Jump to content
atem16

Patrick Hoban And The Djinn Debate

Recommended Posts

Samuel Pedigo    2203

 

Patrick coerced his opponents into a friendly agreement where players volunteer to duel under more skillful conditions. Anybody agreeing to eliminate a significant amount of chance against the GOAT is really paying respect to the better side of this luck-based game. It's unfortunate for them to completely have the rug pulled out from underneath them when the "best" out there resorts to cheap tricks. The only reason this pre-meditated "strategy" isn't a direct violation of the rulebook is because for some reason it doesn't contain a "sportsmanship" clause. 

 

Klaus doing this is one thing, but it undermines the integrity of the game for the Patrick to do this and vehemently defend it. Everybody should ask themselves, honestly: If Klaus or Dalton had admitted to doing this instead, would you think of it differently? Hoban's really good at Yu-Gi-Oh, but c'mon guys, it doesn't make him infallible.

 

Yeah I mean Klaus and Dalton are actual cheaters lol. Comparing Hoban to them is completely unfair.

 

It's not unfair to compare a shady action to other shady actions. If he doesn't want to be compared to them then he shouldn't be doing things (nevermind defending them) that we would only expect from them, like this, or using Dalton's psychological warfare, like he has in the past. It is unfair to say that because he did those, and those are things Dalton and Klaus would do, that he is a cheater. But nobody's doing that.

On the contrary, the fact that I of all people, someone who normally gives Hoban way more shit than he deserves, have chosen to instead defend his actions should make it clear that I am not siding with him just because he's Hoban. I simply believe that you are obligated to follow the rules to the letter, and nothing more. I don't know what kind of psychological warfare Dalton has implemented exactly so I can't comment on that. All I know is that he has been in trouble numerous times for his blatant disregard of the rules. Mind games have nothing to do with my opinion of him. If I catch you cheat, I'm going to think you're a cheater. It's really that simple.

 

You're far too much of an independent thinker for me to have intended the "If Klaus or Dalton had admitted to doing this instead" question for you.

 

 

 

So anything that is not illegal per the rulebook is okay? Does it say anything about having my friends knock on the door of my competitors the night before the Top 8 of Worlds? I think we can agree there is an imaginary line somewhere. Most of us can appreciate being outfoxed, but being snake charmed is something else entirely.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»ACP    33422

Atem has touched on this before, but if you play Yugioh you really need to separate your personal feelings from the rules of the game. I remember people saying, "Yeah, so what if intentionally drawing is against the rules? I don't think it should be, so I'm going to do it anyways." The reverse applies. Just the same way that we should call out intentionally drawing scum, we should not call out people who aren't actually breaking any rules. This kind of borders on scrub mentality.

 

I hate to bring up this particular example, but a lot of people said that my deck choice in early 2013 was also crossing some imaginary line in their head. People were saying, "Your deck takes roughly an hour to complete a turn. That's not the way Yugioh is supposed to be played." Your opinion on how Yugioh should be played should not stop me from playing the way that it is allowed to be played. The same goes for sidedecking mind games.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Soul    7945

Atem has touched on this before, but if you play Yugioh you really need to separate your personal feelings from the rules of the game. I remember people saying, "Yeah, so what if intentionally drawing is against the rules? I don't think it should be, so I'm going to do it anyways." The reverse applies. Just the same way that we should call out intentionally drawing scum, we should not call out people who aren't actually breaking any rules. This kind of borders on scrub mentality.

 

I hate to bring up this particular example, but a lot of people said that my deck choice in early 2013 was also crossing some imaginary line in their head. People were saying, "Your deck takes roughly an hour to complete a turn. That's not the way Yugioh is supposed to be played." Your opinion on how Yugioh should be played should not stop me from playing the way that it is allowed to be played. The same goes for sidedecking mind games.

 

Funny thing is the very people defending your viewpoint right now also disagreed with you on the EV Gishkill brought to the game, in general. I can at least respect your stance, as it's something you believe in wholeheartedly and have practiced on more than one platform. I have no choice but to respect your deck of choice, or the way you attempt to manipulate a player off of the table. But to condone it is entirely different. It's a simple question really, but would you rather a game where no one trusts anyone and there's a ton of people just being dicks to their opponents, or a game where that is virtually non-existent, and when it is, stamped out by the playerbase. 

 

In Chess, these sort of things are not illegal either. They are just highly frowned upon, same in Poker really. Some people just try to respect the game more. Y'know, the actual technical game, and the guessing game that comes forth from those moves. Not the elements artificially created and added by people who imo, are just savages. 

  • Upvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the issue that people have with this isn't that patrick broke any rules. what he did was within the rules, but it speaks volume about his character.

anyone who has played the nekroz mirror knows that djinn is detrimental to it. a mirror of skill turns into a mirror of luck with djinn. it forces you to side cards that are terrible except for breaking the djinn lock, and even then its a crapshoot whether or not you'll draw it. either they open it and you don't draw your out and you lose, or they don't open it and you have dead books in your hand, or they open it and you have eclipse and combo and destroy them.

so when you have arguably the best player in the world right now asking you to side out djinn in the mirror, he's offering you to have a fair game of nekroz mirror where the better player wins due to skill not because they got lucky in the guessing game. he's offering to have a fair fight, for either of you to prove who is truly better at this game.

and then he lies to you in your face, then spits on you.

this is not someone who is known for cheating. this is a player who many in the yugioh world look up to as their idol, as a legitimate player seeing success due to his technical skill and next level deck building, as someone to aspire to.

and he pulls this shit. you can argue all you want that there is no honor or chivalry in this game and that you should take every non technical edge you can to win, but there is an expected level of sportsmanship and trust from both you and your opponent, and he completely disregards it.

even klaus, at the 1k state championship after the main event, asked his opponent to side out djinn and he kept his word.

think about that.

you guys can defend it all you want, but its ironic that people play this game competitively to top and win for recognition of their skills, and then decide to do it by cheating or something like this. no one respects dalton, no one respects klaus, no one respects simon he, no matter how many tops they have, solely because of the tactics they employ to do so.

so i have to ask you: was it worth it, Patrick "Dalton Bousman" Hoban?
  • Upvote 31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»ACP    33422

 

Atem has touched on this before, but if you play Yugioh you really need to separate your personal feelings from the rules of the game. I remember people saying, "Yeah, so what if intentionally drawing is against the rules? I don't think it should be, so I'm going to do it anyways." The reverse applies. Just the same way that we should call out intentionally drawing scum, we should not call out people who aren't actually breaking any rules. This kind of borders on scrub mentality.

 

I hate to bring up this particular example, but a lot of people said that my deck choice in early 2013 was also crossing some imaginary line in their head. People were saying, "Your deck takes roughly an hour to complete a turn. That's not the way Yugioh is supposed to be played." Your opinion on how Yugioh should be played should not stop me from playing the way that it is allowed to be played. The same goes for sidedecking mind games.

 

Funny thing is the very people defending your viewpoint right now also disagreed with you on the EV Gishkill brought to the game, in general. I can at least respect your stance, as it's something you believe in wholeheartedly and have practiced on more than one platform. I have no choice but to respect your deck of choice, or the way you attempt to manipulate a player off of the table. But to condone it is entirely different. It's a simple question really, but would you rather a game where no one trusts anyone and there's a ton of people just being dicks to their opponents, or a game where that is virtually non-existent, and when it is, stamped out by the playerbase. 

 

In Chess, these sort of things are not illegal either. They are just highly frowned upon, same in Poker really. Some people just try to respect the game more. Y'know, the actual technical game, and the guessing game that comes forth from those moves. Not the elements artificially created and added by people who imo, are just savages. 

 

That's such a weird hypothetical, because this is Yugioh were talking about, and I can't imagine where no one is being a dick to each other. I mean you can be a pretty big dick yourself; I've just gotten used to it. We're both angry and cynical, so why are we even bringing a world of respectful yugioh players into the conversation? The other ironic thing is that if people were playing the way the game was supposed to be played in the first place, people wouldn't even be offering these agreements. You never saw Yugi offering to take Dark Magician out of his deck if Kaiba would agree to take out Blue-Eyes White Dragon. So it makes perfect sense to me that in a world where people are trying to convince people to ignore the way the game is supposed to be played, and to mutually de-escalate their arsenal if you will, so that there's a more fair fight, that some of those same people might actually have a hidden reserve of nukes just in case, if you pardon my Cold War analogy. I think it's fair to say, "You live by the arbitrary agreement that is not based within the rules of the game, you die by the arbitrary agreement that is not based within the rules of the game." As for people ranting about skill in Yugioh, you've been playing Yugioh for how long now? It's Yugioh, not fucking chess. Play the game the way it's supposed to be played, or at least play by the written rules at a minimum. If you don't like it, go play something else.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
atem16    283

yes the matter of the fact is that many people do look up to Patrick Hoban and people saying he cheated, he did not cheat but the matter of the fact is he is a skilled player and why would he have to go to this in order to win? Clearly siding out the djinns would have made the mirror a lot more skillful and hoban being a great player as he is could have won but instead did something like this. I actually liked the idea of siding out degenerate shit like rftdd and sixth sense to prove who they better player is rather than losing because " my opponent opened up with x card" or " I have no outs to the lock so I guess  I lose"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gatManB    488

This is straight savage lol. I don't know how I would feel back in the day playing against one of the best players/potentially someone I looked upto and having this happen to me. Technically its a fair move, but again, it just speaks volumes about the kind of person you are. But then it just comes down to what you're playing ygo for. If you're trying to be the best there ever was and this was something you figured would get you there, I mean, you cant really argue with that. personally, like some others said no matter how bad I wanted a win, there's just somethings I couldn't do. Lying through my teeth to have an unfair advantage (specially when my opponent is probably giving me the benefit of the doubt, being a great player and all) isnt a low I would want to stoop to. 

 

Growing up and playing against a few great players like dale/lazaro/ervin, I always took something away from every game whether it was where I made a mistake or how I could have played better. It was never anything malicious or against their character that made me lose. I couldn't imagine the amount of respect I'd lose for those guys had they felt the need to do stuff like that to win. I respected all of those players more because of that fact, they never ever did anything shady to get a win. Every win was just a win, no bullshit, ever. It's also why I'll probably always consider Lazaro the best to ever play this game, dude was the nicest guy ive ever met through ygo and no matter how friendly and good  a person he was, when it was time to play you knew he was gonna go hard. 

 

A lot of people will probably see nothing wrong with what Pat did because YGO has kind of always had that "im making money from this/its my job/im a pro" mentality because of the financial investment and time it takes to play the game. But if that player thought shit was all good and we'd have a beer after the fact lol hell naw, those arent the kinds of people I could keep in my circle

 

comparing this shit to poker is a complete joke as well lol there's real money in poker and can actually put real money in your pocket. Ygo is legit just a hobby

  • Upvote 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blacklisted    1330

Would people have seen this in a different light had Patrick Hoban continued on and won the event? Would people have changed their opinions thinking this was just a swindle that got him there or would they despise his win declaring it undeserved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jhadd1996    247

Id imagine you would also be ok with what dalton did, of putting loli on tilt on their match.

Why was this even brought up? Regardless of Dalton cheating. there is a mental side to the game whether you choose to like it or not. There is literally nothing wrong with putting someone on tilt during a match to gain an advantage in that aspect of the game.

I agree with Mason. It's a tournament, you're there to win not to care what people think of you.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Slashtap    2347

Heard about this story through the grapevine (well, from Sam). This case intrigues me. Not because of the high profile of who is involved because it has shown me a gap in my philosophy. That is, I haven't yet made up my mind about what sportsmanship means or ought to mean and who to blame (or how much blame to assign each part) when a situation like this arises. I wrote to David Sirlin about the matter because he has made this kind of stuff his career and because he is a voice outside of the game from whom I felt I could benefit to hear.

 

I am going to share our brief exchange, not to convince you of any one side (as I certainly haven't decided for myself), but to offer some thoughts to chew on. There is such thing as being correct for the wrong reasons. Based on the emotional argument I am seeing while skimming through some posts, I think this may apply to some who have chimed in (assuming their position is correct).

 

 

Dear Mr. Sirlin,

 
I am deliberating a case concerning sportsmanship vs. gamesmanship. Your wisdom on the nature of competition has given me a lot of direction in the past and I was hoping you could offer some thoughts in order to help arrive at a concrete distinction between the two. I first will describe the scenario, and next summarize my thoughts.
 
In the Yugioh TCG, players engaged in a mirror match would at times issue a gentleman's agreement to remove a card from their deck into their sideboard after the first game. This has been a practice at only a few points in the game's history. Each time, it was done because a specific card was not conducive to the "skillfulness" of the mirror. That is, the card would often punish one player heavily simply because his opponent drew it, with little to no dependency on how well either player played the game itself. Players would sideboard out the card, and it would remain face-up throughout the remainder of match, to keep both players honest.
 
Recently, this gentleman's agreement has become a common practice in a commonly played mirror match. One player came up with the idea to keep an additional copy of the card in his sideboard. In doing so, he could offer to side the card out and remove it face-up while still sideboarding IN the second copy, giving him an unforeseen advantage over his opponent.
 
The game's community has been stirred by this incident. The community is abuzz in conversation. For the most part, this activity has been seen as unacceptable. However, the opinion of the majority is neither here nor there to me. I am interested in arriving at a concrete, preferably quantifiable, distinction between deception being unsportsmanlike and deception between just another aspect of the game.
 
I do not have an opinion on who is right, though I am working through these thoughts right now.
 
In favor of the player's action being acceptable, the most basic premise we have is that his actions were legal. I am reminded of the article you wrote on women's badminton doubles during the Beijing Olympics. Eight players were disqualified because they realized throwing specific games would give them an overall advantage in the tournament. Your conclusion on that matter was that the fault was in the construction of the rules, not in the players. I wholeheartedly agreed there. And so, an argument that comes to mind in favor of this player's actions is that while they may be undesirable, they are more a reflection of a ruleset that needs improvement.
 
The player requested to side out a copy of X card. He made good on his end of the request, upholding the gentleman's agreement in the literal sense.
 
In argument against the player's actions being acceptable, we examine the meaning behind the gentleman's agreement. Its intent is to produce a more skillful game-a game whose outcome is more dependent on the decisions made by two opponents, and less by the sequence of cards they happen to draw. Thus, when this player sided out the copy of X card but sided in his second copy, one could contend that he did not uphold the gentleman's agreement. While he literally upheld his request to side out X card, he did not uphold the intended spirit of that agreement: the mutual understanding that two players wish to play a more skillful game.
 
The following are examples of deception that the game's community has deemed acceptable, fyi.
-Not playing card X, but keeping it in the sideboard to encourage the opponent to side X out. In other words, I don't want to play X, but I also don't want to play against it.
-Smokescreen sideboarding. Shuffling the sideboard into the deck, then removing 15 cards, in order to mask how many cards were swapped between games.
-Deceptive sideboarding. Pretending to sideboard several cards when in fact not changing the deck at all. Or, appearing not to sideboard when in fact sideboarding. This is a very rare tactic and mostly applies to decks that complete convert strategies between games. For instance, let's say in game 1 I played a beatdown deck, and in game 2 I sideboarded into a burn deck. In game 3, you now have to predict whether I will play burn or beatdown. You watch how I sideboard closely. I pretend to side a whole lot. You conclude I am switching back to beatdown. It turns out I was not actually switching any cards, and I am still playing burn.
 
I'm not sure whether this information is pertinent to the case, but here is some additional information about the game.
-You are allowed to lie about the contents of your hand or deck. For instance, you don't want your opponent to attack. You can say (though it would be a novice strategy), "Don't attack me, I have Gorz!" (Gorz would punish the opponent for attacking.) Even if you don't play Gorz at all. Perhaps the most famous example of deception in TCG history was a particular employment of deception about the contents of one's deck. A Magic: The Gathering player sideboarded out one of two copies of his win condition. His opponent did not know this. After going through the first copy, the player feigned that he had the second. He began going through the motions he would go through had he actually had that second copy, and asked his opponent whether he really needed to play it out. His opponent scooped up his cards and conceded, when the entire time the player had no actual win condition.
-You are not allowed to lie about public information, the rules, the policies, game mechanics, card texts, and so on. There are concrete penalties.
-The rules and policies of Yugioh do not (yet) address the particular incident I lay before you. The official policies do not have anything about gentleman's agreements.
 
Thank you for your time, and I look forward to hearing from you.
 
Johnny

 

 

If you ask me as a tournament organizer, my answer is there is no such thing as "gentleman's agreement." That does not exist in a tournament. Actually, both players are at fault and I'd give them warnings for playing the game incorrectly. The game rules DO NOT allow removing a card because you think it makes for a more fun game, or a more skilled game, or for any other reason. That is straight up illegal, or it needs to be. You can't go changing around the rules of the game just because your opponent agrees to it. That's really uancceptable. If the game is better that way, then the rules should change. The forum to do that in is not through a "gentleman's agreement" but rather in actually changing the real rules of the game, or at the very least, the real tournament floor rules.

 
The game rules or tournament floor rules need to exactly define what is allowed here. If they allow removing the card and secretly sideboarding it in, then they immediately fail at doing what they are supposed to do. Obviously the point of such a rule would be to prevent from being possible. So need real rules that really 100% allow the game to be played without the card in question, with no trust needed by either side and that cannot be cheated.
 
All the stuff about lying about what's in your hand is irrelevant. That's all fine and not the same thing as this.
 
What the player did is slimey, but I wouldn't call bad sportsmanship against him. I basically never call that ever, this is more like bad tournament-running. The fault is with the officials for allowing fakey homemade rules to enter a tournament match. That the fakey homemade rules have holes in them doesn't excuse the officials. That's all the MORE reason the tournament officials need real rules to handle this situation, because this was so foreseeable ahead of time. The default rule must be "no house rules are allowed in tournament play."
 
I'll leave it to you to figure out what the real tournament rule should be to handle this, if it is actually desirable. I'd actually lean toward "removing the cards is just not allowed, period." If removing the cards makes the game slightly better, that isn't enough reason to allow it. If it makes the game way better, that is maaaaaaybe enough reason, but still a lot of trouble ruleswise. And it is a lot of trouble. It pretty much needs to be optional, so that anyone who wants to refuse the removal of these cards can do so. And at that point, it's a lot of overhead for a rule that can be ignored. You also need rules about if this applies to any cards or just specific cards, and if it's specific cards, it gets into judgement calls that are best not made in the first place. If it's any cards, it's opening the door to too many matches playing out way too differently and is starting to fail as offering one standard of game everyone plays by. For example, to play to win, I'd always demand no removing because that allowed me to practice a specific matchup ahead of time, not a bunch of different matchups with different cards removed. I'd strongly suggest players play the real game as it is before going to the great lengths to codify the gentlemen's rule into solid tournament rules.
 
I hope that helped some.
--Sirlin

 

 

Thank you for the response. Historically, the "gentleman's agreement" type cards did not take long to get banned by the real rules.

I wish to clarify something, not sure if this changes your response. The player did not sneakily side in the card he agreed to side out. He sided in a second, additional copy, keeping to his literal promise to side out the first copy. In other words, he upheld his end of the agreement while circumventing the spirit behind that agreement. If that does not change your opinion, and you still consider that slimey but not unsportsmanlike, then my question is what criteria led you to not categorize it as unsportsmanlike? The community at the moment sees it as very unsportsmanlike. (I myself am undecided)
 
Johnny

 

 

Yeah I understand that.

 
Unsportsmanlike is a bad word, basically. Patriotic sounds like it means one thing, then it gets applied to "the Patriot Act" and "Patriot Missiles" which are both arguably antithetical to what the US should be about. Unsportsmanlike is practically always hijacked to mean some perverted thing, some way to penalize players for faults of other people.
 
That player did a tournament-legal move that increases his chance to win. I wouldn't call that unsportsmanlike. More like "what his incentive actually is." Of course he should do that, and of course the rules are flawed precisely because they allow it. When you create a button that says "press this for an advantage" then someone presses it for an advantage, you don't get to call that unsportsmanlike. If you want to not like the guy or not think he's nice, or see him as a villain, that's fine, but the one thing he definitely is is "playing to win using tournament legal means" which is pretty damn sportsmanlike. More like a wolf amongst the sheep who are house ruling things and expecting it to go well. I'd give him a pat on the back for proving we need to fix our rules, lol.
 
You really really need a solid rule to enforce this card removal thing, if it is to exist at all. And I still think it probably shouldn't be allowed anyway, even if some rule could be devised. It sounds like a "for fun" thing more than something for actual tournament play. But I can't say for sure because I don't know the specifics.
--Sirlin

 

A big picture question I'm wrestling with is: If a legal move gives a player an advantage, what is the criteria by which we define whether the move is acceptable or unacceptable? For instance, Sam's reasoning, which I think is very good, is that Patrick did not uphold the spirit of the agreement to play a skillful match. However, what makes this different from a deck building advantage, from learning about a tech and keeping it a secret? Playing 2 VE in the main certainly gave Pat an edge over those who mained 1 or 0 that weekend at Navy Pier, and that edge was not a skillful one. VE is "do not play Yugioh." What is the fundamental moral difference when this kind of deck building advantage is used during a game as opposed to before turning in a deck list? To what extent to we blame players, official rules, unwritten standards of play, etc.?

 

I'm not sure whether I'll check back anytime soon, but whether I do or don't, I'd like to apologize for posts I made in December and January.

  • Upvote 33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Urthor    10229
Reading David Sirlin's writing on an actual issue affecting Yugioh is honestly one of the most special experiences I've had with this game/forum, thank you Johnny Li I forgive you.
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blacklisted    1330

I feel its hard to draw a parallel to Yugioh because its a game where there is a lot of luck involved in it such that skill isnt the only determiner of the winner (sports), and there is no real monetary incentive. I feel that the slander and the vilifying of Patricks character did worse to him than what he hoped to achieve especially because he didn't win the event which would have been a redeeming factor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ostaph    73

11051163_843667892348005_1237185721_n.jp

 

Oh man, apart from being very entertaining, this thread makes me kinda sad.

 

I knew there were a lot of cheaters in the game and many at the top tables. I always kinda thought to myself that this game is not complicated enough to make skill a large enough factor to constantly win and beat luck as the most relevant contributing factor to constantly top. On the other hand I also knew that skill plus experience plus raw number of participations in events will definitely result in fairly constant topping. So I was always debating with myself, whether or not most of the successful players are cheaters. I never came to a final conclusion and still havent. But the videos here clearly show that cheating is even way more a thing than I expected - call me naive if you want. I honestly thought that most players would feel ashamed/dirty and might not enjoy winning by cheating more than playing honestly. How wrong I was. Added to that, we have statements about playing to win (yes I have also read tht thing and find it pretty good) and doing everything on that path that makes a victory more likely, be it legal, illegal, morally questionable, morally inoffensive or whatever. I must be a freaking romantic fool to believe in things such as being a nice person and playing fair while doing my best to win and have a good time. Or maybe I'm just a scrub. But I'd rather be scrub than a Lance Armstrong wannabe and do literally everything to become the one with the most victories.

 

If you fail to follow basic rules and norms of social behavior because you are to eager to win, you have a character problem in my opinion. Success is not a legitimation for every shady act possible. And now I'm going to creep back under my rock and preach moral to the other starfishies. All that scum. :(

Quoting myself from the Dalton/Loli thread.

 

Even if not cheating, in terms of breaking rules and policy guidelines, it's bad. You should know it's bad when you actually have to look up if it is even legal. Feel ashamed and don't do stuff like that again, Patrick! Grow as a person and be proud of what you can achieve without being an asshole. Don't be greedy. Be nice and be good at the game at the same time.

 

I support Soul's standpoint on this. Like totally.

It goes along with the only life motto I kinda have: You cannot change the whole world. But you can make the world around you a little bit better by being a nice person.

 

For the notice: I am not your Grandma and I'm no Christian weirdo and I know this sounds pathetic. But I stand by what I wrote there.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Careyious    21

The best players of any game are the game's ambassadors and representatives, whether it it be for Starcraft, Tennis, League or Football. While these players do have a personal interest in winning and playing the game, there is still an underlying responsibility to behave in such a manor that not only protects their own reputation, but also the reputation of the game and promotes the games public image. (I.e you're a role model for a lot of people behave like it). 

 

I think Konami needs to be a bit more active in their control over Yugioh's community public image and enforce good sportsmanship to a much more stringent degree, but for the sake of efficiency, mostly for the higher or highest level of play (YCS and WCQ top cuts and all of WCS ). Punishment for not representing the your team or the sport/game in a good manor isn't uncommon. 

 

On a personal level, this pisses me off to no end because this just reinforces the image that yugioh players are scummy fucks, and not a single Vanguard, Magic or Weiss player was surprised at this news. 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hi i'm dm    2353

you all hated him when he was a fat fuck who had never won anything and now that he wins all the time you all still won't get off his fat nuts even now he's revealed himself to be an utter scumbag and a cunt.

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you all hated him when he was a fat fuck who had never won anything and now that he wins all the time you all still won't get off his fat nuts even now he's revealed himself to be an utter scumbag and a cunt.


Productive post right here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+scuzzlebutt    23501
why dont we find some people that actually break rules to demonize
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Samuel Pedigo    2203

why dont we find some people that actually break rules to demonize

 

Because this:

 

The best players of any game are the game's ambassadors and representatives, whether it it be for Starcraft, Tennis, League or Football. While these players do have a personal interest in winning and playing the game, there is still an underlying responsibility to behave in such a manor that not only protects their own reputation, but also the reputation of the game and promotes the games public image. (I.e you're a role model for a lot of people behave like it). 

 

I think Konami needs to be a bit more active in their control over Yugioh's community public image and enforce good sportsmanship to a much more stringent degree, but for the sake of efficiency, mostly for the higher or highest level of play (YCS and WCQ top cuts and all of WCS ). Punishment for not representing the your team or the sport/game in a good manor isn't uncommon. 

 

On a personal level, this pisses me off to no end because this just reinforces the image that yugioh players are scummy fucks, and not a single Vanguard, Magic or Weiss player was surprised at this news. 

 

To answer my own "If Klaus or Dalton had admitted to doing this instead" question: I would've instantly chalked it up as unsportsmanlike and moved on without bothering to read or post. Patrick's position though makes him a role model and an ambassador. It's not as if he's simply been successful at the game and has steered clear of the spotlight as much as possible. He's always preaching about his philosophies.

 

 

 

@ Johnny

 

I respect Sirlin's POV, but as a Yu-Gi-Oh player it might as well be from lala land, because that's what a game run by Wizards is compared to that of Konami. We're simply beyond being able to reasonably expect Konami to hold themselves accountable for making unfair cards legal or players making "house rules" to get around those money grabs. Acknowledgment of such is why players began entering into these "gentleman's agreements" in the first place.

 

Let me put it this way, Hoban's tactics are no more in the best interest of his opponent and the playerbase as a whole than Konami is for allowing the cards to be legal in the first place. It's perfectly legal for Konami to make Sixth Sense legal but we all know Konami is full of it for doing so. Guess Patrick was being a model ambassador for the game after all. 

 

Regardless, thank you for reaching out to Sirlin and posting your conversation.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catasterism    400

 

The other ironic thing is that if people were playing the way the game was supposed to be played in the first place, people wouldn't even be offering these agreements. You never saw Yugi offering to take Dark Magician out of his deck if Kaiba would agree to take out Blue-Eyes White Dragon.

 

 

I can completely see this happening:

 

"Hey Yugi, why don't we make this interesting."

"What do you mean Kaiba?"

"Why don't we both remove the most powerful monsters from our decks and see who is really the better duelist. You remove your Dark Magician, and I'll remove my Blue-Eyes White Dragon."

"You're on Kaiba!"

 

*two turns later*

 

"You fool Yugi, I still have 2 more Blue-Eyes in my deck, along with la-Djinn!"

 

 

Edit:

But more seriously, the whole "agreement" schtick is what gets it for me. There was no need to make that agreement with the other player and then circumvent it. There are perfectly valid bluffs and misdirections possible that could achieve a similar effect (albeit with lower chance of success) that don't involve exploiting the ideal of sportsmanship from your opponent.

 

"I think Djinn is unskillful so I'm going to side it out. I won't complain if you do too."

"Djinn is bad in the mirror because it's not a combo card so I'm taking it out - here look." (whether this is true or not)

 

Not really any different than the usual table banter of "Well I'm obviously siding X in/out against you" I'm sure we've all heard and participated in many times.

 

That actually adds a layer of skill to the game in the form of bluffing and counter bluffing.

 

Breaking an agreement with the opponent so that you can get an easy win? Where is the skillfulness in that?

  • Upvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»ACP    33422

A few points that I'd like to address

- Appeal to skill: Saying that siding out Djinn makes the game more skilled, so they should've honored that agreement, is complete non-sequitur in this argument. Morality, ethics, and skill are three completely different things.

- Hoban represents the game poorly: No evidence to indicate this. Yugioh is generally looked down upon by other games, and I can assure you that this incident will not significantly shift public opinion in either direction. I can assure you that if this controversy changed anyone's opinion on Yugioh, it's the fact that it's fucking stupid to even offer this kind of gentleman's agreement in the first place. That shit simply does not happen in other card games. You Yugioh players have so much shit wrong with your image that committing to fix this of all things is just laughable and shows how completely unaware you people are as a whole. Maybe you should have a social media campaign to fix the rampant theft, the shitty state of the judge program, the fact that actual cheaters are getting ignored or slapped on the wrist, retarded psuedo-vendors, or 96 other problems before you try to go on a witch hunt for people breaking imaginary rules. You make yourself look even more fucked up by treating this as a serious community issue lol. I could go on about this all day but TL;DR priorities people.

- Sirlin basically echoed exactly what I said earlier, but of course in a much more eloquent way. When you're playing a game, you have entered a contract to play by the rules and nothing more. When you're playing to win, you have committed to use every rule and game mechanic to maximize your chances of winning. Hoban found a good trick, but people will get used to it. There was a time where running Cyber Stein OTK siding into Burn was an underhanded sideboard tactic as well. But people caught on pretty quickly, so people stopped get free match wins for employing said tactic. I know that you'll probably say, "But this is different." According to the rules, it's no different, so that's just like, your opinion, man. I would argue that Hoban did the game a service, as now this tactic is a known quantity, and people will be prepared for it.

  • Upvote 6
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
atem16    283
Julia made a reponse to this as a few were given questions and here is what she had to say :

Julia HedbergOK...I'm not really going to read through all the responses, but here are my thoughts.

People have been asking me about this nearly all weekend, and there are several discussions about it in my judges-only Facebook group. 

There's nothing in the policy documents forbidding these kinds of actions. Your opponent is never obligated to give you any valid information on things that are not Public Knowledge, and you should not think that they will. 
Your opponent is on your opponent's side, they are not on your side. I recommend that you do not enter into these kinds of deals or "gentlemen's agreements", because (sadly) there is a dearth of gentlemen playing card games. 

While these actions are not against current tournament policy, I do not respect them. These all fall under what I've generally referred to as "dick moves". They are not ethical, they are not "genius", they are not "pro". They are cheap and disrespectful things to do.

Now then.
I perfectly realize this puts the average, generally sporting, more or less "unknown" player in a rough position - someone offers them one of these "deals", and common sense (and this latest discussion) should dictate they do not accept it. If they do the smart thing and decline, they run the risk of being mocked at the event or online later, especially if the person making the offer is a "known" player. "Oh, are you saying you don't trust me?" "So and so is a respected player, why are you so scared to take this deal?" "Oh, you aren't willing to make this deal? What kind of a scrub are you anyways". 
etc. etc. etc.
So they're faced with the choice of agreeing to a proposal that is probably only going to screw them over, or rejecting it and risking a public shaming because they wouldn't go along with it.

There has always been a tendency in the player base to build up their own celebrities. Occasionally it's just someone who wins a lot, but most of the time it's just someone who is really, really good at self promotion, and people buy into it. They think "oh I need to listen to what this guy says, watch their YouTube videos, copy their decklists, and generally get into their hype". An unfortunate side effect of doing this seems to be the relinquishing of independent judgment, and then we have a large number of players knee-jerkingly going along with whatever a Yugi Celebrity of the Moment is saying or doing. It was true ten years ago and it's true today.

That's the kind of behavior that lets people get away with stuff like this - and I don't mean actually just doing cheap stuff like this, I mean convincing the player base that it's an OK course of action, and making your opponents too scared to turn down these ridiculous proposals, because they're afraid of the backlash if they "insult" a more popular player.

I know most of you merely wanted an answer to the scenarios above, and instead you had to sit through a lecture - but, that'll teach you to tag me. :>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VongolaPrimo    19

Julia made a reponse to this as a few were given questions and here is what she had to say :
Julia HedbergOK...I'm not really going to read through all the responses, but here are my thoughts.
People have been asking me about this nearly all weekend, and there are several discussions about it in my judges-only Facebook group. 
There's nothing in the policy documents forbidding these kinds of actions. Your opponent is never obligated to give you any valid information on things that are not Public Knowledge, and you should not think that they will. 
Your opponent is on your opponent's side, they are not on your side. I recommend that you do not enter into these kinds of deals or "gentlemen's agreements", because (sadly) there is a dearth of gentlemen playing card games. 
While these actions are not against current tournament policy, I do not respect them. These all fall under what I've generally referred to as "dick moves". They are not ethical, they are not "genius", they are not "pro". They are cheap and disrespectful things to do.
Now then.
I perfectly realize this puts the average, generally sporting, more or less "unknown" player in a rough position - someone offers them one of these "deals", and common sense (and this latest discussion) should dictate they do not accept it. If they do the smart thing and decline, they run the risk of being mocked at the event or online later, especially if the person making the offer is a "known" player. "Oh, are you saying you don't trust me?" "So and so is a respected player, why are you so scared to take this deal?" "Oh, you aren't willing to make this deal? What kind of a scrub are you anyways". 
etc. etc. etc.
So they're faced with the choice of agreeing to a proposal that is probably only going to screw them over, or rejecting it and risking a public shaming because they wouldn't go along with it.
There has always been a tendency in the player base to build up their own celebrities. Occasionally it's just someone who wins a lot, but most of the time it's just someone who is really, really good at self promotion, and people buy into it. They think "oh I need to listen to what this guy says, watch their YouTube videos, copy their decklists, and generally get into their hype". An unfortunate side effect of doing this seems to be the relinquishing of independent judgment, and then we have a large number of players knee-jerkingly going along with whatever a Yugi Celebrity of the Moment is saying or doing. It was true ten years ago and it's true today.
That's the kind of behavior that lets people get away with stuff like this - and I don't mean actually just doing cheap stuff like this, I mean convincing the player base that it's an OK course of action, and making your opponents too scared to turn down these ridiculous proposals, because they're afraid of the backlash if they "insult" a more popular player.
I know most of you merely wanted an answer to the scenarios above, and instead you had to sit through a lecture - but, that'll teach you to tag me. :>

Yep I was the guy who asked julia.
Here are the questions I asked
Julia response were to all of these questions

1. Player A asks player be to side a Djinn releaser, Player A puts Djinn realser in the side deck BUT player B did not and kept in the main deck.
Player B then uses realser and Player A calls a judge..
2.Player Player A asks player be to side a Djinn releaser, Player A puts Djinn realser in the side deck BUT Player B side deck his main deck releaser and puts a second realser in the deck. Both players reveal relaser in the side deck and goes to game 2.
Player B then uses realser and Player A calls a judge.
3.Player A has 3 monster on the field and says to Player B "Show me your set card and if it is mirror force i will scoop"
Player B shows the facedown which was mirror force.
Player A does not scoop.
Player B calls a Judge.
3.5 Player A has 3 monsters on the field and says to Player B who has 3 set cards "Show me your set mirror force and i will scoop"
Player B shows the facedown which was mirror force.
Player A does not scoop. And proceeds to use MST on mirror force and end the game .
Player B calls a judge.
4. Player B has 400 life points left.
Player A summon 2 level 4 monsters and says " Cowboy good game"
Player B then proceeds to sign the slip and leave.
Later it is found out Player A does not run cowboy.
5.Its player A turn time is about to call player A life points are higher Player B then says just end and you will win. Player A ends Player B uses Poison of the Old mind when his turns comes to make his LP higher then the opponent and time calls.
Player A calls a judge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×