Somehow I think this isn’t going to be a popular debate on these boards. What the hey, I’ll pose the question anyway.
The issue concerns something that happened in the tournament world of Magic: the Gathering in March. I’ll explain the situation to those that don’t know the game.
Pro Tour (PT) Tokyo in March. Dan Bock from Madison, WI played a 60 card basic land deck to lose the first round and then dropped out of the tournament 0-1.
In English: the PT is a tournament that happens a few times a year with a top prize of $30,000. There are several other prizes, going down to 32 places, I believe (out of around 250-300 participants). To compete in it, you have to win a qualifier tournament in your local area. In the PT, he played an all land deck. Land is something you use in the game to cast spells. It doesn’t help you attack, it doesn’t help you defend. It does nothing, really. He knew, by playing this deck, he had no chance whatsoever of winning a single game.
So why did he play it? He’s not good at the particular format they were using in PT Tokyo. He knew he stood no chance of getting in the money. He also knew that he wanted to see Tokyo because this would be one of the few opportunities he’d have to sightsee halfway around the world. Plus, trading and selling cards on the side is very lucrative and he’d make more money if he didn’t have to worry about competing in the tournament.
So he all but forfeited. Is this unsportsmanlike conduct? Why or why not?
Since his forfeiture was totally voluntary, I see no problem with it, except maybe wasting the opponents time. Wouldn’t have been easier to just say “I forfeit”???
Here’s the thing. Everyone who plays gets at least 2 PT points. These points are used in ranking systems and as a way to allow the top players to go to PTs without playing in a qualifier. If he had just forfeitted, he wouldn’t have gotten anything. He had to play at least one game, as per the rules, and then he dropped out.
An argument that has been made is that this pretty much gave the first round opponent a bye, because his opponent had no chance of losing.
Bock’s response is that, had he not competed, there would have been an odd number of players and someone would have gotten a bye anyway.
A counter to that is that he made his decision to play the deck regardless of the number of players at the tournament.
He could have easily brought a playable deck, then deliberately lost by playing poorly–hell, it’s easy enough to do that inadvertently at the PT level. That would be the logical thing to do if his only goal was to get a free trip to Tokyo and not be bothered with playing in the tournament.
By entering with an all-land deck (don’t players have to submit a deck list?) he was trying to make a statement. What was the statement?
If it was that WotC are a bunch of money grubbing jerks, I agree with him, but, er, well, aren’t there clearer ways to say that? (Like not buying Magic cards in the first place!)
Or was it, HA ha, WotC flew me to Japan for free, aren’t I clever?
Or was he just trying to avoid gettin’ beat fair and square?
I would consider his conduct unsportsmanlike, because it’s unsportsmanlike to throw a game unless you have a good sportsmanlike reason to do it. Which brings us again to the question, what was he meaning to say?
andros that’s what I’m asking you to decide. Bock’s stunt did hurt people and it did help people. Most of all, it helped him. Does this make it unsportsmanlike? I don’t know.
Podkayne, I have no idea what his statement was. The question is, why would it matter? How much would his motive justify his actions?
It’s undeniable that he went 0-1 to a) go sightseeing in Tokyo and b) make money on the side.
As to why he went 0-1 the way he did, I couldn’t tell you. My best guess is to do exactly what happened: gain popularity within the magic community and raise a little hell. Should that be taken into consideration when we judge Bock’s actions?
A sportsman is supposed to honor competition. A good sportsman honors the competition no matter the outcome. This punk flipped a bird at teh competition because he was afraid teh outcome would go against him.
It was petulant, insulting to the organizers of the event, the fans who paid to see the event (assuming people actualy pay to see these things), and to his opponent. And it was unsportsmanlike.
So people offered this guy competition and he purposely let them win in order to maximize his profits ? Geeze, I hope they never let this guy pitch in a world series !
What if his opponent had had the exact same idea and was also playing land cars? How annoyingly long would that game have been? I know running out of cards is bad (do you lose?) but if each player had exactly the same number of cards would it have been a draw?
At the begining of every turn you must draw a card. If you cannot draw a card, you lose. The minimum number of cards is 60, so yes, it could have been a veeeeery long (and highly ironic/improbable) game.
Realize that this wasn’t a team competition. This was one man acting for himself. There are a limited number of team magic tournaments and I doubt you’d find 3 people willing to go there to throw a match all in the hopes of scoring better outside the game.
People come to play and play to win. They want that prize money. He’s actually made it into the money once or twice before. This time, however, he didn’t feel like doing it.
He never cheated; he never did anything illegal. He skirted around the spirit of the rules though and I think that’s what’s making people upset.
Very few games feel the need to explicate a rule that says: you must try to win (or at least try not to lose). It is assumed. Throwing a match is considered extremely bad form. Really, I am amazed that anyone would need such an idea spelled out.
Is it illegal. No.
Is it unsportsmanlike? Absolutely. The loser does not deserve to be called a sportsman, in any sense of the word. He’s a selfish coward and a greasy little marmot. If you dropped him in the middle of the ocean he could ride his own oil slick to safety.
I haven’t played for years, but I used to have an all-land deck that won on occassion. I don’t think this is what you are talking about, but with a few Mishra’s Factories and the like, an all-land deck can be quite potent.
He went to a competition and refused to compete. If it was on his dime, I’d feel better about it. (Hey, your money bub, have a blast.) But I almost feel as though he defrauded the organizers.
He should have forfited or played a deck. He could let his little sister’s best friend’s cousin build the deck so he would just turn over cards for all I care, but what he did was very, very rude.
BlackKnight, nope, no Urzas, no Mishras, just plain old plains, mountains, and islands.
andros, do I believe that Magic is a sport? No, not really. Does that change the concept of sportsmanlike? No, not really.
Medea’s Child let’s assume he had played any random deck knowing it was terrible. Would playing a legitimate deck have changed whether what he did was ethical when he knew he’d lose anyway? And, in the end, wouldn’t it have punished him? He sits through up to 7 rounds with a sub par deck when it’s better for everyone involved to have him drop out.
This was not unsportsmanlike conduct. It was selfish, yes, especially if the trip to Tokyo was paid for by the tournament organizers, but only slightly so. He earned his spot in the tournament. If he does not care to play to win, even in the face of certain defeat, then that does not harm anyone else.
I haven’t kept up with MTG in five years, but I do know that all tournament winning decks are based on an abuse of flaws in the rules… so which is more unsportsmanlike?
While I view M:tG as a cultural resource on par with Pokemon (on a good day), it was still unsporting of this self-absorbed little wanker.
What he did do was prevent a more worthy opponent from getting into his chair and making a go of it. I tend to agree with Spiritus Mundi, this steaming nuckfugget should be scraped off the sheets with a spoon.
Then again, I view things like M:tG as hyper-contrived preoccupations for bored slackers who have nothing better to do than let some greedy noncreative money-grub Hoover surplus cash from their stone-washed denim pockets while they drink overpriced coffee and smoke clove cigarettes.
“Compete” stems from roots meaning “to strive together”. One of the best paraphrases I heard of what competition should mean is, to strive for what is best within oneself, in the company of others likewise engaged.
That’s what sportsmanship comes down to; approaching the spirit of competition properly.
What he did was petulant, childish, selfish, and petty. Perhaps that was what was best within him, though.
Zenster, you’re mostly right on the description. But besides the fact that I’ve never actually seen ANY magic player smoke clove cigs, most of them are too young to smoke anyway.
As far as taking a spot away from another person, the person he beat in the qualifier did NOT want to go to Tokyo. Strange as that may seem, I guess. They made a deal where Bock would win and the other guy would get most of the prizes. I suppose you could argue that he shouldn’t have competed in the qualifier at all, but he didn’t decide to pull this stunt until well after he had won. I think it was on the plane ride over there.
So then here’s a question: what’s the difference between purposely losing legitimately (playing a bad deck) and just purposely losing (playing a deck that cannot win). In one, he looks like an idiot and is shrugged off. In the other, he looks unsportsmanlike but gets famous. Which is better?
