Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Is intentionally scooping moral?

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cabd

New Member
I've always wondered what other people thought about this. I bring it up now because of Kenny Wisdom's most recent report (on another site that I cannot link except in my sig)

To copy-paste my thoughts from there:

"By scooping to your friend, by definition, you kicked somebody else out of the topcut. When one goes in, one goes out. "

I see this happening all over the place, from small events such as cities or battle roads, all the way up to world last year (Fulop scooping to Ross)
 
I read through that article and the comments on there too and I gotta say I agree with you. It is cheating. I understand wanting your friends to succeed but not at the cost of another person who deserved it missing out. Its unfortunate that some people seem to think this is OK.
 
First off, I find your title funny. Unintentional scooping is a very big issue -- try not to do it D: I've seen my share of gamelosses through unintentional scooping.

The base and hardline fact is that people can do what they want with their games. I can quit any random games that I care to -- it isn't against SotG. Now then, offering incentive for your opponent to scoop (bribery) is certainly against SotG, but that isn't our topic. Legally, scooping to a friend is perfectly allowed, technically. Not showing to a round or cleaning up before the game is over are both technically gamelosses, but they function as such anyways -- they rarely get reported because no one really cares.

Now then, that isn't to say that this is moral. Morals are entirely subjective. I, personally, have no problems with it. It pisses me off when I bubble because of someone doing this, but there is nothing I can do to prevent this as a person. As said before, people can do what they want to with their games. It might piss off other players, but it is the scooper who is in control of his own game. If he finds it morally okay, he is perfectly okay scooping to his friend.

If anything happens to change this, people can get around it. I can accidentally forget to play supporters to let my opponent win, or I can scoop at the last minute because I just can't see a path to victory when I have 1 prize to my opponent's 5.
 
Last edited:
I agree with what you say and disagree as well.

We have that exact problem here at our tournaments with a family that plays. It is annoying to see Cleffa beat a fully charged Magnezone. (that must be 1 massive eeeeeek) It is unfair as they do have an advantage to manipulate standings to ensure certain people do well. As well as changing the entire shape of the swiss rounds and having them both playing ruining other peoples chances at cutting

But on the flipside that is their decision to do so. It is well within the rules and while it may not be sotg there is nothing stopping them doing it. Even if it was illegal how exactly do you prevent/stop it from happening. Judges are just not able to do that with all the other things they have to do
 
Last edited:
I've even seen players scooping to unknown people just to boost the TieBreaker of their friends.

Of course this is not what the game should go like, but you can't blame the players for adapting to the system. It's a result of the Championship Points system combined with the current top cut numbers that let 4-1 players bubble out - just like players dropping before the top cut was a result of the ELO system (but this at least wasn't unfair to others). And just like that, I'm sure P!P knows about the new issue and will react next season.
 
Pardon me? I guess I don't see all the ramifications then, since as far back as I remember I've never scooped to anything less than a hopeless match, or when someone has to leave early for a ride home. Is that now considered somewhat less than moral? If so, I definitely need an explanation since I must be ignorant of some facts. If not, then you need to still clarify the circumstances of your premise.
 
So when Fulop does it for Ross, he's "paving the way" for Ross's incredible Worlds run...

When Kenny's friend doesn't, its immortal.

lol. okay.
 
it happens in every game and it cant be avoided. i was playing in a last chance qualifier for World of Warcraft and people were just scooping so everyone could qualify 3 rounds tooks 8 minutes. round 4 came and 1 of the players didnt want his opponent to qualify so they played the game out so he could prevent his opponent from qualifying. influencing the final standings is always gonna be part of any game.
Posted with Mobile style...
 
I don't have any issue with scooping. I think that it's not really a big deal. It's not something you can say you can't do. I don't scoop too often, but the one time in recent memory that I did was in Worlds 2009 during the last round of Swiss. I was 3-3 and my opponent was 4-2. I didn't know who he was at that time (It was Yuta who won 2010 Worlds, I believe), but since I had no way to make cut with a win, and he would 100% made cut had he won, I scooped. I was HIGHLY favored in the matchup as I had already gone 2-0 against the deck he was playing, but couldn't do that to someone. The biggest gripe people had with it was what about the people that got 33rd. My thoughts on that is if you want to make cut at Worlds go 5-2 (that year). I have no issues with what I did, and think that it was beneficial. I gained nothing out of it.

I'm sure there are reasons that can be a bit more sketchy, but if done for the right reasons it becomes something that is really positive, not questionable as some of you might think.

Drew
 
To take what Drew just said and make it a more direct counter-argument to the OP: is it moral of Drew, knowing he will not make the cut, to knowingly take down another player, who still has a chance at the top cut, just because a) he can, and b) it randomly happened to be a good deck matchup for him?

I have absolutely no issue with scooping whatsoever. It's only even an allowable issue when the computer randomly decides that it's going to make a matchup where such a scenario can occur. And we all know the amount that luck factors into what happens in games.
 
Another provacative discussion on PokeGym! Yay.
(In terms of seriousness...feels like it falls somewhere in between our infamous "declumping" and "flipping a coin" threads, don't you think?)

As usual, I like to contribute what the Tournament Rules say:

10. Match Outcome
Match outcomes should always be the result of game play, except in the case of concession or penalty. Match outcomes determined by random means or by means of bribery harm the Spirit of the Game and are not tolerated by POP.
Click to expand...

Interesting. So games should be played out, except in the case of concession. Let's read more about that.

10.1. Conceding a Match
Players may concede a match to their opponents if they wish, and judges should allow players the opportunity to offer a concession if time is called on an incomplete match but before the players sign their match slip. Once the match slip has been signed by both players, the result of the match cannot be changed.
If a player wishes to concede a match to his or her opponent, a judge or score runner must be called immediately and notified of the concession so that the result can be recorded appropriately.
Click to expand...

"Players may concede a match to their opponents if they wish".
It really doesn't get any plainer than that.

So what about bribery? That's Section 10.3:

10.3. Bribery
Any form of compensation offered with the intention of altering the outcome of a match or persuading a player to concede at any point before or during the match is considered a bribe. Pokémon Organized Play believes that the outcome of every match in a tournament should be decided without any outside influences.
Click to expand...

This also relates to section 7.6.4 of the Penalty Guidelines which says that an example of "Unsporting Conduct: Cheating" is "Offering some form of compensation to an opponent for a concession."

It seems the requirement for bribery is that one player asks the other player for a concession and offers a form of compensation.
Someone scooping out of the goodness of their heart violates neither.


Besides pointing out these facts, I wanted to examine the last sentence. Let me quote it again:

Pokémon Organized Play believes that the outcome of every match in a tournament should be decided without any outside influences.
Click to expand...

Sounds ideal, but not pragmatic. Players have an idea of the tournament standings and who might make the top cut and who might not, and furthermore this season players know who needs Championship Points and who doesn't. Those are both "outside influences" that can factor in to how a match gets decided.

Finally, let's look at it this way. If someone creates a rule that absolutely forbids scooping, the player can still decide they want to lose and play accordingly. They don't attach the energy in their hand. They don't search out another attacker. They don't even need to attack if they don't want to. You can't stop people from losing a match if they want to, as z-man already said.

tl;dr Pokémon Organized Play recognizes that concessions are part of the game, and clearly provides the mechanism. So as the original poster asked, it's a moral issue.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I don't like it and wouldn't do it, but I recognize that it's common and there's not much that can be done about it. Even if scopping were banned, a player who really wants to lose will lose. Forcing a player who wants to scoop to play out a game poorly doesn't seem like it makes anything better for anyone, and trying to police that is essentially impossible. I would look askance at someone who forfeits before the game even starts, but it's their game to lose, and if they want the loss, that's their problem and not mine; all I can do in a tournament is try to win every game I sit down to play, and if the math doesn't get me into cut, them's the breaks. I suppose that if you form a team and decide in advance to maximize team members' chances of cutting, that probably is collusion of a sort, but how would you police that? We can't and shouldn't be watching players' hands to make sure they are making the best moves. I think most competitive games that use a Swiss system have this problem; I know the "gentlemen's draw" is an issue in chess.

Losing out on top cut on resistance because someone scooped does feel awful, but so does losing out on resistance because people you played dropped, and it's not reasonable to force folks to stick around and play out all of their games, either. If I'm going to complain about something I can't control affecting my resistance and keeping me out of top cuts, personally I'm more worried about resistance being harmed by drops than by scoops, although I haven't worked out the math. Has someone else?
 
Imhotep said:
You get whole teams that do this. Flood events in big numbers, roll in, clear the way for their leader/'elected' winner, sometimes on a rota system so they all get wins. Of course, if they meet along the way, it's the elected winner that is scooped against. It's commonplace.

There's 'matchup matching' too; for instance, a player runs a deck they belive can win other than against one or more particular bad matchups. Their subordinates then flood the tournament with decks designed to specifically beat these matchups, in order to crowd out those bad matchups from cuts. Almost like teching in team mates rather than cards into their own deck.
Click to expand...

Really? That's horrible :/ Then again, not much you can do to stop it from happening.
 
Thanks for the responses, guys. I know it's legal (because it's impossible to enforce cleanly). Note the word "moral" in there.
 
Scooping vs. Dropping Out

Some players scoop to save time. Like in the top cut. Players scoop when the stakes aren't that high generally. I have more issues with people dropping out of the tournament. Because the same player who scoops could drop and that would hurt resistance. Those are two different things though. What it does though is that there is a huge gap in skill and deck level between the 3-3's and the 4-2's.
 
You can not stop people from conceeding if they want to. We have a set of brothers who play and the older will not beat the yonger if they meet in a top cut. It is his decison. Once after he conceeded his brother in the T16 of Regionals, his brother went on to win the entire tournament afterwards. But ,that does not make his vicory tarnished at all. He still earned and deserved the Campionship even if he had a little boost.
 
cabd said:
Thanks for the responses, guys. I know it's legal (because it's impossible to enforce cleanly). Note the word "moral" in there.
Click to expand...

It doesn't meet my personal code of ethics/morality/what have you but I can easily see a set of rules under which it would be fine, and I wouldn't consider a person with those kind of rules "immoral." For me, I sit down to play every game to the best of my ability, and feel that to do otherwise is disrespectful to my opponent, but I know not everyone treats games that way, and I don't think prioritizing helping out one's friends is necessarily immoral. Pokémon does have somewhat of a moral code in the Spirit of the Game, and I don't think scooping violates that. (In particular I don't feel like the "it is disrespectful not to play your hardest" rule is actually a global one; that's just something I feel personally.)

If there are actually teams of thirty people descending on tournaments and trying to game the resistance system and metagame to get a particular person to the top cut, that makes me a fair bit more uncomfortable. But I've never seen anything like that in practice, and I don't think that's happening at things like Battle Roads and Cities at the very least. If it is, wow, I guess those people care a whole lot about Pokémon tournaments. :)
 
JandPDS said:
You can not stop people from conceeding if they want to. We have a set of brothers who play and the older will not beat the yonger if they meet in a top cut. It is his decison. Once after he conceeded his brother in the T16 of Regionals, his brother went on to win the entire tournament afterwards. But ,that does not make his vicory tarnished at all. He still earned and deserved the Campionship even if he had a little boost.
Click to expand...

LMAO, please explain how he deserved to win if he should've lost in t16.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top