Is intentionally scooping moral?

[P_A]

This whole phenomena is a mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a gover .... hey, you can't do that to me! Scully! Sic 'em!

Na, boys and gulls, scoopin' gonna happen. Many reasons for it, some honorable, some a bit less than honorable, but calling it immoral is perhaps taking the phenomena a bit to the extreme. One of these days each and every one of you will have a reason to scoop - if you play it long enough. What you decide to do then is your own business.

 

[Victory Bell]

If I had no chance of top cutting and my friend did, and my points/prizes weren't on the line, I would call it honorable to scoop. But not dishonorable to not scoop. My friend in cut outweighs seeing that other guy in cut in my eyes. These people are my friends for a reason. I'd like to think they'ed do the same thing for me. What's immoral about this. Me not wanting somebody else in there over a friend of mine? That that guy somehow HAS A RIGHT to that spot in cut? I don't get it. I would feel bad not scooping my friend into cut... I would feel like I cheated him.

 

[Otaku]

I don't recall if I've scooped for a friend. I was perhaps one of the better local players for a short time and after that, I doubt I had the chance. Still, let us actually look at the question.

What are tournaments for? Are we attempting to find at least close to the most skilled player? Serious question: I know some of you seem to have the floor rules memorized, so I'll let you inform me. I know they are also supposed to be fun, but it is a specific type of fun, that of playing in a tournament. If the restrictions a tournament places on you aren't fun, you don't play in that tournament, so if you don't want to beat your friends?

Please don't play in the same tournament as them.

You still have a right to, I am just making a request.

When you scoop to play the system, that is one issue. Is it legal? Yes. Shrewd? Yes? A part of the game that is ethical? I would say 'no', because of what I believe to be right and wrong. I worry not just about the letter of the law, but the spirit, the intent behind it. What penalty should there be? None on the human level, though it provides an incentive for eliminating the ability to "game" the system.

Now what of simply scooping to a person to help them out? You entered a tournament to determine who was at least close to being the best player. Is gaining sympathy from your opponent a part of the game? I don't believe it is, but my knowledge of the rules is hardly exhaustive.
Many people have made comparisons, analogies, and what have you to the situation. Scooping to help your opponent (be they a friend or total stranger) improve their ranking isn't a gift you give... it's something you take from one to give to another.

I am reminded of how careful aide groups have to be in our world. Many people with wonderful intentions will try to help out those suffering... but careless help can cause more harm in the long run. The most relevant comparison is when aide workers provide food for an area. Do things incorrectly, you'll help a few people out in the short run, but you'll also hurt some as well. If you are giving away food, how can the local farmer sell his produce? He may not starve, but he won't have any money to pay his bills, and even if bartering is an option, you've devalued the crops with which he would procure anything else he needs!

That's short run. The long run is that not just one farmer but several may simply find themselves unable to remain farmers. So now there will be food shortages again, this time not due to drought, war, fires, floods, plagues, etc. but because improper help drove the farmers out of business! This is why it is not unheard of for aide groups to pay businesses that their aide renders unneeded: to do no harm.

This horrible sounding scenario doesn't always happen and this is merely anecdotal (like so many other comments). Still ask yourself if there is logic to it; why would this not happen?

So when you're going to concede to someone just because you want to be nice, remember you're not being so nice to someone else. I won't say which person is more deserving of the win: after all it is possible that the person you scoop to deserves to be in the finals more than the person who would be bumped out by you scooping! What I have learned is in situations like this: just play it out. It may not give the desired result, but ultimately it ends up being the most fair.

I've seen some other comments on this thread that concern me. One was a comment that indicated a person who has succumbed to relativism. That's a weighty discussion ill suited for this thread. So I'll focus on something quite important.

If you believe in "luck" at all, no game or sport is immune to it. While playing chess, you can stop before you make an error because the lighting in the room shifted ever so slightly, and suddenly you notice your mistake: that piece the light just highlighted means your move would have lead to your opponent gaining checkmate. When playing in a sport, especially outdoors, a gust of win can cause the ball to shift just enough that what should have been fair was foul. In all cases, some fundamental flaw within you can manifest at the worst possible time. Imagine losing a world championship because the thin wall of a blood vessel in your brain happened to succumb to the strain right before you could win and burst!

"Luck" is more abundant in some contests, but it is always there.

tl;dr: The purpose of a tournament is to have fun by doing your best to win the tournament following both the letter and the spirit of the rules. When you scoop to help someone else, your hurting someone else; playing it out just seems to be a more fair way to decide it. Relativism makes this whole affair meaningless. If you believe in "luck" at all, you should know its a 24/7 kind of thing for all of your life, not just a TCG.

 

[Kenshin's Garde]

Please don't play in the same tournament as them.

Give me at least 10 tournaments within approx. the same distance from each other for each day tournaments are scheduled and you have a deal. For bigger tournaments, give me at least 100 options.

Until that happens, this isn't really a reasonable request. InB4Trolling, I'm not trying to be combative here, but what alternatives are there? Do I not get to play at all if a couple of friends are going to an event? Do we plan a "playing schedule" to prepare for the SLIGHT possibility we're going to play against each other? etc.

And even then, a MAJOR aspect of tournaments is the social aspect...IDK about the rest of the people on the 'gym, but I see winning as secondary to having a really fun time, and I consider myself a fairly competitive player. Trying to tell me that I shouldn't play in a tournament with friends because there's a chance we might play AND we're both in a position where scooping to the other is advantageous doesn't seem reasonable.

 

[Vablakes]

Ya, I know how it feels to miss the cut by a person. But getting kicked out of it just because someone that wouldn't get into the cut without another win and having a friend scoop to them, kicking someone else that worked harder at acctualy getting real, not cheap wins out is a different matter. That's just not fair. You should have to WORK for your wins, like a real Champion, not some cheap cheater that uses a bunch of friends to give him free wins. Pokemon is for real players, not people who are going to cheat to win. In my eyes, it's no different than palming a card to put it on top of your deck, or taking an extra prize card when you knock out an opposing Pokemon when you aren't using a Rayquaza & Deoxys legend, exept worse. I'm sorry if this sounds mean, that's just the way I feel about it. I hope I haven't offended anyone, this is just my opinion.

 

[Victory Bell]

Ya, I know how it feels to miss the cut by a person. But getting kicked out of it just because someone that wouldn't get into the cut without another win and having a friend scoop to them, kicking someone else that worked harder at acctualy getting real, not cheap wins out is a different matter. That's just not fair. You should have to WORK for your wins, like a real Champion, not some cheap cheater that uses a bunch of friends to give him free wins. Pokemon is for real players, not people who are going to cheat to win. In my eyes, it's no different than palming a card to put it on top of your deck, or taking an extra prize card when you knock out an opposing Pokemon when you aren't using a Rayquaza & Deoxys legend, exept worse. I'm sorry if this sounds mean, that's just the way I feel about it. I hope I haven't offended anyone, this is just my opinion.

...when did scooping when you have no chance to advance to give someone you like some help become cheating...

This doesn't even happen often. Mostly only if you are X-3 paired up to someone who can make cut at X-2. If they beat you they're fine. But if you win neither player makes it. If someone scoops to someone with the same record as them I'd describe that person with the word "tool". Fighting a battle you can win is something, but if you can lose for something good to come to another I'd take that option over the "moral" one.

 

[Otaku]

Give me at least 10 tournaments within approx. the same distance from each other for each day tournaments are scheduled and you have a deal. For bigger tournaments, give me at least 100 options.

Until that happens, this isn't really a reasonable request. InB4Trolling, I'm not trying to be combative here, but what alternatives are there? Do I not get to play at all if a couple of friends are going to an event? Do we plan a "playing schedule" to prepare for the SLIGHT possibility we're going to play against each other? etc.

And even then, a MAJOR aspect of tournaments is the social aspect...IDK about the rest of the people on the 'gym, but I see winning as secondary to having a really fun time, and I consider myself a fairly competitive player. Trying to tell me that I shouldn't play in a tournament with friends because there's a chance we might play AND we're both in a position where scooping to the other is advantageous doesn't seem reasonable.

I wish to clarify something: I was specifically addressing people who couldn't bring themselves to play and risk beating a friend/family member in a tournament setting. I agree tournaments are supposed to be fun, but it is a specific fun. You are agreeing that you enjoy the fun of organized play and fair competition going into it. If you do not agree to that, why play in the tournament?

So no, one doesn't need your requirements you listed, but rather I ask you (and all players) not to abuse the system and to meet the basic requirements of the concept of a tournament. You are to not intentionally play poorly or otherwise aid another, but instead play to the best of your ability. If it is your friend or family member, both of you should understand going into it that you are to play your best against each other should you face each other. As such, I consider this quite a reasonable request.

Obviously a direct comparisons to team sport that is meant to be a team sport won't match up completely. Still the underlying process is similar: how would you feel finding out that a team only advanced because... one of their players was friends with a player on the opposing team earlier in a tournament or series, and the friend of that player either intentionally performed poorly to allow his friend's team to win, or after being a vital part of his team suddenly refused to play at the last possible second, ruining any strategy going into the match?

How would you like taking bids for a construction project and finding out all the local contractors were friends and wanted to help out one particular guy... so they all way overbid so the friend would get it. Sounds noble until you're the guy actually footing the bill. You need this work done but because of the other contractors basically "scooping", you now have to overpay to get the work done!

I should mention any tournament intentionally designed to be "casual" is indeed excluded. I haven't made a Pre-Release for over two years frown but for the longest time the idea was making it a "casual tournament", as contradictory as that might sound. It was specific organized play, but there weren't huge prizes on the line (does it affect player rankings?) and the idea was making it a fun way to get new cards, promote the set, and attract new players. Pre-releases are the kind of tournament where SotG at least implies you should help your opponent out (if not overtly, at least reminding them to read their cards and such). As such, a Pre-release tournament's goal isn't quite the same, and thus forfeiting solely to allow a friend or family member to advance isn't as big a deal. Well if those are still the conditions.

tl;dr: You do not see it as reasonable that I ask you to actually play the game in a tournament you wish to attend? No, sorry. That is unreasonable, but the current rules provide you that opportunity for various reasons. I can't command you to, but if you will not play a family member or friend in an honest game, please don't attend a tournament. If you will play, I have no problem with it.

 

[Vablakes]

...when did scooping when you have no chance to advance to give someone you like some help become cheating...

This doesn't even happen often. Mostly only if you are X-3 paired up to someone who can make cut at X-2. If they beat you they're fine. But if you win neither player makes it. If someone scoops to someone with the same record as them I'd describe that person with the word "tool". Fighting a battle you can win is something, but if you can lose for something good to come to another I'd take that option over the "moral" one.

I must respectfully disagree. I think that people should play out full games, unless it is a top cut game and you have no hope of winning. You make top cut without help from "tools" or you don't make it at all. If someone scooped to me because they wanted me to make top cut and I did just because of that even though I should have lost, I would probably drop, to be fair to the person who got kicked out. I'm sorry, but it is just wrong.

 

[P_A]

No doubt that's a very noble idea and sentiment guys, but ultimately flawed. People do scoop to their relatives, and friends ON OCCASION, (sometimes for better reasons than you might think) but that doesn't make them immoral. And yes, situations do arise where construction contractors do that (mind you, I suppose that happens very infrequently). It's rather plain to see from this thread that those who are "for" the option of scooping aren't the ones who are expecting others to change their opinion, nor are they adamant about their stand. Neither are those who are neither for or against scooping. However I see a marked difference in those who are against scooping. Most are quite stuck on the witch hunt of those who have in the past scooped for one reason or another - without being willing to walk a mile in the other man's shoes. Who are you to tell others that their opinion is soooo wrong?

If TPCi doesn't feel the need to address this issue, or attempt to bring in an unenforcable law, why should you be so stuck in your opinion that you won't even consider possible circumstances? Consider this, why are you so ridgid in your beliefs that you feel the need to run roughshod over others? Are you saying that no one has the right to intentionally lose for any reason whatsoever? If so, I truly pity you. You must not be a happy person but can only find flaws in others to complain about why you didn't win.

I'm done here.

 

[z-man]

I must respectfully disagree. I think that people should play out full games, unless it is a top cut game and you have no hope of winning. You make top cut without help from "tools" or you don't make it at all. If someone scooped to me because they wanted me to make top cut and I did just because of that even though I should have lost, I would probably drop, to be fair to the person who got kicked out. I'm sorry, but it is just wrong.

Why? Look at it from the X-3 player's point of view. He/she has no reason to win, and nothing to win. If he wins, he'll actively have less fun because he'll have a friend around him that missed cut because of his win.

Now look at it from the X-2 player. You have something to win, and your opponent cannot win anything from winning the game. You can be understandably upset if your friend knocks you out of the tournament when he clearly has no shot at making cut. Friends don't let friends miss cut when it is avoidable.


Now look at it from an outsider point of view. Here's an X-2 player playing down against an X-3. Either the X-2 player wins or the X-3 player wins. If the X-2 player wins, he'll be in cut. If the X-3 player wins, oh well. Why should the cause of the X-2 player's win mean anything to you? The effect is what important, and that effect is that he won.

Now then, as the X-2 player, I wouldn't expect my friends to scoop to me, but it would be nice. As the X-3 player, I have no reason not to scoop, so why not? The purpose of these tournaments is to have fun, and I have fun watching my friends play in top cut. I also have fun playing in top cut, but if I can't do it, I'd rather my friends do it.


I hope this makes sense to you. As an observer, the effect of the game should be the only thing that really matters to you. The cause of why someone wins should be irrelevant to you. Both players can possibly win, so who cares how they win?

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

I wish to clarify something: I was specifically addressing people who couldn't bring themselves to play and risk beating a friend/family member in a tournament setting. I agree tournaments are supposed to be fun, but it is a specific fun. You are agreeing that you enjoy the fun of organized play and fair competition going into it. If you do not agree to that, why play in the tournament?

Only those sort of people don't really exist. Further fun is subjective and Pokemon doesn't try to pander to a specific kind of fun. There are collectors, casual players, competitive players, and combinations of the three, and if you really want to get into it someone who folds to their friend so they can get into top cut is trying to let their friend have more fun.

So no, one doesn't need your requirements you listed, but rather I ask you (and all players) not to abuse the system and to meet the basic requirements of the concept of a tournament. You are to not intentionally play poorly or otherwise aid another, but instead play to the best of your ability. If it is your friend or family member, both of you should understand going into it that you are to play your best against each other should you face each other. As such, I consider this quite a reasonable request.

First of all asking someone not abuse a the system is like saying "you might know that this card is going to be hyped, but don't horde them," it's just not going to happen. Further the basic requirements of a tournament do not have any influence on this or people would be getting DQ'd. Also again a lot of this is rather subjective. Who determines what a good play is compared to a bad play?

Obviously a direct comparisons to team sport that is meant to be a team sport won't match up completely. Still the underlying process is similar: how would you feel finding out that a team only advanced because... one of their players was friends with a player on the opposing team earlier in a tournament or series, and the friend of that player either intentionally performed poorly to allow his friend's team to win, or after being a vital part of his team suddenly refused to play at the last possible second, ruining any strategy going into the match?

Again such behavior isn't common. People in being different teams generally means they're in it to win it, and scooping wouldn't help that, and if you're talking about sports that's even more unlikely as they don't want to let down their own team.

tl;dr: You do not see it as reasonable that I ask you to actually play the game in a tournament you wish to attend? No, sorry. That is unreasonable, but the current rules provide you that opportunity for various reasons. I can't command you to, but if you will not play a family member or friend in an honest game, please don't attend a tournament. If you will play, I have no problem with it.

I'm sorry, but your suggestion is the unfair one. Most of the people in opposition to this have bubbled out due to people folding, and aren't bitter about it, and saying if you might scoop then don't play is harsh and unfair to the players who do it.



I want to take a moment to point out something. The majority of people that scoop do so for a variety of reasons, varying from saving time to a kind gesture to their opponent. The later of which is that player's decision and no one else's not even their opponent's and the opponent is not at fault.

A player scooping to a friend can make their day, especially if said person hasn't been in or isn't in top cut very often, and to them that is far more important than trying to get points or whatnot to them.

Further how do you know that they scooped anyway? You're not supposed to watch ongoing matches, and if they told you then bring it up with them.

 

[ajhawk]

No doubt that's a very noble idea and sentiment guys, but ultimately flawed. People do scoop to their relatives, and friends ON OCCASION, (sometimes for better reasons than you might think) but that doesn't make them immoral. And yes, situations do arise where construction contractors do that (mind you, I suppose that happens very infrequently). It's rather plain to see from this thread that those who are "for" the option of scooping aren't the ones who are expecting others to change their opinion, nor are they adamant about their stand. Neither are those who are neither for or against scooping. However I see a marked difference in those who are against scooping. Most are quite stuck on the witch hunt of those who have in the past scooped for one reason or another - without being willing to walk a mile in the other man's shoes. Who are you to tell others that their opinion is soooo wrong?

If TPCi doesn't feel the need to address this issue, or attempt to bring in an unenforcable law, why should you be so stuck in your opinion that you won't even consider possible circumstances? Consider this, why are you so ridgid in your beliefs that you feel the need to run roughshod over others? Are you saying that no one has the right to intentionally lose for any reason whatsoever? If so, I truly pity you. You must not be a happy person but can only find flaws in others to complain about why you didn't win.

I'm done here.

Um, I sure hope not. Let's say three construction companies are bidding on a project and two of the intentionally bid really high so that the third can big high and win, that is collusion and highly illegal. Sure hope no one finds out about that one :biggrin:

 

[evil psyduck]

Player A plays player B. Player A is in even if he loses. Player B is in if he wins. Player A scoops to player B. Now player C wins but would have made cut if player B had lost. Is it fare to player C that player A scooped to player B to get player B in top cut? I THINK NOT!!!

JMO

 

[z-man]

Evil psyduck, the possibility for Player B to win is there. Whatever happens happens. It is perfectly fair because Player B could win anyways, and the same course of events would happen. As I said, when you're an outsider, the ends are what should be important (who wins) as opposed to the means (how that person wins)

 

[RB Golbat]

Evil psyduck, the possibility for Player B to win is there. Whatever happens happens. It is perfectly fair because Player B could win anyways, and the same course of events would happen. As I said, when you're an outsider, the ends are what should be important (who wins) as opposed to the means (how that person wins)

In that case, Player B should prove they could win by playing through the match.

 

[evil psyduck]

Evil psyduck, the possibility for Player B to win is there. Whatever happens happens. It is perfectly fair because Player B could win anyways, and the same course of events would happen. As I said, when you're an outsider, the ends are what should be important (who wins) as opposed to the means (how that person wins)

Could have does not mean he would have.

 

[z-man]

Sure, but if something is unfair, it is providing an advantage to one player over another. The fact that Player B can win means that the scoop is not creating a situation that would not normally happen in a standard tournament environment. If A and B played, and Player B won, the result would be no different. Why should it matter how Player B won? Would it be equally unfair for Player C (the one who may or may not bubble) if Player A gets a gameloss or doesn't show up? You guys are focusing on how the game is won from an outsider point of view when the effect of the "game" is really the only thing that matters...

 

[evil psyduck]

If he can win then play the game. I agree if he plays the game and wins then that is not creating a situation. It is when A scoops to B that it is not creating a situation.

 

[djjoe227]

Player A plays player B. Player A is in even if he loses. Player B is in if he wins. Player A scoops to player B. Now player C wins but would have made cut if player B had lost. Is it fare to player C that player A scooped to player B to get player B in top cut? I THINK NOT!!!

JMO

Is it fair that we're really debating someone's position in a tournament who didn't outright win? This shouldn't go down to people caring about how well someone did after they lost. They lost, they lost, end of story. You want to prevent this? Win. When you don't go into the topcut with an X-0 record, you risk getting kicked out of the tournament.

 

[evil psyduck]

Is it fair that we're really debating someone's position in a tournament who didn't outright win? This shouldn't go down to people caring about how well someone did after they lost. They lost, they lost, end of story. You want to prevent this? Win. When you don't go into the topcut with an X-0 record, you risk getting kicked out of the tournament.

How about you take some of your own advice then? Play the game and win. Taking a scoop IS NOT wining.