25 Comments
Edited by Skooky

beep beep back it up

Posted by DevourerOfTime

Again, thank you Patrick for your superb coverage of this very serious issue within the FGC.

Posted by TheHT

OH!

Edited by Hassun

@theht: COLLUSION!

Had to do it. Also props to the FGC for curbing this behaviour and to Evo for setting the good example.

Edited by MasterRain

Awesome stuff Patty.

Posted by Lively

Patrick needs to find a way to work the word "collusion" into all of his articles, so far so good.

Posted by Skogen

SCOOOOOOOOOPSSSSS

Nice interview. It's good to see real journalists trying to shed light on the topic of collusion instead of writing more sensationalized pieces vilifying the FGC.

Edited by FLStyle

Once again awesome job Patrick.

Posted by KaneRobot

If this does not involve someone being run over by an unmarked black car in a parking garage, I'm not interested.

Edited by Deusoma

@kanerobot said:

If this does not involve someone being run over by an unmarked black car in a parking garage, I'm not interested.

Is it bad that that was my first thought as well, the instant I saw the update on my Twitter feed?

Posted by HubrisRanger

Interesting point about how the Japanese scene doesn't face this issue due to money not being part of the equation anyway. It seems that fighting for "pride" has less of an impetus in the States, which is a shame as it clearly helps stamp out the amount of this type of tom foolery pretty easily.

Edited by wumbo3000

The interview cuts out for a while 18 mins in...

Posted by churrific

I did enjoy this. Thanks.

Posted by Daouzin

@wumbo3000: Yeah, but it comes back about 30 seconds later, it's weird. I had the same issue.

Posted by GalacticPunt

@wumbo3000: @patrickklepek It's an unfortunately long chunk of audio missing near the end. Definitely seems like Patrick heard the closing thoughts, but they are missing. Maybe check the original recording in case it's just a weird uploading fluke?

Posted by MrMazz

Excellent interview Patrick I had hoped you touched on the implication of SRK and EventHubs teaming up in not covering tournaments that do not go along wtih the plan part of enforcement.

Posted by KoolAid

Excellent coverage. I've love to see some interviews looking at the other side of the issue too.

For example, I find it really interesting that Patrick uses the term "growing up" when referring to these rules. Its true, collusion doesn't seem to happen in older professional sports. With all the money poured into them, a fake NBA or NFL match would be a disaster!

But is that really a good thing?

The more people that get interested in a sport, the more money enters the scene in the form of sponsors, ads and ticket sales. But this is all based around the core idea that it is interesting to watch two groups compete when they both want the same thing: to win. The NFL and others makes it's money by making the competition endless. But what happens when the competitors don't want to win? What if they don't care about 1st place? Is the best answer really to force them to compete for the entertainment of the viewers? I agree watching fake matches sucks, and they should be avoided. But I'd also argue that if you are mad at a player for not wanting to compete, then you are missing the point. It only IS interesting when both players want it. Forcing them to play for our amusement is shallow. Its the same thing. Its a fake match. Just because the rule says they should fake it really well doesn't change that.

That doesn't really feel like growing up to me. It seems like one more step on the path to selling out.

Posted by HubrisRanger

@koolaid said:

The more people that get interested in a sport, the more money enters the scene in the form of sponsors, ads and ticket sales. But this is all based around the core idea that it is interesting to watch two groups compete when they both want the same thing: to win. The NFL and others makes it's money by making the competition endless. But what happens when the competitors don't want to win? What if they don't care about 1st place? Is the best answer really to force them to compete for the entertainment of the viewers? I agree watching fake matches sucks, and they should be avoided. But I'd also argue that if you are mad at a player for not wanting to compete, then you are missing the point. It only IS interesting when both players want it. Forcing them to play for our amusement is shallow. Its the same thing. Its a fake match. Just because the rule says they should fake it really well doesn't change that.

I guess my guy counter-response to that is that if you imagine a scenario where you're in a game that you don't care if you win or not, why are you entering into a tournament in the first place? The nature of events like this necessitates that other people are going to be watching your output, so in regard to the idea of them not being there for my entertainment, they can stick to cash-games in their living room if they're not interested in providing entertainment to an unknown viewer. No one is forcing anybody to enter into these public exhibition tournaments, but they are held to certain expectations once they opt into those type of events. If you want to get the prize money, the exposure of participating in those larger tournaments and the competition that comes along with it, don't you think you should also be held to the bare-minimum of at least treating the event with the respect others do?

Edited by Y2Ken

Thanks again for covering this, Scoops.

And I agree with @hubrisranger, if you don't care about winning then maybe you should reconsider why you entered the tournament in the first place. There's plenty of backroom games for you to get your fighting fix in without taking a spot from guys who genuinely want to prove that they are the best on the big stage.

Posted by Jayzilla

@koolaid said:

Excellent coverage. I've love to see some interviews looking at the other side of the issue too.

For example, I find it really interesting that Patrick uses the term "growing up" when referring to these rules. Its true, collusion doesn't seem to happen in older professional sports. With all the money poured into them, a fake NBA or NFL match would be a disaster!

But is that really a good thing?

The more people that get interested in a sport, the more money enters the scene in the form of sponsors, ads and ticket sales. But this is all based around the core idea that it is interesting to watch two groups compete when they both want the same thing: to win. The NFL and others makes it's money by making the competition endless. But what happens when the competitors don't want to win? What if they don't care about 1st place? Is the best answer really to force them to compete for the entertainment of the viewers? I agree watching fake matches sucks, and they should be avoided. But I'd also argue that if you are mad at a player for not wanting to compete, then you are missing the point. It only IS interesting when both players want it. Forcing them to play for our amusement is shallow. Its the same thing. Its a fake match. Just because the rule says they should fake it really well doesn't change that.

That doesn't really feel like growing up to me. It seems like one more step on the path to selling out.

The flip side of that coin is who wants to watch hours on end of game coverage only to have someone blow a match on purpose? That is a colossal waste of everyone's time. People like to watch competition because they want to see who is the best. No one wants to see someone lose on purpose because they are splitting the money with their pals. At least I know I don't.

Posted by forteexe21

I'm losing a lot of salty bucks at salty bets due to all the collusion. I bet Shaq and Akuma is in on it.

Edited by rmanthorp

Dead air towards the end of this. Other than that - fantastic coverage of the FGC Scoops. Lovin' it.

Moderator
Posted by Sourpower

@patrickklepek the music is genius. I love it. Keep up the great work.

Posted by Turkalurch

Man that intro music is BOUNCIN'!