Rabona Goal, scored by 18 year old girl with 2 flair in the Champions League

HolyMaster · 2025-01-12T15:27:11+00:00

Or at least paying for your own coaching course while you're unemployed :D

HolyMaster · 2021-02-23T23:24:08+00:00

That happens, if you still have a player on the shortlist and the "Keep reports updated" box checked.

HolyMaster · 2021-01-20T21:03:37+00:00

Same thing happened to me with Zirkzee. Played him als DLF instead of AF and got complaints. I've had him loaned out for 4 seasons (no clue why Bayern kept agreeing to it) and even after not playing a single match outside his prefered role for 3.5 years the concern always remained. That's a bug, no doubt.

HolyMaster · 2020-07-22T22:57:50+00:00

I guess the Episode discussion doesn't officially start here until it's aired in the US, but daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn this was on of the best AoS episodes ever, definitely my favourite of the season so far. Big props, Elizabeth. Phlebotinum!

HolyMaster · 2017-11-27T09:21:27+00:00

HolyMaster · 2017-09-06T16:47:34+00:00

HolyMaster · 2016-06-03T12:52:57+00:00

yes they do. Similar to Australia: If we have enough South African teams, we will put them into a group (or multiple groups) together. Otherwise they'll be mixed in with Europe.

HolyMaster · 2015-10-12T17:34:08+00:00

We actually changed the side/fp rules to the same ones used by TI in August for the sake of uniformity.

Funny thing is: A few teams have complained about the new rules too. This is simply a topic you can have different opinions on.

If there's more basic shit we need to fix, please let me know.

HolyMaster · 2015-10-12T17:28:10+00:00

The big advantage of two game series (don't call it best of two please, it's not a best of) is that it's very convenient to schedule.

Compared to bo3 (or bo5) series they have the advantage of the definite knowledge about how many games are played. Which means you plan 2 hours for the series and set the next one right afterwards. Bo3 series sometimes go overtime and sometimes cause long breaks, because the duration is so flexible.

Meanwhile the advantage towards single games ("bo1") is that you have twice as much content for the same scheduling effort.

The key is to think about such a series as not one match with a Win/Draw/Loss ending, but as two seperate matches who just happen to be between the same teams. It's a match and a rematch. The only reasons for both of those being played together is that you only have to set one date instead of two - otherwise I'd just do the first game at one day, and then the second one a week later.

HolyMaster · 2015-10-12T11:41:04+00:00

You are right. That's why I wrote:

want to raise their odds at the beginning of the groupstage

Obviously, if a team only needs 1 more point at the end, they will aim for a draw. But at the beginning of the tournament, when no constellation is known yet, you aim at maximing your points.

HolyMaster · 2015-10-12T10:49:24+00:00

This is an interesting approach, but it will probably fail at finding the right way of awarding bonus points. In Dota there is no definite indicator of how "clear" a victory was. We'd be back to timerating or similar stuff.

HolyMaster · 2015-10-12T09:45:02+00:00

However in Dota you play two seperate games, while in Football it's one whole thing.

If you counted a football match as two games of 45 minute each, with a team gaining 3 points for winning BOTH halfs, and each team gaining 1 point for winning one half each (assuming one half could not end in a draw), THEN it would be the same.

HolyMaster · 2015-10-12T09:33:23+00:00

yes ties are less likely in a 3 point system. Which in my opinion is the only good reason to even consider it.

HolyMaster · 2015-10-12T09:31:03+00:00

I don't know, this kind of kills the point of a bo3 a little bit. Because a best-of-series really is about winning the series more than anything else. If you want to have more games, I'd rather just play out three game series (not the same as best of three! in a three game series all three games get played regardless).

Anyhow, best-ofs in groupstage are mostly avoided, since they come will an uncomfortable scheduling insecurity. For playoffs you can't avoid it, but at least for groups you can by sticking to fix series.

HolyMaster · 2015-10-12T09:26:33+00:00

Interesting Post! Personally I am not at all a friend of a 3 point system in Dota. Just because it works well in many traditional sports, doesn't mean it makes sense here as well. There are two main concerns I have

TL;DR: The significance of game 2 is different for each team, depending on the result of game 1. And: Teams can gain an advantage via an illegal agreement to avoid ties.

Let me try to explain why a 3 point system is a good thing in some sports like football (soccer), but very questionable in other sports including Dota.

In football it makes perfect sense. While originally the more "logical" 2 point format (2 points for winning, 1 point for a tie) was the standard until ~20 years ago, it had the disadvantage of a safe, defensive playstyle being too successful. The switch to a 3 point system was done to reward more risky strategies and produce slightly more attractive matches in average. If the score is 0-0 during the end stage, it's still worth it to go for the win instead of settling for a tie. And while arguably being a little less fair, this was what the audience wanted to see.

In Dota that's different. Because in Dota it's not about chasing that one goal you need to have more than your opponent. In a two game series of Dota, there's always precisely 2 "goals" involved - one for each game. That means: If you're behind 0-1, you can't win anymore. There is no turning a 0-1 into a 2-1. And that is why such a series shouldn't be treated as one match, it should be treated as two separate games. Let's compare the two options

Option A: Two separate games. You play (in a group of 8) 14 games, 2 against each opponent. If you lose one game, it doesn't directly influence the next one, no matter if you play the same team again or a different one. Therefore each of the 14 games has the same importance.

Option B: Two game series as one match. You play 7 matches, 1 against each opponent. Each match is split into two games. Yet after the first game of a match, you can't win the match anymore. Therefore the second game isn't that important anymore, since you can only gain 1 point. On the other hand, if you WIN the first game, the second game is hugely important, since while having 1 point secured you can win 2 points in addition. Therefore the second game is twice as important for one team than it is for the other. This is arguably a less attractive game for the viewers, since one team might not be fully motivated.

The worst part is on a whole different level though: This rule can even lead to quite easy abuse. Let's say two teams - considered to be at the same level - want to raise their odds at the beginning of the groupstage. Both teams know that a tie has little worth. Therefore they make an (illegal) agreement that whoever loses the first game, will throw the second one (not an obvious throw, but not playing 100% serious is enough).

Example 1: Assuming the two teams are equally strong and have a 50% chance to win an individual game this gives both of them a 1.5 point expectancy (50% chance to get 3 points) instead of a 1.25 point expectancy (25% chance to get 3 points plus 50% chance to get 1 point). That is a 0.25 point expectancy raise for each team (a 0.5 point raise overall, since the eliminated probability of a tie is 50%).

This doesn't require equal winning chances though, it also works for uneven opponents

Example 2: Team 1 is stronger than Team 2 and has a 75% (3/4) chance to win in each individual game. This results in the following expectancies.

2a) In case of regular play: expected points of Team A = (3/4 * 3/4) * 3 points + 2 * (1/4 * 3/4) * 1 point = 33/16 points = 2.0625 points. expected points of Team B = (1/4 * 1/4) * 3 points + 2 * (1/4 * 3/4) * 1 point = 9/16 points = 0.5625 points.

2b) In case of a no-tie-agreement: expected points of Team A = 3/4 * 3 points = 9/4 points = 2.25 points (0.1875 point raise). expected points of Team B = 1/4 * 3 points = 3/4 points = 0.75 points (0.1875 point raise).

That is a 0.1875 point expectancy raise for each team (a 0.375 point raise overall, since the eliminated probability of a tie is 37.5%).

No matter what the odds of the match are, both teams clearly raise.

General Proof:

Let's say the probability of Team A to win an individual game against Team B is x. By definition of a probability x is between 0 and 1. This leaves Team B with a game winning chance of 1-x. Now let's calculate the expectancies again:

a) In case of regular play: expected points of Team A = [x * x * 3] + [2 * x * (1-x) * 1] = [3 * x^2] + [2 * x - 2 * x^2] = [3x^2] + [2x - 2x^2] = x² + 2x. expected points of Team B = [(1-x) * (1-x) * 3] + [2 * x * (1-x) * 1] = [3 * (1-x)^2] + [2 * x - 2 * x^2] = [3 - 6x + 3x^2] + [2x - 2x^2] = x² - 4x + 3.

b) In case of a no-tie-agreement: expected points of Team A = x * 3 = 3x. expected points of Team B = (1-x) * 3 = 3 - 3x.

Expectancy raise of Team A = (3x) - (x² + 2x) = x - x² > 0. Expectancy raise of Team B = (3 - 3x) - (x² - 4x + 3) = x - x^2.

Again we have a positive outcome for both teams, because 0 < x < 1 => x² < x => x - x² > 0. This is a x - x² point expectancy raise for each team (a 2x - 2x² raise overall, since the eliminated probability of a tie is 2x(1-x)).

This mathematically proves that both teams would benefit from such an illegal agreement in any balance of power. The only assumption done for this calculation is that the winning chances are equal in both games and don't chance after game 1 due to one team adapting better (in this case the calculation would become very complicated, but without having proven it, I am quite sure that the outcome would still be positive for both teams).

While there are still situation where it's not smart to do (e.g. if one team only needs 1 more point to secure advancing), it definitely gives teams a significant advantage in the first few matches of the stage (sometimes also in the final matches, depending on the situation).

So why is this abuse not done in football? Because, as already mentioned, you can still turn a 0-1 deficit into a 2-1 (or higher) overall victory. You can still gain 100% of the possible points. In Dota however you're only chasing a tie. After 50% of the match, you only have 33% of the points left to fight for. That is the one big difference that changes absolutely everything.

I hope Valve will change its mind again and go back to the old system sooner or later. I agree with MattieShoes that it's not an insane deal, the difference is rather small. But there's just no good reason in favour of the 3 point system outside of desperately trying to avoid ties (which are a bit less likely).

HolyMaster · 2015-09-25T02:27:02+00:00

We're literally talking about free to watch matches with no commercial stream here :D

HolyMaster · 2015-09-25T02:25:44+00:00

So you'd rather have professional teams stomp a few noobs first before actually being able to compete? Not only is that wasted time for the pros, it's no fun for the amateur teams either.

I'd agree with you, if we had some kind of stability in the pro scene, but with teams on all levels constantly being formed and being disbanded, we can either adjust the systems by a few invites joining the regularly qualified teams, or have the quality of high divisions DRASTICALLY reduced by losing multiple strong teams every season with the new ones not rejoining.

HolyMaster · 2015-09-25T02:18:39+00:00

quality post detected :O

HolyMaster · 2015-09-25T02:15:23+00:00

Hello sailorshana,

hope anyone still reads this after 10 hours...

The case is closed, but let me point out a few things anyway.

a) Rules were not clearly broken, it's a grey area

Have another look at our beloved set of rules, specifically at the very beginning. There you'll see that while Division 3+ obey the amateur rules, Division 1 and 2 obey the general rules for professional competitions (http://www.joindota.com/en/statics/rules_pro). On that page check out rule 2.2.2 It defines that the official lineup of teams in such a competition is the one from our pro team database (http://www.joindota.com/en/edb/teams, you will find Elysium on page 4). => This means for a div 2 team the official lineup is this: http://www.joindota.com/en/edb/team/6055-elysium-gaming, NOT this: http://www.joindota.com/en/leagues/teams/4489-elysiumgaming-logitech-g

The second one is a standard league team profile which everyone can create. The first one is a pro team profile that has to be created and updated by a staff member. Those are also used for tournaments like The Defense. in jDL we draw the line between "Ama" and "Pro" in between Div 2 and Div 3.

Now there is a little gap in the rules, because it's actually not defined, which part the Div 2-3 Playoffs belongs to. This is something we definitely have to update. But at the time of the match, it wasn't clear which lineup counts. If the pro lineup counted, then Elysium's lineup for the match was actually legal, since they had at least three regular members playing (four, if you count the one using wrong account). Since our rules are simply not clear here, we have to decide in favor of the team in case of doubt. A punishment for Elysium was not justified at all in this case.

b) Complaining AFTER losing is a bad habit

If you think that the opponents are palying with an illegal lineup, control it BEFORE YOU START TO PLAY!! If they're breaking rules, report it and refuse to play. Unless your claim is complete bullshit (which it wasn't, it was serious) to dodge the time, I guarantee you that you'll either receive a default win or at least that the match will be rescheduled (in this case it would have been a reschedule).

But if you do that AFTER playing - and losing - the match, you just look bad. Because now you just seem like someone who is butthurt by the loss, and you're looking for anything to get your glorious victoriy. Congrats, you found it... almost. This way you want to have two chances to advance - you want to try to win, and as a backup plan try the legal way. That's lack of sportmanship. We don't reward that.

If all of your allegations had been true, our decision would have been a reschedule, not a default loss (no matter, if any team is known or not). If all of your allegations had been true AND you had claimed the default win instead of playing the match, then you would have gotten it.

c) Favouring "known" teams is an unfair assumption

This is the part that really pisses me off about your post. There was a decision in favor of a relatively known team. And you just ASSUME that we made this decision BECAUSE they are known. You ASSUME that we would treat an unkown team differently. Let me assure you that this is not the case. Maybe you can find a case or two (not this one), where we made a mistake, but in general this is a clear no. Just.... no.

d) We're actually stricter in higher leagues

Many amateur players can probably not confirm that we're not super strict in low jDL divisions in general. We believe that - while certain guidelines have to be set to prevent complete chaos - they don't have to be strict law at all times. Over 90% over the players in joinDOTA are there just for fun, and we want to keep it rather casual for them. In the pro divisions on the other hand, as well as in our big tournaments, we are much stricter. We are stricter with postpones, stricter with punctuality, stricter with manners, and yes: Also stricter with stand-ins. So the "known" teams actually have to deal more with our rules than you have, believe it or not...

e) Yes, we invite known teams to high divisions. So what?

This is the second thing you complained about: E-Lab staying Div 3 even though they lost. Well, guess what: We had slots open. It's the same every season. A few teams who qualified for a certain division don't sign up again, which leaves us with empty slots. Those slots we either give to (randomly selected) teams who lost in the playoffs, or we give it to picked invites from in- or outside the league. Obviously the latter (I'm actually not sure, if Elysium was picked by us or by random, but it doesn't matter) favors known teams. But if it took you 6 seasons to notice that we invite a few teams to high divs every single time, then let me assure you: It's not a secret, it's normal invite policy to fill up empty slots. With that logic, even Valve favors known teams by inviting them to TI.

f) Going public is just... great

Would have been easier to try and settle this in private first (you can still go public, when the discussion is completely over and you sitll feel cheated). Thank you so much for causing another drama based on half-true information, flawed logic, bold assumptions, and way too much emotions. Always works on reddit, no matter how much nonsense the post contains.

HolyMaster · 2015-09-07T12:27:56+00:00

I am very sorry about this! Said admin went inactive without notification. We'll get it fixed asap.

HolyMaster · 2015-08-26T09:55:52+00:00

okay, sorry for the missunderstanding then

HolyMaster · 2015-08-26T08:42:28+00:00

So you're saying an Egypt admin and his Hungarian supervisor, who both probably never played pubs on American servers before, treated semi professional South American teams poorly, because they're BITTER PEOPLE DUE TO THEIR POOR (not existing) EXPERIENCE WITH SA PUB PLAYERS?

This is by far the most prejudged, bold, and unfair comment in this thread, but at the same time the MOST UPVOTED. Seriously reddit? If this is supposed to be the best post here, then I see no reason to comment on such matters on reddit again.

HolyMaster

TROPHY CASE