|
Angry Grimace posted:Its only scummy because the other players didn't think of it. Its not cheating and and unlike the awful post complaining about playing loud music outside his hotel, it isn't conventionally illegal either. You can't even term it bad sportsmanship because the consistent theme in these "no its scummy" posts is an inability to define what he is even doing wrong in a way you could actually describe a rule prohibiting it. Just because you can't define a rule prohibiting it, doesn't make it not scummy. And you have no evidence that none of the other players hadn't thought of doing the same thing - and simply decided not to act on it because it's a scummy thing to do. Also none of us called it cheating; it's just clearly outside the bounds of sportsmanlike behavior. I'm sorry for your autism. Terrible Horse posted:Scummy means going against the "spirit" of the competition. The spirit of the competition is that deck, luck and skill in-game determine the victor, not who has the best out-of-game intelligence.
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 20:48 |
|
|
Rinkles posted:What's Channel Fireball BP? ChannelFireball Pantheon
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Terrible Horse posted:Scummy means going against the "spirit" of the competition. The spirit of the competition is that deck, luck and skill in-game determine the victor, not who has the best out-of-game intelligence. I don't agree that out-of-game intelligence is not part of the game. Reading the metagame is clearly within that realm. MiddleEastBeast posted:Just because you can't define a rule prohibiting it, doesn't make it not scummy. And you have no evidence that none of the other players hadn't thought of doing the same thing - and simply decided not to act on it because it's a scummy thing to do. Yes, disagreeing with you obviously means the other person has autism. It is, in fact possible to have a debate without resorting to personal insults or insinuating the other person has a mental disorder, which by the way, my nephew actually has and I don't find funny. Seriously loving chill out. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
AgentSythe posted:ChannelFireball Pantheon Do they share tech/testing with vanilla team Fireball, or do they essentially just share sponsors?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I don't agree that out-of-game intelligence is not part of the game. Reading the metagame is clearly within that realm. I have a sophisticated set of cameras secretly installed in the game area feeding info on my opponent's hand & library directly into my cybereye. What!? Show me in the comprehensive rules it mentions cybereyes! That's right! Nowhere! Checkmate, clearly one player should have knowledge of what cards the others are playing the others cannot access because they sucked enough dicks in the back room or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Remember when that French player who had access to upcoming sets was banned for leaking it? It's not like players don't have insider info on these things. They just publicly deny them as they should. Again, the only mistake here is that the guy receiving the intel, in TYOOL 2014, didn't do it electronically.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:I have a sophisticated set of cameras secretly installed in the game area feeding info on my opponent's hand & library directly into my cybereye. Chill la Chill posted:Remember when that French player who had access to upcoming sets was banned for leaking it? It's not like players don't have insider info on these things. They just publicly deny them as they should. Again, the only mistake here is that the guy receiving the intel, in TYOOL 2014, didn't do it electronically. I don't want to speculate on what they have and don't have, I just think that on a professional level where this is how they put food on the table, I don't think its outside of the spirit of competition to try and find out what the opponent is playing. It is to some extent a strategic game. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I don't agree that out-of-game intelligence is not part of the game. Reading the metagame is clearly within that realm. I'm sorry. Last thing I'll say is that I don't see how the fact that Dezani freaking denied having done it and then changed his story and downplayed its significance doesn't automatically refute your position that it's all hunky dory. It's also very clearly distinct from the type of 'out-of-game intelligence' that reading a metagame is. MiddleEastBeast fucked around with this message at 22:21 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
MiddleEastBeast posted:I'm sorry. Last thing I'll say is that I don't see how the fact that Dezani freaking denied having done it and then changed his story and downplayed its significance doesn't automatically refute your position that it's all hunky dory. I am not attempting to argue that the other players didn't think it was wrong, I'm arguing that I don't think its wrong in the first place because they are professionals and can and should do whatever they can to get an edge. Ari Lax calling a judge on an unrevealed morph is along the same lines. I would expect him to do it if he can.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I don't agree that out-of-game intelligence is not part of the game. Reading the metagame is clearly within that realm. I'd say studying the metagame falls more under deckbuilding and skill, whereas "out of game intelligence" would be like, a spy has informed you that your opponent can't concentrate and becomes anxious when he hears the word "ex-patriot"; you work "ex-patriot" into your conversation 60 times while playing the match against him. It's not against the rules, but most people would consider it rude and its not an inherent part of the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:No, that is against the rules. It is also conventionally illegal. That is not a good example. You might as well argue that the Olympic rules didn't prevent Harding from having Nancy Kerrigan capped by a hired thug. It's not that much different from what Dezani did i.e. use out-of-game means to get in-game intelligence. It's not that different from this:  Show me where the comp rules talk about peeking! But yeah there's exactly no difference between reading that a lot of people are playing Jeskai Tempo and literally using corrupt deals with vendors to gain knowledge not available to anyone else.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
I guess I view "sportsmanlike behavior" as something that necessarily reflects etiquette and tenets that are held by a majority of the community that participates in whatever game/sport you're talking about. It doesn't make sense for each individual to have their personal definition of sportsmanlike behavior; that's what brings about the downfall of society.Angry Grimace posted:I am not attempting to argue that the other players didn't think it was wrong, I'm arguing that I don't think its wrong in the first place because they are professionals and can and should do whatever they can to get an edge. Ari Lax calling a judge on an unrevealed morph is along the same lines. I would expect him to do it if he can. MiddleEastBeast fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
LSV thinks it's bad. Case closed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
Terrible Horse posted:I'd say studying the metagame falls more under deckbuilding and skill, whereas "out of game intelligence" would be like, a spy has informed you that your opponent can't concentrate and becomes anxious when he hears the word "ex-patriot"; you work "ex-patriot" into your conversation 60 times while playing the match against him. It's not against the rules, but most people would consider it rude and its not an inherent part of the game. If everyone knew Brian Kibler would concede the moment you said "Tubal Cain," everyone would say it before the first shuffle. I don't know, was it bad sportsmanship that Bob Maher didn't concede a match he would have lost (which resulted in him winning the Invitational final) due to Kibler accidentally clicking the wrong card? Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
When john McCain shows up to my fnm I jangle keys instead of flicking my cards whenever I'm matched against him. I also request up top high fives frequently. I'm a pro. Hire me cfbp
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
MiddleEastBeast posted:I guess I view "sportsmanlike behavior" as something that necessarily reflects etiquette and tenets that are held by a majority of the community that participates in whatever game/sport you're talking about. It doesn't make sense for each individual to have their personal definition of sportsmanlike behavior; that's what brings about the downfall of society. Whether he thinks it was wrong or not isn't really relevant, though. I don't think he should think its wrong, assuming he does (he may have simply denied it because someone got mad at him.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Whether he thinks it was wrong or not isn't really relevant, though. I don't think he should think its wrong, assuming he does (he may have simply denied it because someone got mad at him.) I guess this is where we shake hands and go our separate ways.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:
this looks like MJ
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I don't know, was it bad sportsmanship that Bob Maher didn't concede a match he would have lost (which resulted in him winning the Invitational final) due to Kibler accidentally clicking the wrong card? What the gently caress are you even trying to argue at this point
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:36
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I don't know, was it bad sportsmanship that Bob Maher didn't concede a match he would have lost (which resulted in him winning the Invitational final) due to Kibler accidentally clicking the wrong card? This is very analogous to using secret deals to gain information to which one normally does not have access. I'm going to steal the Broncos' playbook now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:This is very analogous to using secret deals to gain information to which one normally does not have access. I'm going to steal the Broncos' playbook now. Stealing the Broncos' playbook is illegal both by the rules and by the law. Teams hire players who have been cut by other teams to learn the details of the former team's playbook all the time. Lottery of Babylon posted:What the gently caress are you even trying to argue at this point The meaning of "spirit of competition" is highly nebulous. MiddleEastBeast posted:I guess this is where we shake hands and go our separate ways. Sure. I'm not saying this kind of thing would be okay as a casual tryhard.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Stealing the Broncos' playbook is illegal both by the rules and by the law. Teams hire players who have been cut by other teams to learn the details of the former team's playbook all the time. Christ, why are you still arguing this? It's a scummy thing to do, it's not loving illegal, just scummy and unsportsmanlike. It's on a similar level to sneaking into someone's room to look at their actual deck.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
I never bathe in the weeks leading up to a magic tournament because I'm hoping my unbearable stench will distract my opponents. This is entirely in the spirit of competition and if you disagree then you're just jealous that you didn't think of not showering before I did. Please love me
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Stealing the Broncos' playbook is illegal both by the rules and by the law. Teams hire players who have been cut by other teams to learn the details of the former team's playbook all the time. Okay I'll photocopy the drat thing. Any other points you'd like to dodge extravagantly while arguing that things that reduce the effects deck, luck, and skill in-game on the effects of the game are a-ok and if I want to break into high-level magic I should start cultivating my secret bargains?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Stealing the Broncos' playbook is illegal both by the rules and by the law. Teams hire players who have been cut by other teams to learn the details of the former team's playbook all the time. Please don't tell me you play in Seattle or, if you do, please tell me who you are so I can make sure I know exactly what kind of person I am playing against when I do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
My attitude is that whenever an argument comes to light that's effectively letter of the law versus spirit the people staunchly arguing in favor of the former are pretty much always wrong but it's not like there's anything you can really do about it and it sucks a whole lot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
Is there a rule against sucking off judges so they'll make rulings in your favor later e: asking for a friend
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Okay I'll photocopy the drat thing. Any other points you'd like to dodge extravagantly while arguing that things that reduce the effects deck, luck, and skill in-game on the effects of the game are a-ok and if I want to break into high-level magic I should start cultivating my secret bargains? That is also against the NFL by-laws. I don't quite understand what argument you think I'm dodging. Lottery of Babylon posted:Is there a rule against sucking off judges so they'll make rulings in your favor later Unfortunately, this is collusion. I imagine it is also legitimately illegal for a number of reasons. En Fuego posted:Please don't tell me you play in Seattle or, if you do, please tell me who you are so I can make sure I know exactly what kind of person I am playing against when I do. Not only do I play in Seattle, I play at your LGS; better make sure to reveal those morphs. "JUDGE!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Not only do I play in Seattle, I play at your LGS; better make sure to reveal those morphs. "JUDGE!" Well that loving sucks, cause you're a piece of poo poo. (Go ahead and say something about this IRL, I will tell you the same!)
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
En Fuego posted:Well that loving sucks, cause you're a piece of poo poo. (Go ahead and say something about this IRL, I will tell you the same!) You do understand its a theoretical disagreement about a card game right? I don't think you're a piece of poo poo for having a contrary opinion to mine, although I'm a bit sketchy at your penchant for calling other people pieces of poo poo for not agreeing with you, not to mention the whole "say that to my face fucker not online and see what happens" routine. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:You do understand its a theoretical disagreement about a card game right? I thought this was about "how [pro players] put food on the table". Sounds like something you should take seriously
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Is there a rule against sucking off judges so they'll make rulings in your favor later Well it's not illegal*, you gotta do everything to win, there's money on the line man. *There is a rule in the brand-new Judge Code about bribery, but nothing about sexual favours.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:That is also against the NFL by-laws. I don't quite understand what argument you think I'm dodging. The entire rest of the post that you dodged is a perfect example of you dodging arguments. I'm currently prostituting myself to my lgs so they tell me what singles my opponents at FNM bought recently. Might as well get started early.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:The entire rest of the post that you dodged is a perfect example of you dodging arguments. I honestly don't understand what you're saying. The fact you don't normally run into that type of information without going out of your way isn't necessarily meaningful. You also don't have any clue what the metagame is going to look like without going out of your way to investigate it. Serperoth posted:Well it's not illegal*, you gotta do everything to win, there's money on the line man. I would be willing to bet that its a criminal offense to throw a MTG tournament in exchange for sex. Asymmetrikon posted:I thought this was about "how [pro players] put food on the table". Sounds like something you should take seriously I could be wrong, but I don't have reason to believe any of you guys are in the Pro Tour. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I honestly don't understand what you're saying. The fact you don't normally run into that type of information without going out of your way isn't meaningful. You also don't have any clue what the metagame is going to look like without going out of your way to investigate it. Can you literally not see the difference between looking at a top eight after the fact and noticing the number of siege rhinos, and having information like "Kibler bought two mantis riders" that no one else but Kibler and the vendor know, that the vendor will not give anyone else due to them and the vendor not having a deal? Angry Grimace posted:I could be wrong, but I don't have reason to believe any of you guys are in the Pro Tour. When playing at the kitchen table with my brother I'm going to try to get him called away to take a dog out so I can peek at his hand because I like my games as competitive as possible. Orange Fluffy Sheep fucked around with this message at 23:16 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I would be willing to bet that its a criminal offense to throw a MTG tournament in exchange for sex. Read the post you're quoting. I'm a L1 judge, and just looked at the Judge Code, it only mentions bribery per se, without any reference to sexual favours rather than monetary ones. Gotta put bread on that pro wizard poker table man, money's on the line.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:When playing at the kitchen table with my brother I'm going to try to get him called away to take a dog out so I can peek at his hand because I like my games as competitive as possible. Anyway to get those Pro Points, man. Gotta earn that sweet children's card game cash somehow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I honestly don't understand what you're saying. The fact you don't normally run into that type of information without going out of your way isn't necessarily meaningful. You also don't have any clue what the metagame is going to look like without going out of your way to investigate it. I was under the assumption that the point was that everyone assumed that they had equal access to public information on previous tournament data going into any tournament and furthermore that any other form of unequal access albeit not illegal in any sense, is frowned upon. Metagame predictions are generally drawn from tournament data, whether on paper or online and not from getting itemized lists of who-bought-what from a dealer (which is more information than just looking at what's sold out).
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
Like, seeing Kibler bought two Mantis Riders tells you almost exactly what Kibler has sleeved up, when seeing there's a lot of Jeskai decks around or seeing that Mantis Rider is sold out won't tell you exactly what your opponent sitting across from you is shuffling right now before the game even begins.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 20:48 |
|
|
Serperoth posted:Read the post you're quoting. I'm a L1 judge, and just looked at the Judge Code, it only mentions bribery per se, without any reference to sexual favours rather than monetary ones. Gotta put bread on that pro wizard poker table man, money's on the line. No, I'm suggesting match fixing for sex is probably illegal as a general proposition, not within the Magic rules.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 23:22
|
|