Current round: 6
2024-04-01
to 2024-04-21

New registration

Login
Password

Forum: Euroleague - results

Back to forum list 1 2 3 4 5 6 (7) 8 9
2010-04-19 17:20:13 Miroslav Háša (czlgregi)
infinite llamas - Midi Rod NG
# 4836
Hi,
i am sorry, i didn't play this match and my team members say, that we played with 2 players(mrteuse, mrtaalento). I didn't know how to write results. So, there are results:

I.ROUND
rosicky - mrteuse 1-0 1-0 2-0
illkubica - mrtaalento 1-0 0-1 1-1

II.ROUND
illkubica - mrteuse 1-0 0-1 1-1
illtruskawek - mrtaalento 0-1 1-0 1-1

III.ROUND
illsosnowieec - mrteuse 0-1 0-1 0-2
r0sicky - mrtaalento +/- 0-1 1-1

IV.ROUND
illtruskawek - mrteuse 0-1 0.5-0.5 0.5-1.5
illsosnowieec - mrtaalento 0-1 1-0 1-1

infinite llamas 23.5 - 8.5 Midi Rod NG
2010-04-19 10:39:12 Csilla Vassné B. (th_vacsi)
Superteam vs Trojan Horse
# 4833
Hello !

On 18. of April at 19:00 we were waiting for the team Superteam till 19:30.
There was only one player in kaszuny from Superteam : stfederer.He didn't know anything about other players of them.
We are very sorry this kind of "win" ...
I wrote nothing in "match result" , I think it will be filled by admins.

vacsi and Trojan Horse
2010-04-08 21:47:34 Tomo Dernovšek (jezek_si)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4809
Pavel,

I didnt say anything about the mouth and you didnt read well between the lines. I explained the rules about the competences of the committee and its members. All captains agreed with that rules and therefore nobody cant take these competences.

When Iec and later Angst explained the reasons about our final decision, they summarized reasons from all members who voted for the result 16:16. All members didnt vote for such decision, but mayority ones did. It is not necessary that every member tells his reasons separately (and public), not even how every member voted. If I would vote again after all this hot discusion, I would vote the same, but I dont tell you how. No one cant force me his mind.

I hope, it is more clear now.
2010-04-07 23:20:27 Pavel Laube (kedlub)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4807
Nice indeed..
It is really sad for me that after so many comments about this matter here (not mentioning some silly "Angst polish power" speculations), reaction of the committe is almost like.."Are you in the committe? No? Than keep you mouth shut and don't teach me the rules, we don't need to explain anything!" However, I think you really should explain! I consider it very normal that the control body explains arguments for its important decisions (as this might of course become a precedent). There is e.g. still the most important question of many here, how did you come to conclusion that there was really fully understood "gentleman agreement", which remains unanswered.
I'm glad that at least Angst explained us his reasons. However, it seems that I "understood very well his previous explanation" and I find it "weird" indeed, if the only reason for him was that Zathras stance was written by his team-mates (I can imagine hundreds of reasons why he possibly didn't write it himself - especially when no one from committe asked him to do that). When I wrote to ask you for faster decision making I really didn't want to force you to decision without any necessary information(which apparently happened), so I'm sorry!
However I understand the uneasy situation of Angst and others, who wanted to decide fast. Perhaps they decided even good, I don't know. But please, don't take the further discussion or critique as an offence! Although the result is done and cannot be changed, it would be still nice to make it all a bit more clear..
2010-04-07 19:29:36 Monika Kolouchová (olsava)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4805
Angst is right. A committee has 5 members, everyone voted according to his own opinion and 3 vote were needed...
What seems easy at first sight is sometimes very hard when you have to decide rightly about it...
2010-04-07 19:25:20 Tomo Dernovšek (jezek_si)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4804
After so hot discusion, including the players from other teams, I have decided to reply once again, although this case is closed.

All captains had confirmed the rules before EL started. The committee is main authority of GEL and can decide in serious cases (not only fair play problems) (rule 10.2). The organizers of GEL are allowed to change the rules or make exceptions to the rules, if a situation requires this. This should only be used in exceptional circumstances (rule 15.1). I am a member of committee from the season 06/07 and I can confirm, that noone has influence on other(s), not even Ales, when he was a member. He had/has just right to power of veto at important changing rules. We persuasion each others by arguments only. I have never noticed that two members »work in pair« agaist the others or that one member vote for his nation. Sometimes a member abtains from voting because his vote maybe not be objective. I trust to every member to work honest and fair, although we have sometimes different opinions.

Everyone had chance to become a member of committee 2 month ago. I really cant understand that, except 2 candidates, no one wants to work in the committee, but now, there are more players, from the other teams as well, who want to teach a committee how to interpret the rules. Sorry, but you cant do that.

I mention 2 cases, although this is not in the usual way. First: Team Mollo, 2nd round, 8+5 = 13pp for playing 3 vs. 3, TM made 1 substitution, no protest from anyone. After a week one member of committee asked the others how was possible to interpret the rule 5.2 as well. There were 2 possible interpretations:
a) 1 missing player the whole match (playing with 3 players the whole match) --> 5+8pp
b) Infact TM played with 4 players in the match (but in every round one is missing) --> 8pp only.
Both interpretation are correct, but all members agreed with b).
Second: Malutki3000. According to the rule 2.6 we didnt allow Eurogomoku to change his nick when he changed a team. Malutki was a bit different case, but we cant agreed at once. But when the opponent team agreed, that he could play with a new nick, the final decision was very easy.
These 2 cases prove, that we can write 30 pages of the rules, but we cant foresee each possible situation. Therefore we have to discuse about unpredictable situations individually.

Everyone is wellcome to present his/her views of rules in the forum Rules. Thanks!
2010-04-07 17:13:05 Michał Żukowski (zukolepl)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4800
Zagrali fair i z duchem gry, tak w przeszłości zdarzało się kilkanaście razy ( przytoczyłem wątek z ice cube i woodenheads ), problem w tym wypadku był taki, że jedna gra decydowała o wygranej bądź remisie. Jakby nie to, to nikt by nie protestował. No ale przecież bardziej liczą się pkt i wygrana niż gra fair ;0

PS Guzik mnie obchodzi że napisałem po polsku, jak to tornitus napisał, polska strona - polski punkt myślenia, więc i polski język na forum też może być ;-0

Zukole.
2010-04-07 16:30:19 Piotr Małowiejski (dt_angst)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4798
I tried to explain why I decided in that way. I'm really sorry if it is weird, stupid, strange or funny for anyone here, but that was the reasoning. I don't have to explain, but felt obliged to do this as issue seems to be controversial.

I have no problem with the situation when other people see some things in different way as it is natural. However, I needed to vote and I voted according to my understanding of situation.

Unfortunately, it seems you don't understand my explanations. I regret that Zathras didn't respond (as Morph did), but it doesn't mean I need to teach captains and other players what to write here. I had limited knowledge in the moment of voting and there was no statement of Zathras that seemed to me a little bit strange, especially after Morph's comments. I understand Mollo's policy, but why Tornitus made his statements if they agreed to communicate by their captain in this case?

Summarising, I needed to decide and decided. Maybe my decision is not popular, maybe I was wrong from your perspective. However, I don't feel guilty because of it as I decided according to my sense of fair play.

Finally, I really can't leave with no comment suggestion on my special power here in the Committee. I really appreciate work done by my colleagues, despite we had different opinions many times. I have never tried to persuade them to change their mind in any way different than logical (from my perspective) argumentation and if you suggest their could act under my influence, it is really unfair to them.

Kind regards,

Angst
2010-04-07 15:15:27 Riku Kuokka (tornitus)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4797
And as I said earlier, [post # 4782] dont take it too offensively, I dont mean it like that.

kind regards, tornitus
2010-04-07 15:07:41 Riku Kuokka (tornitus)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4796
How come everyone else seems to think it should have been our win but the committee? Maybe Angst has too much power over every other parts of committee.. but i cant know that, im just wondering.
2010-04-07 14:35:25 Jan Kopecký (whdeafbat)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4795
I forgot to add one flaw I see in the decision, let me quote iec:

"match score was counted including this game by zukole and nobody protested until the end of match, thus KR also was given false hope that they are fighting for draw, they might also choose different tactics if the score was different."

As far as I know, there is no EL rule which appoints zukole to be the official EL score counter and no EL rule says "if you don't agree with the score of your match written by zukole you have to stop the match and argue". Zukole can count and post score just as any other player with kurnik nick, what zukole or any other player posts during the match on public chat has no validity and is absolutely irrelevant. If KR "was given false hope that they are fighting for draw", it's only their and zukole's fault, it's not fault of TM.
2010-04-07 14:18:17 Jan Kopecký (whdeafbat)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4794
I really wonder how did the committe draw the conclusion that "it becomes clear that there was gentlemen's agreement between them" because opposite seems to be the truth according to Team Mollo, there is zillion posts by Marko Pellikka and Riku Kuokka which are consistently saying: "zathras wanted his 2 wins and played the 3rd game just in case it's needed". It is crystal clear there was no gentleman agreement whatsoever, basically it's word of KR players against word of TM players and in such case, it should be KR who has to show us a proof that it was a gentleman agreement. There's no such proof as far as I know.

Another thing, since angst mentioned the rule "5.3.A team match consists of individual matches. In every individual match 2 players meet each other and they play 2 games where they start one game each." it is obvious that the committe's decision absolutely ignores this rule since out of those 3 games which zathras and morph played, committe decided to count 2 games started by zathras and 0 games started by morph. This rule clearly states that each player starts one game, i.e. the game started by morph must count as EL game according to EL rules.
2010-04-07 14:03:30 Pavel Laube (kedlub)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4793
Truely, I don't argue with the committe decision in itself, it's complicated case indeed. But the way of argumentation seems to me really weird, especially that one from Angst! To argue that "there was no statement from Zathras", is beyond my understanding, as Marko has written here already sheets of paper, where he clearly repeated their stance that it was not Zathras intention to lose his win from the first game..(Pity that I wasn't there,I still wonder how that "gentlemen agreement" looked like..). And as a captain it is clear that he speaks for Zathras in this forum, so I fully understand his wondering..
2010-04-07 12:08:54 Costinas Beniamin (vlh_dragon)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4792
There's a incy bincy detail that slips my mind . How come all the players (but all that don't belong to the jury ) saw the result so clear (Team Mollo winning) and their comments were so easily neglected ?
2010-04-07 11:36:31 Marko Pellikka (pellikka)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4791
We had a discussion about this matter as a team. As a captain I was representing all the team here. So if you would have seen necessary to see testimony by zathras himself it would have been nice that you would have approached either me or him that without his comments there is no chance for verdict to be on our side. Common sense said that we had nothing to worry about, so in this case we feel like surprised pants down without a warning.

Practically you are saying, that because the third game was played, there must have been gentlemen's agreement. All other goes to evidence category mentioned earlier. So according to this I would tell you that this was not a special case of any sort. You need to make a rule saying: "That if third game between paired couple is played, it's automatically considered as a rematch.".
2010-04-07 10:40:41 Piotr Małowiejski (dt_angst)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4790
What evidence would you expect?

There was statement from Morph and no statement from Zathras (he didn't deny Morph's version - why?). Third game is visible in the statistics. In this light it becomes clear that there was gentlemen's agreement between them.

Kind regards,

Angst
2010-04-07 06:38:26 Marko Pellikka (pellikka)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4789
Just wonder why without proper evidence this was turned to their favor. Without evidence I would have even understood somehow just marking the game totally non-played or draw. But because even this wouldn't have changed the match result, it's easy to see how some people might come up with unnecessary comments against some nationality.

I want to believe that the committee was unbiased and did their best in this matter. So the thing what is left for me is my opinion. I also want to apologize to my team. Probably I could have done something better...
2010-04-07 00:22:06 Piotr Małowiejski (dt_angst)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4788
Ondik,

"5.3.A team match consists of individual matches. In every individual match 2 players meet each other and they play 2 games where they start one game each." - that's why we needed to decide which games are valid.

Neither if Vilu is acting childish nor if Olsava is fair player (no doubt from my side) that wasn't the case.

Kind regards,

Angst
2010-04-07 00:16:07 Riku Kuokka (tornitus)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4787
Ondik, i think there is nothing to be done anymore. Sometimes people just screw the rules, too bad that it had to happen now and here. But it happens in every game sometimes, so let's focus on the next upcoming matches.
2010-04-06 23:49:54 Ondrej Nykl (pandik1)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4786
"As one of them has been repeated" - this is KR's statement, TM's statement includes the "JUST IN CASE" thing and if i'm not mistaken there's not enough evidence to confirm either of these statements.

"I assume we can't count results of three games" - why, because it's not possible to write such result into match results system? Is it written in rules? When nobody confirmed TM accepted to play the first game again AND don't count the original game, you just can't ignore the result of first one.

PS: you (and i'm sure lot of people who've been around for a while) know exactly what I mean with those "polish kids", just see vilumisiek's first response. And it's not the first time (Olsava's post, and i guess we all can agree she's one of the most mannered player)
2010-04-06 23:04:44 Michał Wileczek (krvilumisiek)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4785
zajebiście
2010-04-06 22:51:47 Piotr Małowiejski (dt_angst)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4784
Riku,

You're right. I probably shouldn't reply to silly comments, but hoped next time you will think twice what you would like to write.

Ondik,

I assume we can't count results of three games. As one of them has been repeated, we decided that last one is valid.

Best regards,

Angst

P.S. Watch out! Polish kids will come to see Czech and Finnish adults playing :)
2010-04-06 22:16:35 Riku Kuokka (tornitus)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4782
Didn't say the country is the problem, i just meant that of course you support your landmates. Sorry if i expressed myself incorrectly.

For example: If there is just swedish witnesses, of course they say its a swedish victory?

Or if you just listen american opinions, of course you start to think that america's opinions are right.

No offense, man, dont understand everything so offensively.
2010-04-06 21:41:09 Ondrej Nykl (pandik1)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4781
Polish kids being out of line and making troubles once again.

Too bad such behaviour gets supported by comitee.

Neither side's version could be confirmed, it's beyond my understanding how the rule 5.7 could have been overlooked then.
2010-04-06 20:34:25 Piotr Małowiejski (dt_angst)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4780
Riku,

Do you have any problem with Poland? Hopefully for Finland, probably almost everyone here is too wise to judge country by one of its citizens behaviour.

Maybe it's good time to grow up?

Regards,

Angst
2010-04-06 19:50:22 Riku Kuokka (tornitus)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4779
Polish site.. polish witnesses.. polish opinions.. of course its a poland-winning- situation! even if the both captains dont agree it to be EL-game..

So why so surprised, Attila? :)
2010-04-06 17:25 Attila Demján (bcattila)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4778
Very surprising decision:O

Zukole: Gadael vs me case: It's him, who had net problem, not me. I agreed to play a new game and I knew the rules and we both agreed to count the new game. And I was the captain... Plus, the result didn't matter.
So who is funny?:)

I think the committe should reform the rules in order to avoid such conflicts in the future.
2010-04-06 16:15:30 Piotr Małowiejski (dt_angst)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4777
Dear All,

We couldn't wait longer with taking the final decision. As Igor said it was really hard issue and we all probably shall agree that there were strong arguments for both considered solutions.

KR statement was not enough obviously. However, Zathras didn't deny their version and we all can see three games in the statistics (third game the same moves like in the first one). Maybe I'm wrong, but I find Zathras as really fair player and I regret that we need to mention him in almost every message...

This case should not be treated as a precedent. Such an issue is not clearly regulated in the rules, hence EL Committee probably would need to decide independently in possible further similar situations, having in mind specificity of any particular case.

What can I say more is that in my opinion gentlemen's agreement between players is above captain's will (there is no problem to discuss it with captain before) as the team shall establish their own forms of communication.

The decision was not unanimous, however now this case is closed. I would appreciate if you could focus on the new round.

Kind regards,

Piotr
2010-04-06 15:59:51 Marko Pellikka (pellikka)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4776
Oops. You have made the decision already. Ok then, I just can't still understand how you came up with such verdict. Maybe it's possible if you think that it was our team who was to prove otherwise (which in my opinion shouldn't have been the case) and if the time spent is not as meaningful as number of moves played (as can be seen from Igor's reasoning).

Well, what has happened has happened. Would be nice if you can polish the rules about this matter for following season.

P.S. Doesn't writing in main lobby result making your nick blink grey?
P.P.S. Would have been nice to discuss this issue further. I was available all day on Sunday and Monday. Today I was busy on work trip.
2010-04-06 15:45:59 Marko Pellikka (pellikka)
RE: Klub Rzeszow - Team Mollo
# 4775
As I said earlier, it was asked in the game room if the extra point could be given. At least samsaa from our team was watching the games. The third game was played just in case.

My games lasted longer and I wasn't even aware that the third game was going when I jumped to the game of zathras. So I would like to see some witness telling that the third game was played with a purpose to replay the first game. Before that I don't accept that the third game being counted. At the moment the only things witnessing the validity of third game have been comments from KR side. Is that enough for them?
Displayed message count: 30