Dankster Morgan
It is better this way
This is so messed up
I strongly disagree, I have posted a lot of elements which can't be considered random coincidence, considering that this tournament was online they couldn't expect to have more than this.ESL would be way out of line to do something unless there was inconvertible proof.
No matter how suspicious it looked, it would be highly inappropriate for a league to ban or DQ a player on rumor alone.
Imo this doesn't matter. No matter how suspect something may look, you cannot disqualify someone from a competition like this unless there's more than circumstantial proof. Circumstantial evidence alone is not enough.I strongly disagree, I have posted a lot of elements which can't be considered random coincidence, considering that this tournament was online they couldn't expect to have more than this.
Not disqualifying him damaged not only me and the other partecipants, but also E-League (commentators saying he is suspicious and openly saying he could be a cheater was just ridiculous, this are the world finals for a pot of 250k $, not some community cup joke tournament) who had its tournament ruined by a fool who gave free games away, and ESL itself because now everyone can be confident to get away with whatever fraud they want in every single online event, since admins won't take actions without "100 % proof", unachievable online.
What is highly inappropriate is having a clear fraud play in a super exclusive event, for a lot of money and in front of a lot of people, and at the same time rewarding him with 500$ and a trip that is worth many thousands. It's ridicolous
If that can be of any comfort, at least it wasn't you who had to spend that time and money to move wherever only to, as we say here, bounce off Dragon and pack up to go home pretty much immediately.I'm fucking mad
"A popular misconception is that circumstantial evidence is less valid or less important than direct evidence. This is only partly true: direct evidence is popularly assumed to be the most powerful. Many successful criminal prosecutions rely largely or entirely on circumstantial evidence, and civil charges are frequently based on circumstantial or indirect evidence."Imo this doesn't matter. No matter how suspect something may look, you cannot disqualify someone from a competition like this unless there's more than circumstantial proof. Circumstantial evidence alone is not enough.
Does he even use TYM at all? I'm not sure.Also on a different note, why didn't Bambooka show up here and tried to explain the circumstantial evidences pointed against him.
This is not a criminal prosecution. There is not a carefully selected jury, a lawyer on both sides, etc."A popular misconception is that circumstantial evidence is less valid or less important than direct evidence. This is only partly true: direct evidence is popularly assumed to be the most powerful. Many successful criminal prosecutions rely largely or entirely on circumstantial evidence, and civil charges are frequently based on circumstantial or indirect evidence."
Quote from wiki.
If you think about it it makes sense.
Let's say you see a person entering a house with a gun. You then hear a gunshot and your reaction is to pull out your own gun and rush inside to find out what happened. You find a dead body there and you see the above mentioned person running away through the window.
This is not a direct evidence against that person since you didn't see the murder occurring however you have strong circumstantial evidence that makes that guy a suspect. Sure it's possible that the real murderer might be hiding inside the closet and the the guy you saw entering was set up but it's much more likely this isn't the case.
This reminds me of the saying:
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."
2nd answer would be : This man was posessed during PTP then what happened is someone performed an exorcism on him and this priest was like : "IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST, OUR SAVIOR!! LEAVE THIS MAN ALONE!! IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST, GIVE ME YOUR NAME!! YOU ARE NOT WANTED DEMON, RETURN TO NOTHING!!! IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST, SAVIOR!!! I BANISH YOU BACK DEMOGORGON!!!!""A popular misconception is that circumstantial evidence is less valid or less important than direct evidence. This is only partly true: direct evidence is popularly assumed to be the most powerful. Many successful criminal prosecutions rely largely or entirely on circumstantial evidence, and civil charges are frequently based on circumstantial or indirect evidence."
Quote from wiki.
If you think about it it makes sense.
Let's say you see a person entering a house with a gun. You then hear a gunshot and your reaction is to pull out your own gun and rush inside to find out what happened. You find a dead body there and you see the above mentioned person running away through the window.
This is not a direct evidence against that person since you didn't see the murder occurring however you have strong circumstantial evidence that makes that guy a suspect. Sure it's possible that the real murderer might be hiding inside the closet and the the guy you saw entering was set up but it's much more likely this isn't the case.
This reminds me of the saying:
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."
When you got people saying stuff like this you prolly wouldn't roll through https://testyourmight.com/threads/possible-cheating-in-the-esl-pathtopro-final.65667/page-5#post-2351191Also on a different note, why didn't Bambooka show up here and tried to explain the circumstantial evidences pointed against him. He must have heard about the accusations by now.
Can someone contact him maybe? It'd be nice to invite him on a podcast to let his opinion be heard.
This could be beneficial for both the community and him.
Ummm, ESL is a private company for whom participants in their events likely agreed to a quit lengthy terms of service. If ESL felt it was worth pursuing this the offending party would have been gone because it absolutely is their job, if they want it to be, to bar someone from competition. Think of most private companies in situations like this as a more competent version of Roger Goodell.This is not a criminal prosecution. There is not a carefully selected jury, a lawyer on both sides, etc.
In a trail the jury is asked to convict only when guilt is beyond all doubt. In order to make that happen, there's direct examining and cross examining, forensic evidence is taken, fingerprints and DNA matched, etc. It's not just "well it seems like he did it" and then instant jail.
This is done to (hopefully) protect the rights of people who are accused of a crime.
While practically we might feel that this happened, it's not ESL's job to bar someone from competition unless they can prove it. Especially with them not being as familiar with the players as we are, they can't just "take someone's word for it" or it'd be easily abused.
Jeezus dude...Should be shot where he stands
Since Supes is your worst MU as a Cheetah, I have a tip for you. If you see that someone plays Supes and you beat him, that means that the person playing him is the worst player. You can differentiate the scrubs from the pros that easily.Very nice topic but I don’t agree with the decision. First of all Im from France and play more with fr guys than rus but I already played enougth against napier kingusha sakron, they have good level so when I saw Bambooka at eleague I was surprised, and ofcause he lose all matches, why I was surprised if I don’t play too much against him? I play cheetah he plays superman and I really hate this MU and today 29th of october I play against him online and destroy him and remember that I played some times and always win him, sm is hard for me and I saw many sm much better than his. Thanks to my french mates to let me know about this topic of cheating today.
I don’t agree that online big events should be deleted because for some players like me who don’t have time or maybe money or event both to travel for big tournaments should be able to show their skills online. Especially in France and Russia we don’t have a lot of events.
Of cause if we were all pro and playing was our work and travel free no problem than
This is because just like NFL players, Riot's LCS players are salaried, bound by contract and the league is their living. Which means they have retrictions on their conduct, image, behavior and streaming practices that go far beyond a random entrant in a one-off online open event.Ummm, ESL is a private company for whom participants in their events likely agreed to a quit lengthy terms of service. If ESL felt it was worth pursuing this the offending party would have been gone because it absolutely is their job, if they want it to be, to bar someone from competition. Think of most private companies in situations like this as a more competent version of Roger Goodell.
For example, Riot Games just suspended some fool from competition for, please brace yourself for the amazing show of intelligence that got this fool banned, livestreaming a domestic violence incident with his girlfriend. Now, I would be amazingly surprised if Riot had specific langauge in their TOS that covered this particular situation but I wouldn't be surprised if they had more general language regarding behavior OR if they just felt like this guy was giving them a bad enough look and decided to suspend him for that.
Never quote wiki it is not a reliable source but what you do say is true."A popular misconception is that circumstantial evidence is less valid or less important than direct evidence. This is only partly true: direct evidence is popularly assumed to be the most powerful. Many successful criminal prosecutions rely largely or entirely on circumstantial evidence, and civil charges are frequently based on circumstantial or indirect evidence."
Quote from wiki.
If you think about it it makes sense.
Let's say you see a person entering a house with a gun. You then hear a gunshot and your reaction is to pull out your own gun and rush inside to find out what happened. You find a dead body there and you see the above mentioned person running away through the window.
This is not a direct evidence against that person since you didn't see the murder occurring however you have strong circumstantial evidence that makes that guy a suspect. Sure it's possible that the real murderer might be hiding inside the closet and the the guy you saw entering was set up but it's much more likely this isn't the case.
This reminds me of the saying:
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."
That's just way too much man, he possibly cheated in a video game tournament but he didn't break the game and make superman's f23 +20 on block.Should be shot where he stands
I really don't think it should be considered crime-worthy, yeah there is a lot of money involved but really going to jail over a video game tournament. Listen to how absurd that sounds, and again he didn't break the game but he did break the rules of the tournament so he should be banned if they ever get hard proof of it.I hope this sets an example.
Going to sound crazy, but this type of thing really should be considered crime worthy and if it ever happens again it should be properly investigated.
If you cheat on a game show you can get arrested and most the time there is way less money on the line.
How will they do it? I've no idea that's not my job.
Can't just say "nah cus it's video games brush"
Fraud is a crime, soooo in cases of fraud (what this is if Bambooka was not in fact the one who competed online) why shouldn't it be considered a crime???...
I really don't think it should be considered crime-worthy, yeah there is a lot of money involved but really going to jail over a video game tournament. Listen to how absurd that sounds, and again he didn't break the game but he did break the rules of the tournament so he should be banned if they ever get hard proof of it.
Yeah you're right, just it sounds so dumb he'd have to go to court over a video game tournament. Then again he shouldn't have even done it in the first place so it would be his screw up.Fraud is a crime, soooo in cases of fraud (what this is if Bambooka was not in fact the one who competed online) why shouldn't it be considered a crime???