[nGenLight]

Originally Posted by Paroxysm

I'm curious as to how you can claim it as an unfair advantage? Both players legitimately thought that Metalopolis was a part of the map pool before and during the game, and thus had even footing while playing. Rev may have preferred the map, but Iaguz agreed to it, and made no objection until after he lost.



I understand the importance of a map, but in a game where both players agree to the map selection, under the belief that it is in the map pool with no conflicting mindsets at the time, then the final result should stand. As I said earlier, if Iaguz, bless his beard, realised in the middle of the game that it was not in the map pool, a regame would be viable. Even if it was the instant the game finished.

I personally believe that an Event Report has to be written by the admins of the event, to ensure that no problems like this occur again. But I also think that people need to adhere to management and admin decisions. There is absolutely nothing more frustrating than running a tournament and having people argue with you while you are trying to organise 125 other people to play their games etc. I understand that this may be a bit exaggeration, but you catch my drift. Iaguz initially asked for a rematch, which is a fair call. The admins discussed it, and came to the conclusion that it was not a viable outcome. DONE. Case Closed. That shit is like NCIS. Sure its bad that he copped the short straw, but someone had to either way it went. He hasn't posted in this thread (apologies if I missed it) which makes it seem as though he is no longer interested in what happened. If this is a case then 'sticking up for your teammate' does not warrant a thread to discuss what you think are 'poor' admin decisions.

If we are going to discuss poor decisions, we should ask what constitutes a poor decision? Perhaps this will help us to avoid it in the future
In this case, the admins are RUNNING THE TOURNAMENT. THEY ARE IN CHARGE OF WHAT HAPPENS. Their decision should be considered final, and shouldn't be questioned. You may not agree with what they say, but that doesn't make it a bad choice.

Their decision should be considered final - no doubt, they are the ones in charge.

However this does not mean that we cannot question or challenge the decisions made. Arguments and precedence raised by myself and others have created plenty of plausibility to bring this scenario into discussion. Furthermore, this discussion is far more beneficial than it is damaging to the prospect of future tourney operations. A post-event review done by the admins is a sure thing, however this doesn't mean a neutral-third party cannot weigh in on the matter either, especially when that third party is very well affected by the outcome of these decisions.

There should always be a channel to appeal, discuss and challenge, I am doing this through the forum, in polite way that is not breaking any rules. This isn't an aristocracy, lay off the Admin is GOD notion.

Also, just because a map was played that a player really dislikes (say Metal for me and Iaguz, thumbs down for the last year). Doesn't mean we get to choose to not play it because if the map played is within the map pool/rules of the tournament, we have no choice but to play it, there is NO possibility for a disagreement to not play that map. I'm also cynical about just how much you really understand the importance of a map is to us players.