Bracket manipulation: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
(Added more information and anonymity) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ArticleIcons|ssb=y|ssbm=y|ssbb=y}} | {{ArticleIcons|ssb=y|ssbm=y|ssbb=y}} | ||
{{cleanup|needs rewriting to describe bracket manipulation in general}} | {{cleanup|needs rewriting to describe bracket manipulation in general}} | ||
'''Bracket manipulation''' refers to any behavior by any player in a tournament with the intent to manipulate or alter the result of a tournament bracket, usually performed in collusion with other players for financial gain. | '''Bracket manipulation''' refers to any behavior by any player in a tournament with the intent to manipulate or alter the result of a tournament bracket, usually performed in collusion with other players for financial gain. In tournaments with [[Double Elimination Bracket]]s, a player in a winners' bracket may play poorly in a match intentionally to be moved to the losers' bracket. | ||
==Reasons for bracket manipulation== | |||
{{incomplete}} | |||
Reasons for bracket manipulation may include, but are not limited to the following: | |||
*a player's [[main character]] is [[counter (matchup)|countered]] by a main character of another player in the matches ahead | |||
*a player may believe their chances of winning are increased if they face players in the losers' bracket, who they think are better matchups in their favor | |||
*Collaboration with other player(s) to eliminate another player/win more money between the two. There may be a third player in the bracket that one of the players plays poorly against. So to secure a higher placing and a higher payout, the player makes an agreement to split their prize money with another player, who will then throw their set, and face off against the threatening player in the losers bracket to knock them out of the tournament. | |||
*a player has a poor history with a player(s) who they will face in the matches ahead | |||
==Example== | |||
For example; Smasher A, who mains {{SSBB|Falco}}, has reached the winner semifinals, and is about to face off against Smasher B, who mains {{SSBB|Marth}}. A however, notices that Smasher C, who mains {{SSBB|Pikachu}}, has been dominating the losers bracket and is set to face the loser of his set with Smasher B. Smasher A, knowing Falco is hard countered by Pikachu, and remembering his losing history against Smasher C, conspires to manipulate the bracket with Smasher B, knowing that Marth counters Pikachu, and that Smasher B previously defeated Smasher C in the winners' bracket. Smasher C, seeing that the winner of his set with Smasher A is set to face Smasher D in the winner finals, who mains {{SSBB|King Dedede}}, a character Smasher B plays poorly against that Smasher A will counter, agrees to the split. Smasher B then proceeds to intentionally lose the set against Smasher A, and goes on to eliminate Smasher C from the tournament, while Smasher A defeats Smasher D and secures a spot in the grand finals. While Smasher B does eventually get eliminated by Smasher D in the losers finals, Smasher A defeats Smasher D again in the grand finals to win the tournament. And through splitting that prize money, both players make more money than they would have if they played out their set with Smasher D winning. | |||
For the money earned in this scenario assuming the tournament pays out $500 in a 55/30/10/5 payout: | For the money earned in this scenario assuming the tournament pays out $500 in a 55/30/10/5 payout: | ||
1. | 1. Smasher A ($275) | ||
2. | 2. Smasher D ($150) | ||
3. | 3. Smasher B ($50) | ||
4. | 4. Smasher E ($25) | ||
Through splitting their earnings, | Through splitting their earnings, Smasher A and Smasher B earn $162.50. | ||
For the money earned in the scenario where the players don't split, resulting in | For the money earned in the scenario where the players don't split, resulting in Smasher B winning their set, to then lose to Smasher D, while Smasher A is eliminated by Smasher C: | ||
1. | 1. Smasher D ($275) | ||
2. | 2. Smasher B ($150) | ||
3. | 3. Smasher C ($50) | ||
4. | 4. Smasher E ($25) | ||
While | While Smasher B gets a higher placement in this scenario, he earns less money. And Smasher A, having been eliminated by Smasher C before the final four, earns nothing. | ||
==Controversy== | ==Controversy== | ||
Bracket manipulation, while a practical method to earn more money in a tournament as demonstrated above, is extremely controversial in the Smash community. Many players see it as immoral, as it interferes with the bracket progression of other players. As seen in the above scenario, | Bracket manipulation, while a practical method to earn more money in a tournament as demonstrated above, is extremely controversial in the Smash community. Many players see it as immoral, as it interferes with the bracket progression of other players. As seen in the above scenario, Smasher C is prevented from placing high enough to earn money by having to face Smasher B sooner than he would have if the manipulation didn't occur. They also say splitting harms the integrity of the tournament, and waters down the event for spectators as the players splitting will not give it their all in their set. | ||
There are a few supporters of the right to split however. Common claims in support of splitting include that it's the players' money, so it's their right to do what they want with it, and that the other players that are prevented from advancing by the splitting wouldn't have their bracket progression interrupted if they "played better". Despite the small support for splitting, it is generally looked down upon, and TOs will generally punish players that are caught splitting. | There are a few supporters of the right to split however. Common claims in support of splitting include that it's the players' money, so it's their right to do what they want with it, and that the other players that are prevented from advancing by the splitting wouldn't have their bracket progression interrupted if they "played better". Despite the small support for splitting, it is generally looked down upon, and TOs will generally punish players that are caught splitting. | ||
| Line 36: | Line 45: | ||
==Major incidents of bracket manipulation== | ==Major incidents of bracket manipulation== | ||
The most notorious incident of splitting in competitive Smash was between {{Sm|Mew2King}} and {{Sm|ADHD}} at [[MLG DC 2010]]. This resulted in both players being disqualified and banned from participating in the rest of the 2010 MLG ''[[Brawl]]'' circuit. This event is said to have damage the reputation of the competitive Smash community, as two of the best players should be model representatives of the community, and not be caught partaking in underhand activities. This incident is cited as a major reason for MLG dropping ''Brawl'' after the 2010 circuit. | The most notorious incident of splitting in competitive Smash was between {{Sm|Mew2King}} and {{Sm|ADHD}} at [[MLG DC 2010]]. This resulted in both players being disqualified and banned from participating in the rest of the 2010 MLG ''[[Brawl]]'' circuit. This event is said to have damage the reputation of the competitive Smash community, as two of the best players should be model representatives of the community, and not be caught partaking in underhand activities. This incident is cited as a major reason for MLG dropping ''Brawl'' after the 2010 circuit. | ||
Many steps have been taken to attempt to prevent bracket manipulation. One example is that in many double elimination tournaments, during the Grand Finals, the winner of the losers' finals must win more matches in the set than required of the victor of the winners' finals. This attempts to discourage intentionally moving to the losers' bracket. | |||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Revision as of 22:39, March 6, 2013
|
This article or section may require a cleanup. The editor who added this tag believes this page should be cleaned up for the following reason: needs rewriting to describe bracket manipulation in general You can discuss this issue on the talk page or edit this page to improve it. |
Bracket manipulation refers to any behavior by any player in a tournament with the intent to manipulate or alter the result of a tournament bracket, usually performed in collusion with other players for financial gain. In tournaments with Double Elimination Brackets, a player in a winners' bracket may play poorly in a match intentionally to be moved to the losers' bracket.
Reasons for bracket manipulation
|
This article or section is incomplete. You can help SmashWiki by expanding or finishing it. |
Reasons for bracket manipulation may include, but are not limited to the following:
- a player's main character is countered by a main character of another player in the matches ahead
- a player may believe their chances of winning are increased if they face players in the losers' bracket, who they think are better matchups in their favor
- Collaboration with other player(s) to eliminate another player/win more money between the two. There may be a third player in the bracket that one of the players plays poorly against. So to secure a higher placing and a higher payout, the player makes an agreement to split their prize money with another player, who will then throw their set, and face off against the threatening player in the losers bracket to knock them out of the tournament.
- a player has a poor history with a player(s) who they will face in the matches ahead
Example
For example; Smasher A, who mains Falco, has reached the winner semifinals, and is about to face off against Smasher B, who mains Marth. A however, notices that Smasher C, who mains Pikachu, has been dominating the losers bracket and is set to face the loser of his set with Smasher B. Smasher A, knowing Falco is hard countered by Pikachu, and remembering his losing history against Smasher C, conspires to manipulate the bracket with Smasher B, knowing that Marth counters Pikachu, and that Smasher B previously defeated Smasher C in the winners' bracket. Smasher C, seeing that the winner of his set with Smasher A is set to face Smasher D in the winner finals, who mains King Dedede, a character Smasher B plays poorly against that Smasher A will counter, agrees to the split. Smasher B then proceeds to intentionally lose the set against Smasher A, and goes on to eliminate Smasher C from the tournament, while Smasher A defeats Smasher D and secures a spot in the grand finals. While Smasher B does eventually get eliminated by Smasher D in the losers finals, Smasher A defeats Smasher D again in the grand finals to win the tournament. And through splitting that prize money, both players make more money than they would have if they played out their set with Smasher D winning.
For the money earned in this scenario assuming the tournament pays out $500 in a 55/30/10/5 payout:
1. Smasher A ($275)
2. Smasher D ($150)
3. Smasher B ($50)
4. Smasher E ($25)
Through splitting their earnings, Smasher A and Smasher B earn $162.50.
For the money earned in the scenario where the players don't split, resulting in Smasher B winning their set, to then lose to Smasher D, while Smasher A is eliminated by Smasher C:
1. Smasher D ($275)
2. Smasher B ($150)
3. Smasher C ($50)
4. Smasher E ($25)
While Smasher B gets a higher placement in this scenario, he earns less money. And Smasher A, having been eliminated by Smasher C before the final four, earns nothing.
Controversy
Bracket manipulation, while a practical method to earn more money in a tournament as demonstrated above, is extremely controversial in the Smash community. Many players see it as immoral, as it interferes with the bracket progression of other players. As seen in the above scenario, Smasher C is prevented from placing high enough to earn money by having to face Smasher B sooner than he would have if the manipulation didn't occur. They also say splitting harms the integrity of the tournament, and waters down the event for spectators as the players splitting will not give it their all in their set.
There are a few supporters of the right to split however. Common claims in support of splitting include that it's the players' money, so it's their right to do what they want with it, and that the other players that are prevented from advancing by the splitting wouldn't have their bracket progression interrupted if they "played better". Despite the small support for splitting, it is generally looked down upon, and TOs will generally punish players that are caught splitting.
Major incidents of bracket manipulation
The most notorious incident of splitting in competitive Smash was between Mew2King and ADHD at MLG DC 2010. This resulted in both players being disqualified and banned from participating in the rest of the 2010 MLG Brawl circuit. This event is said to have damage the reputation of the competitive Smash community, as two of the best players should be model representatives of the community, and not be caught partaking in underhand activities. This incident is cited as a major reason for MLG dropping Brawl after the 2010 circuit.
Many steps have been taken to attempt to prevent bracket manipulation. One example is that in many double elimination tournaments, during the Grand Finals, the winner of the losers' finals must win more matches in the set than required of the victor of the winners' finals. This attempts to discourage intentionally moving to the losers' bracket.
