A request and an insight into my personal stance on prize pots

Leprekaun

Hey lads. Well, I know I haven't been to any tournaments in a long time now. Its partially to do with the fact that I've had a very busy year of college so by the time the weekend comes, I'm pretty much dead. Anyway, I've finished my exams on Friday so I'm free for the summer which is great so I'd be willing to get involved in some tournaments or even run some myself, that is not a problem at all.

Now, there is one niggle about my involvement in tournaments though, prize pot. Previously, some of you may have seen my strong argument for a lower prize pot but this is honestly not related to my current stance on tournaments as my issue now is of a different nature. Basically, my personal stance on prize pots is that I don't want to be included in prize pots. The reason for this is based on religious reasoning. I've found out that the idea of a prize pot has been likened to a form of gambling and I don't gamble at all so although I am regretful in having paid into the prize pot previously and ran a tournament that had a prize pot, I can be excused for not having known this fact then but for future involvement, I would like to still be part of the community and help in any way I can to keep it alive and help it grow.

So my request is this, can I still be involved in tournaments without chipping into the prize pot? I would ofcourse pay for rental of consoles/venue, that is a definite thing that I will do but if I could be excused from the prize pot, I would very much appreciate it. In the event that I could win or place highly in a tournament (very unlikely), I'd automatically relinquish my prize money to leave the money gathered as an investment into community equipment or needs (web hosting, camera recording equipment, anything really needed etc.)

In the case where I would be running a tournament myself, please note that, in this situation, I would completely eliminate a prize pot so only console/venue rental would be required.

Doctor DooM

Would depend 100% on the tournament organiser tbh.

I think any semi friendly one though could take your full contribution and put it directly into the venue however.

Personally it would be antithetical for me to play in a tournament under religious rules, tbh. But that'd be my choice.

FutureGuy

I ran non-FG tournaments for years on a European level and we had a player who was a devout Christian and whonever gambled. However, he happily played in major events with 40-50 euro entry fees because he made the distinction between gambling on events where he was not a partcipant and events where he was actively participating.

I don't play in events for the prize money, but there are plenty of players that do, and they may not turn up at an event that had zero prize money.

Doctor DooM

FutureGuy wrote: »

I ran non-FG tournaments for years on a European level and we had a player who was a devout Christian and whonever gambled. However, he happily played in major events with 40-50 euro entry fees because he made the distinction between gambling on events where he was not a partcipant and events where he was actively participating.

I don't play in events for the prize money, but there are plenty of players that do, and they may not turn up at an event that had zero prize money.

Just to clarify, I have no problem playing in a tournament with no pot: I have a massive problem with the famously inclusive fighting game community doing so to favour a religion.

Vyze

We actually had the whole gambling issue before for Slayers tournaments (which is why the first CXC gave away vouchers), since the SU had rules about "gambling" for cash prizes. But I'm pretty sure the way it was sorted was showing that video game tournaments were a game of skill, rewarding the winner, rather than gambling on random chance.

As was said, I'm sure any friendly tournament would let you waiver your prize but changing tournament rules for religious reasons seems a bit worrying.

Out of curiosity, if the TO insisted that you keep your cash prize, would giving that money to a homeless charity or the like outweigh the gambling issue?

UberPrinny_Baal

Interesting topic:

Leprekaun wrote:

I've found out that the idea of a prize pot has been likened to a form of gambling

"the idea of....has been likened" to sounds like a weak point to me. Either it is or it isn't. Depending on your religion, a lot of stuff is literally against the rules, but practically these days a lot of this is ignored (e.g. The Bible passages denouncing shaving and artificial fabrics/leather).

So are you absolutely steadfastly abiding by every rule of your particular religion; or are you cherry-picking this one out because, as you said, you were against prize pots beforehand?

Dictionary wrote:

gam·ble (gmbl)
v. gam·bled, gam·bling, gam·bles
v.intr.
1.
a. To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest.
b. To play a game of chance for stakes.

Under this I'd even argue it doesn't apply. It's a game skill (not chance), and unless you're secretly amazing, the outcome isn't uncertain, you're probably not going to win anything.

Under this definition you shouldn't even spectate while having an opinion, because if you expect a certain outcome (Man U to beat Liverpool), you're betting on an outcome (it doesn't specify it needs to be for cash).

I'd say that I fail to see how participation in FG tournaments really applies to religious concerns. I fail to see how it applies to the hobby of gaming in general. Have you ever played any Pokémon games, as they have a casino in every game?

Ultimately I don't think tournament organisers should let participants dictate what happens to their entry fee on a case-by-case basis (should apply the same to everyone); and I think especially that religion is a weak reason.

If T.O.s DO want to allow this: Its of more benefit to me personally that pot money goes towards the scene than towards individual players, so I have spontaneously discovered religion as of 5 minutes ago. Sorry Stevo

Doctor DooM

UberPrinny_Baal wrote: »

If T.O.s DO want to allow this: Its of more benefit to me personally that pot money goes towards the scene than towards individual players, so I have spontaneously discovered religion as of 5 minutes ago. Sorry Stevo

This is exactly why this should be sorted between leprekaun and whoever is running the tournament and the decision would be 100% the TOs without pressure from anyone.

While your argument is logically correct, and I believe Leprekauns argument is completely invalid, I'm a secularist and I don't like the idea of a person being ousted because of their particular beliefs: It's... compassion rather than logic to perhaps make a genuine exception.

Personally if it was me and behind close doors, he'd pay as much as the next guy but I'd put it all to the cost of the venue. I'd take his winnings and split it proportionally between the other placing players.

chopperbyrne

I would be against it.

It would just lead to other people coming up with other reasons why they shouldn't pay the full amount.

It's a competition with an entry fee, that the top three get rewarded.

It's not gambling.

Dreddybajs

Agreed with Chopper. If your religious convictions are that strong about it, then don't enter tournaments, I guess. That said, I also wouldn't consider it gambling.

1man3letters

yea bit of a weird situation alright,

but i echo what doom and chopper said, they hit the nail on the head i think

Vyze

Dreddybajs wrote: »

Agreed with Chopper. If your religious convictions are that strong about it, then don't enter tournaments, I guess. That said, I also wouldn't consider it gambling.

Pretty much this. If you won't do something for religious reasons... don't do it I guess?

If I liked pole dancing but hated titties, I wouldn't ask a strip club to make their dancers keep their clothes on.

Scavenger XIII

Vyze wrote: »

If I liked pole dancing but hated titties, I wouldn't ask a strip club to make their dancers keep their clothes on.

Best analogy. :pac:

Leprekaun

Its not a matter of what I choose and not choose to do in my religion so I try to do everything, without exception. I am devout to my religion and like I have previously mentioned, if I had known this before, I wouldn't have gotten involved in tournaments or ran tournaments with a prize pot so its not a case of "throwing the toys out of the pram" to try and manipulate the community. When I had previously had voiced my opinion about tournament entry fee, there were only few who agreed but the majority disagreed and that was fine, I conceded and any tournaments that were held after that, I paid the same entry fee as everyone else.

In terms of imposing myself on others with my stance, I'm not trying to impose my religious views on any of you. I'm just trying to find a good balance between the situation and my beliefs. In my opinion, religion is entirely a personal thing so whether or not you want to be religious, thats up to you, I'm not going to go round each of you and start saying "Have you ever of..." and all that carry on, I'll only be there to have a laugh and play some SF. If you wish to ask me about any of it, thats fine, I can answer to the best of my knowledge but I'm not going to try to change your mind because, like I said, its a personal thing, you make that decision.

In regards to whether this can be considered gambling or not, it is gambling. The only difference between betting on a football match and putting your own money into a prize pot is that you do have a clearer understanding of how good you are and can rate yourself compared to other players but even then, it is still gambling, because from one tournament to the next, some players might change characters which favour their matchups and disadvantage others. If you asked most people "Who'd win Evo this year?", they'd say "Daigo" but Fuudo won last year and there have been other times where Daigo was beaten so although he is most probable to win, it is not a certainty that he will.

So fair enough, it can be assumed that nothing is certain, that is the truth so there will always be an unknown factor in any situation. In the instance of tournaments here, I just feel that although there are the top 8 players who could each possibly win a tournament, sometimes they'll lose and sometimes they'll win. A direct comparison can be poker. Ok, so there are more unknown elements in poker but analogies can be made. Your cards could be your chosen fighter (Zangief Vs. Ryu -> Ryu's favour) and reading your opponent right, that would apply to any form of competition. But the same way you have a select few top poker players who always place highly, none of them always win.

So ok, now, there is a small predicament, how would anyone earn any money in sport if its considered gambling? Well, thats where a third party comes in. Say if GameStop chose to sponsor a tournament, awarding the winners with prize money / vouchers / gaming hardware etc., then in this case, it would be completely valid to have a tournament with prize money, as long as the winnings of the players aren't coming from other players.

Anyway, my original post was directed towards TOs in general, not necessarily to the community.

If the TOs can agree with me on this, I would greatly appreciate it as I do miss getting involved in tournaments but if they choose not to, thats fine.

Dreddybajs

So if you buy a pack of crisps are you gambling cause there might be a load of poo inside the bag instead of crisps?

Doctor DooM

That... is really horrifically flawed logic.

Not from dreddy, although I do worry why he's so obsessed with poo.

Anyway, lol at the idea of all the TO's agreeing to this. Can't and won't happen (Uber pointed out why, so did chopper). However if you'd taken my advice and handled this privately...

UberPrinny_Baal

Leprekaun wrote: »

So ok, now, there is a small predicament, how would anyone earn any money in sport if its considered gambling? Well, thats where a third party comes in. Say if GameStop chose to sponsor a tournament, awarding the winners with prize money / vouchers / gaming hardware etc., then in this case, it would be completely valid to have a tournament with prize money, as long as the winnings of the players aren't coming from other players.

I think I'm gonna excuse myself from the rest of this topic, because as Doom pointed out, I'm basically arguing logic, but you're arguing faith/beliefs.

While I won't ever knock anyone for any religious beliefs, the logical conclusions you're drawing to justify them AS faith are so flimsy they make no sense.

If you wanna be a TO and organise a SF4 "no prize pool" tournament, I'll wish you the best of luck and show up on the day to participate

Yreval

Paying to enter any competition where the entry fee contributes to the prize = gambling, apparently.

I really, really, really don't understand this line of reasoning at all.

If;

(a) the competition is a game of skill, and
(b) the entrant has direct influence on the competition;

then it is not gambling - end of story.

EDIT:

jackiechan_confused1.jpg

Yeah, that works too.

Doyler01

raah!

It seems to me that he is not seeking to change the rules for anyone else, he is asking for an exception. He is saying people can pay in to the prize pot if they want. He is simply asking that if he is waiving his rights to the prize then perhaps it would be ok if he didn't pay into the pot.

You could say "everyone will do it", but I imagine it wouldn't be too difficult to distinguish between those who are doing so for purely monetary reasons and those doing so because of cultural/religious reasons. In this case, it seems fairly obvious that it's genuine. In other cases, it would be equally obvious that it is not genuine. Worst case scenario would be that one person would be able to trick a tournament organiser once. But realistically speaking, this will probably never happen to anyone in ireland as a result of letting this guy play without paying to the pot.

Whatever his justification for waiving the pot (and he doesn't need to justify himself), it seems a reasonable request, and I don't see why having one extra person in the tournament who paid to get in but didn't pay for the pot and won't win the pot would be a problem.

And while this is an internet discussion forum, it's not nice to tell people who are trying to enter into a social group that you think their beliefs are stupid or illogical.

But I think you probably should have just asked the individual organisers, rather than making a thread about it where people might get excited and think you are trying to religiously opress their prize pots.

Edit: Also a tenner isn't that much at all. And it's not that much extra from paying entry to paying for the pot. maybe 7 or 5 or something. Just drink 7 or 5 less cans of coke etc.

raah!

Yreval wrote: »

Paying to enter any competition where the entry fee contributes to the prize = gambling, apparently.

I really, really, really don't understand this line of reasoning at all.

If;

(a) the competition is a game of skill, and
(b) the entrant has direct influence on the competition;

then it is not gambling - end of story.

From the definition above, "to bet on an uncertain outcome", do you really think that betting on yourself in streetfighter isn't gambling? Do you think there is no element of uncertainty involved in such a "bet".

I play games where the loser has to make tea or do a shot all the time, and I would say that it certainly falls under the heading of gambling. You could say it's less "gambley" than gambling on dice or whatever, but to say that there is no element of uncertainty is impossible. Nobody genuinely thinks that, and it's strange that you would go out of your way to say it. It's also not very nice.

And it's important to note that he is not saying that if he pays to play but then doesn't take the prize that he is still gambling. He's saying that it wouldn't be unreasonable for the organiser to allow him to not pay the portion that goes to the prize.

Dreddybajs

It would be really crap to get knocked out of a tournament by someone that didn't pay entry when you did.

Also Lep you say religion is a personal thing, and that's true - so why should everyone else go out of their way to suit your beliefs? You have an extremely easy choice not to enter the tournaments in the first place if it's important to you.

Yreval

raah! wrote: »

From the definition above, "to bet on an uncertain outcome", do you really think that betting on yourself in streetfighter isn't gambling? Do you think there is no element of uncertainty involved in such a "bet".

I play games where the loser has to make tea or do a shot all the time, and I would say that it certainly falls under the heading of gambling. You could say it's less "gambley" than gambling on dice or whatever, but to say that there is no element of uncertainty is impossible. Nobody genuinely thinks that, and it's strange that you would go out of your way to say it. It's also not very nice.

There is some uncertainty, granted, but you have to draw the line somewhere between games of skill and games of chance and I'd say that fighting games fall firmly on the former side of that line.

UberPrinny_Baal

Even though I said I've stopped addressing Lep, I wanted to reply to this specifically.

raah! wrote: »

You could say "everyone will do it", but I imagine it wouldn't be too difficult to distinguish between those who are doing so for purely monetary reasons and those doing so because of cultural/religious reasons. In this case, it seems fairly obvious that it's genuine.

The main flaw in what you're saying here, is that a monetary or other practical concern is a wrong/non-genuine reason; but a religious/cultural reason is right.

That's baffling and I absolutely disagree with you.

raah!

Yreval wrote: »

There is some uncertainty, granted, but you have to draw the line somewhere between games of skill and games of chance and I'd say that fighting games fall firmly on the former side of that line.

Yes but you can still bet on games of skill, is the thing.

UberPrinny_Baal wrote: »

Even though I said I've stopped addressing Lep, I wanted to reply to this specifically.



The main flaw in what you're saying here, is that a monetary or other practical concern is a wrong/non-genuine reason; but a religious/cultural reason is right.


That's baffling and I absolutely disagree with you.

Well when I said 'monetary/practical' I was refering to likely situations that nobody would like such as "I'm not gonna win so I'll make some excuse and not pay into the pot". There might be some legitimate monetary or practical concerns, but when I used those words I was refering specifically to those cases that you would like to avoid by not allowing people special treatment for any reason. The reason these are not acceptable is that the person is trying for nothing more than to make a gain which causes losses to the other people (such as the winners). I guess I should have been more specific.


The reason cultural/religous reasons are more acceptable, is that they are not simply an attempt to make a profit/avoid a loss, and are not something that the person can change without changing their culture or religion. And cultural diversity and acceptance are normally seen as good things (This involves not wanting people to change their culture or their religion), regardless of what the culture or religion you are making allowances for is. For example, making exceptions in the rules for swearing on bibles for atheists is seen as a good thing, in terms of diversity and acceptance.

Doctor DooM

raah! wrote: »

It seems to me that he is not seeking to change the rules for anyone else, he is asking for an exception. He is saying people can pay in to the prize pot if they want. He is simply asking that if he is waiving his rights to the prize then perhaps it would be ok if he didn't pay into the pot.

He specifically stated he wants to run tournaments, and run them by his rules. I personally would find it difficult to swallow that reasoning. But as I said: That's just me.

raah! wrote: »

You could say "everyone will do it", but I imagine it wouldn't be too difficult to distinguish between those who are doing so for purely monetary reasons and those doing so because of cultural/religious reasons. In this case, it seems fairly obvious that it's genuine. In other cases, it would be equally obvious that it is not genuine. Worst case scenario would be that one person would be able to trick a tournament organiser once. But realistically speaking, this will probably never happen to anyone in ireland as a result of letting this guy play without paying to the pot.

This is for TO's to decide: I have seen three (minimum) experienced TO's in this thread disagree with you.

raah! wrote: »

Whatever his justification for waiving the pot (and he doesn't need to justify himself), it seems a reasonable request, and I don't see why having one extra person in the tournament who paid to get in but didn't pay for the pot and won't win the pot would be a problem.

True, and I agree with you: if however, he thinks a cent less should be paid, it'd be a case of GTFO.

raah! wrote: »

And while this is an internet discussion forum, it's not nice to tell people who are trying to enter into a social group that you think their beliefs are stupid or illogical.

We all tell each other every day here when we are being stupid or illogical, check out the SFxT thread for todays other example. I am certainly not putting religion on a pedestal away from this criticism. Leprecan is one of the oldest members of this community and he knows we're not being personal. Long as people aren't personally insulting one another, debate is debate.

raah! wrote: »

But I think you probably should have just asked the individual organisers, rather than making a thread about it where people might get excited and think you are trying to religiously opress their prize pots.

I agree, however I do not really appreciate the tone, seeing as for example I suggested the exact same as you, only without getting a dig at the forum members here about oppression.

raah! wrote: »

Edit: Also a tenner isn't that much at all. And it's not that much extra from paying entry to paying for the pot. maybe 7 or 5 or something. Just drink 7 or 5 less cans of coke etc.

A tenner isn't much, it's true. However, for example, I bring a huge, heavy suitcase of equipment to tournaments all over the country and give countless hours of my time recording and I never try to dodge paying the pot (although sometimes it's freely offered to me). I personally would be annoyed if someone used religion as a way to do so.

Not that I think that's Leprecaun's tack here: I think he's been very silly in starting this thread being honest, and should have just gone to a TO in private and discussed it with them.

I don't see this thread having much life left in it: Im going to take a look later tonight and perhaps close it.

Dreddybajs

Can someone please address my post about the bag of crisps full of poo.

mackg

Yreval wrote: »

There is some uncertainty, granted, but you have to draw the line somewhere between games of skill and games of chance and I'd say that fighting games fall firmly on the former side of that line.

So you would not call a money match a form of gambling? In my mind that is done under the premise that you bet your opponent "x" amount of money that you will beat them, sounds like gambling to me. To me a tournament where everyone pays in is an elaborate version of this.

Orim

Dreddybajs wrote: »

Can someone please address my post about the bag of crisps full of poo.

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

mackg wrote: »

So you would not call a money match a form of gambling? In my mind that is done under the premise that you bet your opponent "x" amount of money that you will beat them, sounds like gambling to me. To me a tournament where everyone pays in is an elaborate version of this.

In a money match you are betting on the result.

In a tournament you are paying to enter the event.

ayjayirl

Any argument based on religion is flawed.


That being said, you could always just give the prize pot to a charity if you won. Does your religion allow that?

FGs aren't gambling but you can gamble on them. Big difference.

mackg

Orim wrote: »

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.



In a money match you are betting on the result.

In a tournament you are paying to enter the event.

If you pay €10 entry fee and once costs are covered the rest goes to the prize pot then you could definitely look at it like the rest is being bet on the result. I'll admit that this isn't black and white.

raah!

Doctor DooM wrote: »

He specifically stated he wants to run tournaments, and run them by his rules. I personally would find it difficult to swallow that reasoning. But as I said: That's just me.

This is for TO's to decide: I have seen three (minimum) experienced TO's in this thread disagree with you.

Yes not entering his tournaments is fine, but it would be a shame to not have a person playing in another tournament just because they can't contribute to the prize pot. As to distinguishing between tricksters and devout religious people with very specific bible related reasons not to pay into a pot, I honestly think that I (and most other people) could with a high degree of certainty tell them apart. Especially since the people who turn up to tournaments are people you know. But then that's me, and if the tournament organisers think it's not possible for them to do that then that's that. It is up to them, but I still think it would be possible for them to allow it without too much hassle, for the reasons given.

True, and I agree with you: if however, he thinks a cent less should be paid, it'd be a case of GTFO.

Yeah, I think the solution you posted is pretty much inarguably the best one. Where the whole of his 10 goes to the community. Perhaps the nicest one would be to allow him to keep whatever the amount that goes to the pot, but that's really only the nicest to him.

We all tell each other every day here when we are being stupid or illogical, check out the SFxT thread for todays other example. I am certainly not putting religion on a pedestal away from this criticism. Leprecan is one of the oldest members of this community and he knows we're not being personal. Long as people aren't personally insulting one another, debate is debate.

Yes but sometimes people don't want a debate. In SFXT people can call each other retards just as they would on any atheism/religion debate. But if someone says something like "can I wear my religion hat at this thing" and people go "that's retarded, no you can't", then I don't think it's very nice. And it seemed to me that peoples responses to his personal request were heavily influenced by the request coming from a religious grounding. Which is why in my post I emphasised the fact that if he had just said "I really like tournaments, but I can't pay for the pot", he would still have a good case.

I agree, however I do not really appreciate the tone, seeing as for example I suggested the exact same as you, only without getting a dig at the forum members here about oppression.

...

Not that I think that's Leprecaun's tack here: I think he's been very silly in starting this thread being honest, and should have just gone to a TO in private and discussed it with them.

I agree with all that, inappropriate tone. Anyway, I hope the main TO's will allow him to put his money to the community fund and not the prize pot. And your suggestion of the full tenner going to the community is probably the best one.