, do you want to play this out?"
The first situation is a bribe because they are offering you something of value (half the prize) for conceding. The second isn't because the discussion of splitting the prize and playing the match are seperate.
Sorry, but I don't think I can possibly agree that discussing the 2 subjects in tandem is unethical when discussing them in sequence is not. That's simply illogical. Either conceding for prize is unethical or it isn't. The order in which the terms are agreed upon is purely semantic.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 10:26AM
#15
|
|
|
Sorry, but I don't think I can possibly agree that discussing the 2 subjects in tandem is unethical when discussing them in sequence is not. That's simply illogical. Either conceding for prize is unethical or it isn't. The order in which the terms are agreed upon is purely semantic.
The choice of sharing prizes cannot determine the outcome of any game or match. MadAdmiral's second scenario was legal, because the players could have played the match out normally. No player was forced to concede or forced to draw.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 10:39AM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2011
|
@MadCow: Why can't you agree with that? What makes bribery unethical (and against the rules) is that you're using a reward to "force" a person into acting differently. Obviously, discussing both a split and who concedes/draws fufills both conditions.
However, if you offer a split WITHOUT saying anything about the outcome of the match, then you've removed one half of the critical points of bribery. You can't possibly say that it's unethical to sit down at a table and say "I would like to split the prizes with you, but still play the match out."
Likewise, if you agree to concede (for instance, the conceding player is locked into the Top 8 either way, the other needs a win), then both want to hedge their Top 8 results, a split can be agreed upon there as well. This isn't unethical as the match result has already been decided before any discussion of the prize has taken place.
I would also like to point out that you clearly didn't understand what I was saying. The fact that you said "conceding for prize" clearly indicates that. No one in my situation could ever be considered conceding for the prize. Here is an example of what I'm talking about:
Me: "I would like to offer you a split."
You: "Why?"
Me: "We're both in the money, and one of us is making Top 8 regardless of what happens. Half of a Top 8 share covers my expenses to get here. I don't really care about coming out ahead, I just want to make sure I break even."
You: "Ok, sounds reasonable. I'll split."
Me: *calls judge/TO over* "My opponent and I have agreed to split our prizes."
Judge: "Do you agree with that?"
You: "Yes."
Judge: "Ok." *leaves to do some paperwork or whatever*
----------
Me: "Alright, now here are the standings. If we play, the loser misses Top 8, but the winner would be seeded highly. If we draw, we're both in. I would like to offer a draw so we can get some rest before the Top 8 begins."
You: "Actually, I've got to meet someone in about an hour. I didn't expect the tournament to be so big. I'll just concede and get out of here."
Me: "Ok. Let's sign the match slip."
Now, anything below the line can be done. You could say "I'd rather play it out and try to be the first seed." Or you could say "I'll take the draw and see you in the Top 8." It doesn't matter. The result of the match had nothing to do with the actual prizes.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 11:33AM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2012
|
The rules say that agreeing upon a prize split cannot affect the outcome of the match, however MadCow21 brings up a good point. Without the loss of a prize at risk, your opponent is much more likely to concede and move on.
This is the sort of rules evasion that happens in real life politics, and Wizards would be wasting their energy trying to counter it.
If you offer your opponent a booster box to concede, you're doing something illegal. If you offer your opponent a split, thus giving up only a few packs, and he concedes to "save time," congratulations. You know how to manipulate the system.
How would anyone propose that we make a rule to avoid this sort of conduct? The situations in which cheating and bribery occurred differ from legitimate agreement only by the motives of the players. Clearly, it's unethical -- but how can we spot that it's being done?
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 2:48PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Sep 16, 2008
|
The choice of sharing prizes cannot determine the outcome of any game or match.
That, my friend, is a false statement. The choice of sharing prizes can most certainly affect a player's subsequent decision that determines the outcome of the match. Pretending that a temporal seperation between the two discussions somehow makes them completely independent of one another is naive at best.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 2:54PM
#19
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2010
|
it cannot _directly_ influence the outcome of a game or match
proud member of the 2011 community team
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 4:58PM
#20
|
|
|
just imagine if the rule wasn't there
the first thing your opponent will do before you start the match is offer you something in exchange for a win, maybe he wants the planeswalker points, maybe he wants the bragging rights of having been in the final (or even "won"), there are lots of reasons to win besides just the price which he will have to give away as bribes
that's not a scenario I'd enjoy
I'd rather just play for playing's sake and not being bribed or possibly bullied into conceding
On the other hand, that would certainly fit the flavor of a duel between Plansewalkers a lot better. I mean, I'd bet Nicol Bolas would be quite happy to offer you your pick of the minion's he's been collecting from Bant to get you out of his... what do you say for a dragon? Horns? Scales?
|
|
|
