Jump to content
ACP

PSA Regarding Agreeing to Side Various Cards

Recommended Posts

+Urthor    10238
I don't get what's hard to understand about the words "unless otherwise stated"
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blacklisted    1334

Yugioh is a game with almost no cash incentive yet there are so many issues of swindles, cheats and the abuse of loop holes and gray areas it's insane.

 

Like people come up with the whole 'Its a competition, you play to win not make friends' make it sound like the game is the be-all-and-end-all situation. I would rather walk away from an event with a few extra people I can call a friend, than 2 boxes and a whole bunch of people discussing whether some shit I did was scummy or not.

 

Like yes winning is good and all, but if you're gonna cross a moral boundary for a card game with no monetary incentive, that's probably going to extend into shit you do outside of the game and thats when I'd like to say you should probably take a step back and reconsider what you're doing with your life. I probably do sound like a moral crusader here but the fact of the matter is, we can all name endless amounts of shit that is legal to do but probably not ethical and at the end of the day, its easier to remember what kind of person you are than what achievements you've had

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+greasy thug    19083
I think winning a card game, especially something like ygo gives the player a euphoric feeling to the point that they believe that winning at all costs is justified
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blacklisted    1334

I think winning a card game, especially something like ygo gives the player a euphoric feeling to the point that they believe that winning at all costs is justified

 

Winning in a card game which most people are too ashamed to tell their peer groups they play? How would they live with a euphoric feeling knowing it wasn't legitimately earned?

 

At my last regionals, I was x-1 going into the last round and my opponent asked me if I wanted to draw. Mathematically speaking, it was clearly the best option. If there is 1 winner, that person gets a deckbox and a mat and the other person gets neither, while if we drew, we both get a mat. 2 mats is also worth more than 1 mat and a draw so, using game theory, it was the best option. However, I had already gotten my invite and only wanted the win, I didn't really care about the mat. My opponent wanted to top, he had never topped an event before. So I said to him that if we ID'd then he wouldn't have a legitimate top so we played it out and I lost.

From that, he obviously didnt care about the money, his driver was to top an event, and he did so legitimately. For other people, I don't know. If there is no monetary incentive and no integrity, what is their driver to play the game?

 

 

From a real world example, I know it isn't illegal for a cab driver to take a longer route to your destination, so long as he takes you there, but isn't taking a route that isn't the most direct/efficient just unethical?

 

 

Furthermore, it's human nature that bad memories and impressions are more salient and vivid to people than good ones. There will be more people that remember the shit that happens in tournaments rather than the winner. Most people can't name who won each event, but if asked to name the Simon He incident or the Sam v Gruner incident, or other similar stuff, a lot of people can just tell the story off the top of their heads. While people may just care about winning, making a few good impressions here and there is probably better for your career if you do pursue a long term competitive career in this game

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Audioslayne    902

Question: 

 

While I think it's pretty cut and dry that what happened was legal yet unethical to most, what are your thoughts on this in say DGz or DNF warring?   Like you don't even have the luxury of seeing them physically remove the card so they don't even have to side one more.  If both players agree to this mid war duel and it's broken should a penalty be enforced?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carbon    1858

They'd probably just laugh and say "sucks for you"

If whoever did that gets punished then they're being very hypocritical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darthflaw    124

No.

 

It's been said before and apparently bears repeating: Don't trust your opponents when it comes to what they tell you about the  contents of their deck. It's private information and per the rules of the game, they have no reason to be honest with you about what they have in their deck. If you offer to side out djinn and they agree and you lose to the lock, it's your own fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Paraliel+    8117

They'd probably just laugh and say "sucks for you"
If whoever did that gets punished then they're being very hypocritical.

Or are following a different official ruleset lol
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jhadd1996    240

 

I think winning a card game, especially something like ygo gives the player a euphoric feeling to the point that they believe that winning at all costs is justified

 

Winning in a card game which most people are too ashamed to tell their peer groups they play? How would they live with a euphoric feeling knowing it wasn't legitimately earned?

 

At my last regionals, I was x-1 going into the last round and my opponent asked me if I wanted to draw. Mathematically speaking, it was clearly the best option. If there is 1 winner, that person gets a deckbox and a mat and the other person gets neither, while if we drew, we both get a mat. 2 mats is also worth more than 1 mat and a draw so, using game theory, it was the best option. However, I had already gotten my invite and only wanted the win, I didn't really care about the mat. My opponent wanted to top, he had never topped an event before. So I said to him that if we ID'd then he wouldn't have a legitimate top so we played it out and I lost.

From that, he obviously didnt care about the money, his driver was to top an event, and he did so legitimately. For other people, I don't know. If there is no monetary incentive and no integrity, what is their driver to play the game?

 

 

From a real world example, I know it isn't illegal for a cab driver to take a longer route to your destination, so long as he takes you there, but isn't taking a route that isn't the most direct/efficient just unethical?

 

 

Furthermore, it's human nature that bad memories and impressions are more salient and vivid to people than good ones. There will be more people that remember the shit that happens in tournaments rather than the winner. Most people can't name who won each event, but if asked to name the Simon He incident or the Sam v Gruner incident, or other similar stuff, a lot of people can just tell the story off the top of their heads. While people may just care about winning, making a few good impressions here and there is probably better for your career if you do pursue a long term competitive career in this game

 

 Some people are  just more competitive than others, and actually have that drive to win more than anything else, and more than others. For me, and possibly for a lot of people, winning, but mostly seeking perfection is the ultimate reward. Not the prizes, not the money(while this is nice), and most certainly not what people think of you. Everything else is just secondary. I believe you should always try to seek perfection, it really is just the ultimate reward. Some people argue perfection isn't possible. What else do you aim for? You should seek less than perfection? You should settle for less than perfection? You should seek for perfection because it's the best possible outcome, and these people aren't going to be willing to be content with anything less than perfection. Achieving perfection is possible, It happens every single day even if it's just in the little things like a driving test or an actual test. You may never achieve perfection in some things you choose to do, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't try.


Look at all the best players in the past(and now). What makes them different than everyone else? They seek perfection rather than settling for "good enough" and they settle for nothing less.

That's my opinion at least.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TFJ    632
But by using an underhanded tactic, you admit that you are not good enough to reach perfection.

So you caused yourself to fail in that goal.

If being the best is the goal, you don't do that by lying. This isn't a case where he played better, getting closer to perfection.
This is a case, where he saw a quick opportunity to win. He decided to take it, but if you are taking shortcuts, it means you don't care about perfection. You just want that title respect cash money whatever.

And of course title and respect don't come if you do something dirty.
So you can't achieve perfection, playing at the best level. And you don't even get respect.
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TFJ    632
Why did Weevil throw Exodis into the ocean?
He knew he could never be at the level required to beat it. So he took an underhand approach to win.

Why did Weevil add Parasite Parasite to Joeys deck?
He doubted his ability to beat Joey with his skills. So he took an underhand approach.

Why did Hoban trick opponents to take Djinn outs?
He wasn't confident in his own ability to win every mirror.
If he knew 100% that he was better, there was no reason to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+ACP+    34066

But by using a meta deck, you admit that you are not good enough to reach perfection.

So you caused yourself to fail in that goal.

If being the best is the goal, you don't do that by playing meta. This isn't a case where he played better, getting closer to perfection.
This is a case, where he saw an easy opportunity to win. He decided to take it, but if you are taking shortcuts, it means you don't care about perfection. You just want that title respect cash money whatever.

And of course title and respect don't come if you play meta.
So you can't achieve perfection, playing at the best level. And you don't even get respect.

Now see how ridiculous your quote looks? You're imposing arbitrary standards on what makes a player good and limiting yourself. This is the kind of attitude that shitty players have.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Paraliel+    8117

Except based on that, you think that technical skill is the only way to be "skillful". Luck still rears its ugly head over card games and mind games reduce the chance that luck will have its way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TFJ    632
Leily, this is not mindgaming. This is just a lie.

Yes there is mindgaming when it comes to siding. But this doesn't fit. This is saying, why should I bother trying to mindgame/play, I can just lie and win.

Lies are perfectly acceptable to people. So there won't ever be an agreement on this subject. But to say he mindgamed him with his side is incorrect for this tournament.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Paraliel+    8117

His opponent believed he would honor the agreement because he was Patrick Hoban, and the only reason he was able to lie successfully is because he's a respected player.

 

Mindgames.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TFJ    632
Except their was no mindgame. Because 99% of players did not ever question the outcome.
Seeing the Djinn faceup made them trust it completely.

There wasn't a doubt for most of them I'm sure. Sure in all future tournaments you can call it a mindgame, not this one.

If you want to col it anything. You have to say outplayed, out strategized, etc.

----
As for Allen changing my post.
It depends completely on what your goals are. If you have the goal to only be the best with non-meta, then yes perfection is cheapened if you use meta.

If jhadd meant perfection means winning then sure.
But I think most people assume perfection is more associated with making the beat deck, plays, and gaining respect. And in this situation respect isn't be given by a lot of people, so perfection was not achieved.

If you call Respect an arbitrary standard. Then yea you see nothing wrong with pushing the limits.
But Patrick has tried to make a name for himself, a respected name. So it is not an arbitrary standard for him.
----
Allen, leily,

Do you respect that Patrick did this move? Or are you just indifferent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jhadd1996    240

Why did Weevil throw Exodis into the ocean?
He knew he could never be at the level required to beat it. So he took an underhand approach to win.

Why did Weevil add Parasite Parasite to Joeys deck?
He doubted his ability to beat Joey with his skills. So he took an underhand approach.

Why did Hoban trick opponents to take Djinn outs?
He wasn't confident in his own ability to win every mirror.
If he knew 100% that he was better, there was no reason to do so.

I never mentioned Patrick in my post, but ok.

This literally doesn't make any sense. Don't compare scripted  cartoons to what Patrick did.
 

But it doesn't really matter how good your technical play is in a mirror because deck building decides most mirrors anyway. Take the Burning Abyss mirror or Dragon mirror  with babies, both of them are pretty skill intensive, but Patrick even said himself he won because he was playing Emptiness and 3 Sword in the main while everyone else wasn't. For example, just like the Burning Abyss mirror, what are you doing to do when your opponent mains Mask Change 2, Enemy Controller, and Maxx "C", and you aren't, and he just flips Mask Change in your turn? No amount of Technical play is getting you out of that.

 Also at your other post. There are a lot more things that you can achieve perfection in that go along with technical play if that makes sense. Patrick might have had really tight technical play in the mirror, but that doesn't mean he isn't allowed to get an even bigger advantage by offering to side out Djinn, their opponents side their outs out, and Patrick is prepared and side's in another Djinn, effectively making his deck better.

You're actually just being illogical.




 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+ACP+    34066

To be honest, I respect Patrick for doing this move, but not for the reasons that you might think:

1. Hoban has shown that he can think outside the box, and this is an example of that. It's so weird because back when I frequented the YCS circuit, Hoban was completely different. He didn't ask a lot of questions, he wasn't much of an independent thinker, and I believe that's a large part of what held him back for years. I just love how this incident is so representative of the fact that Hoban is just on a completely different level than virtually every other Yugioh player.

2. When he used this trick, he obviously knew that he was a famous player, so this would be big news. He had to decide whether he valued people's opinions more than winning. He decided that he valued winning more. And I respect the fact that he made that determination. I respect people who think for themselves rather than just doing something because people tell them too. I believe that worrying about the opinions of others is a large part of what holds people back. Some people don't want to take risks because, "What if I fail and people laugh at me?" I know people who says things like, "I'm not racist, but I would never want to date outside my race because of how other people would perceive me." As anyone who knows me well is aware, I do things the way I want to do them, and I don't care what people think about it. It's gotten me in hot water before. So I can personally relate to the scenario that Hoban is in.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blacklisted    1334

 

 

I think winning a card game, especially something like ygo gives the player a euphoric feeling to the point that they believe that winning at all costs is justified

 

Winning in a card game which most people are too ashamed to tell their peer groups they play? How would they live with a euphoric feeling knowing it wasn't legitimately earned?

 

At my last regionals, I was x-1 going into the last round and my opponent asked me if I wanted to draw. Mathematically speaking, it was clearly the best option. If there is 1 winner, that person gets a deckbox and a mat and the other person gets neither, while if we drew, we both get a mat. 2 mats is also worth more than 1 mat and a draw so, using game theory, it was the best option. However, I had already gotten my invite and only wanted the win, I didn't really care about the mat. My opponent wanted to top, he had never topped an event before. So I said to him that if we ID'd then he wouldn't have a legitimate top so we played it out and I lost.

From that, he obviously didnt care about the money, his driver was to top an event, and he did so legitimately. For other people, I don't know. If there is no monetary incentive and no integrity, what is their driver to play the game?

 

 

From a real world example, I know it isn't illegal for a cab driver to take a longer route to your destination, so long as he takes you there, but isn't taking a route that isn't the most direct/efficient just unethical?

 

 

Furthermore, it's human nature that bad memories and impressions are more salient and vivid to people than good ones. There will be more people that remember the shit that happens in tournaments rather than the winner. Most people can't name who won each event, but if asked to name the Simon He incident or the Sam v Gruner incident, or other similar stuff, a lot of people can just tell the story off the top of their heads. While people may just care about winning, making a few good impressions here and there is probably better for your career if you do pursue a long term competitive career in this game

 

 Some people are  just more competitive than others, and actually have that drive to win more than anything else, and more than others. For me, and possibly for a lot of people, winning, but mostly seeking perfection is the ultimate reward. Not the prizes, not the money(while this is nice), and most certainly not what people think of you. Everything else is just secondary. I believe you should always try to seek perfection, it really is just the ultimate reward. Some people argue perfection isn't possible. What else do you aim for? You should seek less than perfection? You should settle for less than perfection? You should seek for perfection because it's the best possible outcome, and these people aren't going to be willing to be content with anything less than perfection. Achieving perfection is possible, It happens every single day even if it's just in the little things like a driving test or an actual test. You may never achieve perfection in some things you choose to do, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't try.


Look at all the best players in the past(and now). What makes them different than everyone else? They seek perfection rather than settling for "good enough" and they settle for nothing less.

That's my opinion at least.


 

 

 

While this is true, and I'm 100% for achieving your best, I would never advise anyone to compromise integrity or character for it.

If your driver was money, sure you probably have more incentive to cheat or swindle your opponent, the abuse of loopholes or flaws or whatever because you ultimately just want the money and don't care how you do it.
If your driver is to be the best, you'd do it without the above. You could offer such an agreement, and honor the purpose behind it, or if it was refused, you just accept the game has an element of luck behind it and that some people may be luckier than others.

 

Humans are social creatures, what people think about you most certainly does have an impact on you. Between fame, money and glory, fame is the only driver which will last and be echoed. Previous best players have all seeked perfection through playing this game and accepting that luck factors are involved but continue to play their best and uphold their reputation and character. Perfection isn't winning the game at all costs disregarding everything such as your opponent being a human being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Careyious    21
Now that the common agreement is to side out Wavering Eyes in the mirror, are there any ways an opponent might find a way to somehow have 3 faceup Wavering Eyes yet play a set in his deck, without a violation of the rules? I can't think of anything without the rules of no cards that aren't in play being allowed in the deck box coming to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Me.    1348

I think careyious is trying to protect himself by preemptively finding the possible loophole rather than exploiting it. And even if he's not, I'd rather make it public before it's used than after, if it should exist.

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.

×