Posts from Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments. Auto-translated

I kindly request that the Arbitration Committee review the following situation:

Tournament: One for All, positive VS yarik1987
In round 121, the opponent disconnected, disappeared from ICQ and Hamachi, and then reappeared, saying that his computer had rebooted. I said that we could only continue through the judges, and I immediately informed everyone, but it was December 31st, and no one responded:)
The opponent didn't even have the "save before battle" option enabled (this is a separate request to include this in the rules).
The opponent convinced me to continue from my autosave from round 121 (I was red). We continued. Rule 8 states:

8. If a controversial situation arises, one of the players MUST stop continuing the game, save, and submit the necessary saves for review by the relevant authority! If the game was continued, the controversial case in the specific game is considered resolved, and the result of the game cannot be reviewed, even if the rules are subsequently changed in favor of the losing player.

This rule does not give me the right to retroactively request a technical win.

When we finished the game, I looked at round 121 and saw that it was easy to lose or intentionally lose, both in the gnome area and near the elementals.

I wrote to the judge, Dave_HUN. First, he asked for the player's nickname, and when he saw that it was about yarik1987, he said:

which opponent is this? 12:43
yarik1987 12:43
Dave_HW '
yes I believe he had tendency to do this in the past 12:44
can you send me the saves with pass? 12:44

Then, Dave looked at the saves and said:

yea, I think now we can't give you tech win, but stopping the game and asking judges after every crash / pc reboot / etc. would also be very time consuming 12:55
here it is pretty obvious what happened, I will ask sanin 12:55
maybe he will overrule

Dave also says that rule 8 is a double-edged sword. We asked Sanin if he could somehow rewrite this rule, but he said that the tournament was already running and he would not change anything.

Therefore, the question is whether the Arbitration Committee can review this situation and, if there was indeed a loss, grant a technical win, bypassing this rule.
And whether to have a conversation with the player yarik, or impose penalties, or a ban, I don't know, but since Dave says that this is not the first time...

Game saves:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1JxLcpqJsxZxXLfFDfuVXVORD0icNbz6_

P.S. While we were communicating with yarik about this situation, he even offered me a draw...
If I hadn't lost anywhere, I wouldn't have offered my opponent a draw.

FailFish

Something always seems to cause problems for Positiv every week (and it's always over something trivial). And it's not like he has all day to write so many messages... The community is harmful to Rafik.

Something seems to be happening with Positiv every week, and it always involves some kind of problem (and it's always over something trivial). And it's not like he's writing essays... This community is dangerous for Rafik.

So, it seems like that's the case. Trivial? Is throwing a game trivial? Tell me then, what isn't trivial?

P.S. After I was given a technical loss in the Jebus-streamers tournament, even though I didn't throw the game, but I couldn't defend myself because the facts were against me, I will treat suspicious situations the same way.

Tell me then, where is it not nonsense?

further down the forum) in the topic "eternal debtors"))

further down the forum) in the topic "eternal debtors"))

Money has nothing to do with the heroes; it's just extra.

Could someone from the Administration Team please check if the application submitted by positive has been accepted for review, and provide an estimated timeframe for when a decision will be made regarding it?

In a seasonal game, there was a situation with Tvarina where he refused to finish the match. He offered me a draw, but I declined, and now he doesn't want to continue playing. From my point of view regarding this situation: There is a chance of winning, and I want to try to pull it off after his disrespectful attitude towards me (I believe I have at least a 20% chance of winning). In my opinion, the match should be finished. We won't play any further games, but since we started, we need to bring it to an end. I described the game in the seasonal thread: /post/1066007/ /post/1066030/

What's the argument about? If someone refuses to finish the game, just declare them the winner. Are there any disagreements about this?
The further you go into this thread, the stranger the messages become...

Regarding the "complaint" about positivity. The Arbitration Committee (AK) has repeatedly explained what actions should be taken in case of a strange situation, but time and again, players ignore these recommendations. Instead of following the tournament regulations and postponing the game until the judges review it (although he himself wanted to do so, judging by the quote from the rules), Positiv agreed to continue the game from an autosave, thereby deciding to trust his opponent. The game was played, doubts arose, and once again, instead of quietly submitting the saves and a description of what happened to the judges, he does the opposite, posting everything on the forum... Do you seriously think that a well-considered decision can be made based on just one strange incident? For this, there needs to be a whole series of oddities so that conclusions can be drawn based on their totality. Personally, I don't remember any complaints regarding Yarick with suspicions from players; judging by the silence of the other members of the AK, they don't have such information either... Now let's look at the facts: in the battles that Mullich fought, it is impossible to lose (I would also have cleared the magma to the left of the dwarf, since there was enough mana for 2 slows); it is impossible to prove that before the disconnection, Mullich attacked that magma and fought poorly. What kind of technical win are we even talking about?
A little history, read this:
/topic/11680/
The decisions regarding Gunnar and Rasim were made precisely because of numerous reports from players about disconnections; note that no results of games were reviewed even then. And here, suddenly, it seemed strange to me that there was a disconnection; give me the win retroactively :D. In my personal opinion, Positiv filed an unfounded complaint, simply trying to get something out of it, hoping for some benefit, and deserves criticism, but not a technical win.

Having examined the save, I have come to the conclusion that the probability of any kind of intentional loss in the max-Dwarf Cottage is close to zero. Therefore, we reject this request. However, as a precedent, we will keep it on file. In the event of further similar claims, we will take measures.

I refuse to finish the game with Jelen117 because I no longer want to play with this player. I have explained the reason several times during the stream, and I can repeat it personally to the administrator (AK). Therefore, I request that the administrator award the result of this game based on the save file.

I anticipate the AK's verdict – 10 days of ban without the possibility of early release.

What's the argument here? If someone refuses to finish the game, just declare a victory. Are there any disagreements about this?
The further you go into this thread, the stranger the messages become...

I submitted the victory report, but Tvarina isn't confirming it.

Regarding the "positive" claim. What kind of technical skill are we even talking about here?

Whether it's poker or Heroes, I can't seem to win, either by dominating or by playing defensively:)

P.S. The fact that a skilled player didn't lose for Mullich doesn't mean that the opponent played well; they could have easily made mistakes and lost. But there's a solution, and I'll accept it. I'm just drawing my own conclusions.

Thank you for considering the request.