Let Odette play!

[guitarizt]

And they wondered why i play tg

http://i.imgur.com/pywdqqC.png

 

[Odette]

https://clips.twitch.tv/odetted/ComfortableGerbilRiPepperonis

https://clips.twitch.tv/odetted/Fantast ... tSeemsGood

All the reason we need

11111 fml

 

[7Sense]

It's obvious her skill is even under 1600.. why to do so much hassle about this? Just let her play..

 

[Clemensor]

It's obvious her skill is even under 1600.. why to do so much hassle about this? Just let her play..

Principle and integrity I assume. Because if Odette is allowed to play, what would for example Craigert stop from saying that LB10 played for him when they account shared for shits and giggles and he really is about 1600 etc.? (hypothetically speaking ofc) From an admin POV it is the best to keep and enforce the rules very consistently.

 

[7Sense]

It's obvious her skill is even under 1600.. why to do so much hassle about this? Just let her play..

Principle and integrity I assume. Because if Odette is allowed to play, what would for example Craigert stop from saying that LB10 played for him when they account shared for shits and giggles and he really is about 1600 etc.? (hypothetically speaking ofc) From an admin POV it is the best to keep and enforce the rules very consistently.

Because we are a community and we assume people won't lie just to get into the tournament and ruining the fun.
This case for me is pretty obvious, a lot of players knows her.. why are we being so picky about this..

 

furthermore, odette is a well-known noob. not letting her play in a noob tournament is like
not letting viper play in an expert tournament. in her case one can regard it as proven that mbl
played for her..
http://www.voobly.com/match/view/14153772
explain that lol.. 27/2.
also she is a girl, and as it is common nowadays, one should have some positive discrimination policy.

 

[Novaya]

Don't know what all the fuss is about. The point has already been mentioned multiple times: Having rules that are applied consistently helps avoid situations of admin bias. The tournament admins will have to decide their intention with the 1650 max rate rule. If they allow Odette to play, which I have no real concern for either way, others who have higher than 1650 max rating could argue using the same logic. This in turn can cause more drama and that's never good for an organized event, whether for fun or for cash prizes.

 

[squeak]

make it 69-69 and close the topic

 

[teutonic_tanks]

she asked so kind, make an exception pls! <3

 

[Maiwingkos]

make it 69-69 and close the topic

too late

 

wow a lot of people expressed their opinions.

 

[musky]

My thoughts: is it really account sharing when the other person is your partner and is in the same room with you? Has no one here ever let their girlfriend/wife/friend/dog try to play? I didn't even think about it as cheating because it wasn't with the purpose of boosting up my rating, it was just for fun.

If somebody else is using your account (especially if they're better), then yeah. I get that it's just a bit of fun for you two, but I think the main point is it's not fair for your opponent, who may be trying to play seriously. Somebody else already said it, but if you're trying to play a real game, you start building up an advantage and at the end a pro comes in and wipes you out, it feels pretty lame. Obviously if everything is known and agreed on before hand it doesn't matter, but that's basically never the case.

It's not like this is super serious or anything (although it is against voobly rules, right?), but if an exception to the rules is made I hope it won't be made just because somebody is famous or well-known. Either accept all similar cases or just be strict and say no, IMO.

 

[BlotchedyDooDah]

i've still not received a response as to if i'm allowed to play

 

well, it seems that you reached this rating by playing on your own, right?

 

[ZeroEmpires]

Let her play, jeez. Isn't the whole idea of having tournament admins to actually use your head and critically look at a situation?
Ask yourself this: When you set the rating limit what was your intention? Was it to set a precedent or to make sure that the people participating in the tournament are below a certain skill level?
It's very obvious she is way below 1650, and if your only way to gauge that is going to be based on her rating and you'd ignore all of the other substantial evidence that is presented then what's the point in having a tournament admin to look at these things?

And what is the purpose of this tournament? It's for <1650 rated players, it's hardly going to be super serious, money on the line, hardcore AoC is it? Instead of setting a hard limit you should look at average ratings over a period of time instead of highest achieved. It's very possible that players can be active and achieve 1651, then go away for a while and be much worse than that. It's also very possible that players could get lucky and gain more rating points than their skill level reflects based on how their opponents play on that day.

 

[hightower]

Just imagine a new player going MS with weaker friend and playing the first 5 games vs him...he will reach 1650+ by winning this 5 games, then play vs others and drop to 1400...

 

[Clemensor]

Just imagine a new player going MS with weaker friend and playing the first 5 games vs him...he will reach 1650+ by winning this 5 games, then play vs others and drop to 1400...

Tough luck I guess. No clue why someone would do that in the first place.

 

i could post a good number of people who actually did this.

 

[nimanoe]

yeah, don't think it's weird to play your first few games with a friend 11

 

[Clemensor]

yeah, don't think it's weird to play your first few games with a friend 11

but why rated? :| aprat from one or two games to not be a zero gamer

 

[nimanoe]

yeah, don't think it's weird to play your first few games with a friend 11

but why rated? :| aprat from one or two games to not be a zero gamer

laziness, forgot to turn it off, to make things more exciting?

 

[RacerFXX]

Let her play, jeez. Isn't the whole idea of having tournament admins to actually use your head and critically look at a situation?

Yeah and what is the decisive factor in this. allowing one player to play and the other not because i say so? Because someone is more known than another? I need to explain a player why he is not allowed to play so i have to make a line which makes me able to argue for or against him.

Ask yourself this: When you set the rating limit what was your intention? Was it to set a precedent or to make sure that the people participating in the tournament are below a certain skill level?
It's very obvious she is way below 1650, and if your only way to gauge that is going to be based on her rating and you'd ignore all of the other substantial evidence that is presented then what's the point in having a tournament admin to look at these things?

If i allow her to play, how do i explain to others beeing a bit higher than 1650 that they are not allowed? You think they care if she is more known than others? they act in their own interest and i cant give them a point why there is a difference between them. according to the rules i cant defend my decision.

And what is the purpose of this tournament? It's for <1650 rated players, it's hardly going to be super serious, money on the line, hardcore AoC is it?

Does it need the worlds best players to be serious? Does it need money to be serious? Its a game and in the first point i think it should be about fun, not money. I think also lower rated player deserve a tournament they can take serious with clear rules.

Instead of setting a hard limit you should look at average ratings over a period of time instead of highest achieved

I also have so set a fix line there to be transparent. someone beeing a bit over the allowed average because having a "good" day, doing noob bashing or whatelse will probably also start complain. i think this would be just different. not better.

 

[SiFly]

I think the whole problem is that Racer didn't call it "intermediate tournament" but used the word "pro" in it.

If people had the idea it was for ~1400 players, they wouldn't complain this much about the 1650 max rating rule. Robo didn't have issues (besides one dramaqueen) with having these tournaments with a max rating about the same as this tournament uses.

 

[ELQuark]

I totally agree with RacerFXX (the tournament admin). To make an 'exception' for Odette would mean more work for him, since others will complain and say, that their real rating is below 1650, just they got 'lucky' or other reasons. Admins have it the toughest being the most neutral here.

From my viewpoint it's not even worth discussing about it.

 

[robo]

Actually there were a lot of issues, and next time there will be much more specific rules in place regarding rating.