View Single Post
  #95   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-04-2013, 14:17
rick.oliver's Avatar
rick.oliver rick.oliver is offline
Mentor - Retired
AKA: Pap
no team
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Liberty Township, OH
Posts: 249
rick.oliver has a reputation beyond reputerick.oliver has a reputation beyond reputerick.oliver has a reputation beyond reputerick.oliver has a reputation beyond reputerick.oliver has a reputation beyond reputerick.oliver has a reputation beyond reputerick.oliver has a reputation beyond reputerick.oliver has a reputation beyond reputerick.oliver has a reputation beyond reputerick.oliver has a reputation beyond reputerick.oliver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Winning a Match vs. Winning Strategically

The best way to ensure that each team plays to win every match is to ensure that the seeding system rewards that behavior. Qualifying points based on wins and ties with tie breaker points based on a team's own alliance performance (not the opposing one's) should do that.

This is the system in place for this year. The remaining incentive which may influence behavior is the draft process. In my opinion, drafting 1 to 8 in both rounds would remove any incentive for a team to "throw" a match.

Under these circumstances, I cannot think of an ethical (or even gray area) which would justify a team "throwing" a match.