Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Burning Question

Is something just plain wrong when a team that wins 3 out of 4 events isn't the series champion? I mean, does anybody else really believe anybody else is actually the better team this year? (Not a shot at the other teams or players--as I know and respect a number of them but c'mon.) Isn't this the sort of thing that only happens in the Millennium?

29 comments:

Anonymous said...

The three wins didn't prevent them from winning the series, it was the cheating in the 4th event that did it.

But, to be fair, it was the BLATANT cheating by Bob's team in the prelims on Friday that resulted in the multitude of gun checks that occurred Saturday.

Bobby's guns Friday were so obviously in breakout mode that it came off as a mockery to the entire league. Zach even got "caught" by a camera on the webcast coming out to fire down the line, and his gun sounded like it was shooting 30BPS....he comes back in to his bunker looking at his gun and seemingly making an adjustment, comes out again and seems to be shooting closer to 13~15BPS. Huh, go figure.

Telford was helping commentate at that point, and pointed it out in case anyone missed it. It was just silly...so for Arsenal to lose to Blast as a result of a reffing crackdown decision that was brought on by Blast's blantant cheating is a pretty tough way to get screwed. I feel for them.

Don Saavedra said...

Accusations of cheating aside, maybe there was something to what Bob was saying back in the day about how consistency matters more than winning every tournament.

Anonymous said...

This is why PSP is superior to USPL/NPPL. The people who run PSP actually have a slight clue with regards to paintball competition. If the folks at USPL had any idea whatsoever about the competitive aspects of paintball, they'd have figured out sometime in the past five years that the semi-auto rule is a travesty.

Arsenal just learned why the hard way. It's too bad it had to come to that, but it doesn't seem anyone on the USPL side seems to realize that things like working on your rules are an important aspect to running a tournament series.

Baca Loco said...

Don
Do you mean back in the day when Bob was winning series titles without winning any events?
Seriously, would you rather win an event outright or a series title without actually winning anything?
It seems to me it devalues the whole idea of winning.

Don Saavedra said...

If it's a thing to win, and it's a difficult thing to win... I don't see what's not to be proud in winning it.

Anonymous said...

Baca,

I don't think you can choose anything. We all would rather win each and every single event we attend AND the Series.
Blast was only 12 points behind Arsenal after Pevs' event. I don't recall all the podium but that means they were pretty darn close to Arsenal at those 3 events.
You got a point: They didn't win a single event. But as Don said, no shame in taking the Series but being consistently good.

Now that raises a question: checks on guns made Arsenal lose Vegas... does that mean they didn't deserve to win the previous events IF checks were made consistently at HB, SC Village and Pevs?
Or were they just unlucky with their guns this time? (or were the refs to picky)

Anonymous said...

If the refs would've been that 'picky' on Friday, Blast could've been handed 7 gun penalties....then, if Arsenal were to have gotten nabbed too, Dynasty would've pulled out yet another Series title, assuming they would've still gone on to win the event.

How crazy would that've been?

Unfortunately, the ref's weren't paying much attention to guns on Friday...until after several appearances on the field from Blast, which got the powers that be to pull the refs together and ask them to start checking guns hardcore.

Anonymous said...

Check that...Arsenal still had Dynasty in points...n/m

Baca Loco said...

Anon
Sure I can. Unfortunately I'm not the King of Paintball (yet) so my decisions aren't binding.

And for all you conspiracy buffs name the brand of gun that Arsenal was penalized for.

But seriously, what does a seties title get you? In most sports the winners usually actually win something and in those few where they don't have to does anybody really take it seriously? (Unless, of course, money is involved.)

anonachris said...

I'm going to guess that Aresenal was penalized for an illegal, non-cheater gun. While the cheaters got away because their cheating guns were undectable.

So the NPPL has once again renewed the interest of teams who play in it next year (if any) to try to get their hands on cheater boards wherever and however they can.

If they're stupid they'll announce they're just going to crack down enforcement next year and have zero tolerance (how's that war on drugs working out for a "real world" parallel?)

If they're smart they'll come up with a real solution.

Anonymous said...

Arsenal was penalized for a bouncing gun, (ref said he could hear it firing more shots than pulls when he was ripping on it) That ref has great hand / eye and ear coordination as he can hear how many shots are coming out and how know how many times he pulled the trigger. Single pull was single ball no bounce. Actually grabbed 2 guys guns in the chrono and got them to fire 2 balls on one pull the first time we tried it but they were still playing. Sad part was the gun was checked 2 times before that on a all guns down (not even in the rulebook) and another time a ref checked and said it was fine, just a fast firing gun. Then they get it to "add shots" and "bounce" when they throw 3 pods through it.

franktankerous said...

what happened to the "robot" they used to have? A ref pulling the trigger and saying it seems fast just seems way to subjective. Not saying its the wrong call, but "great hand eye and ear coordination" that just seems like a problem just waiting to happen

Anonymous said...

problem w/ the robot is it belonged to Bobby....and thus he knew how to beat it...and others started catching on.

franktankerous said...

huh? its a machine that pulls the trigger and compares the number of shots that are fired with the number of trigger pulls?

Seems pretty full proof too me...

Can anyone with a name confirm that bob owned and knew how to beat the machine?

Anonymous said...

Bob confirmed it himself on the webcast Saturday.

Anonymous said...

...and, it's only fool proof if the board is in the same mode it was in when the gun was considered "questionable". Breakout modes can be programmed to switch back to semi after x number of shots, or y number of seconds. It took too long to get from the field where it was noticed to the "fool proof" robot where it could be checked to actually catch anyone.

Reiner Schafer said...

I assume everyone here has seen the USPL Rules Committee statment on the issue.

http://68caliber.com/

Anonymous said...

Laughable. All that statement shows is that the people running USPL are morons. "Mechanical Bounce"? The whole point of the electronic gun is THERE ARE NO MECHANICS!

"Mechanical Bounce" is just a euphamism for "this gun only adds a few shots per second"

franktankerous said...

The Robot can only catch bouncing guns, not cheating guns. So in this case since the ref took the gun and shot it for himself to see that it was adding shots and then ran 3 pods through it, this is something the Robot could have given a definitive and scientific answer to not just "I have good hand eye ear coordination and I think its adding shots".

Bob's solution for getting around the robot was cheater boards that would allow the gun to seem legal then turn on a performance mode, then go back to being fully legal again, therefore going undetected. This is very different from what the Arsenal player had.

This needed to be addressed Mechanical Bounce is when a gun fires a shot due to the recoil of the marker... This problem can be solved by increasing the return tension on the trigger. Or by increasing the setting on the board that helps eliminate these false positives.... Please stop speaking about things you don't understand.

Before Baca puts us all in time out for getting off topic... The individual events give out trophies for the teams that win each event. The series title is for the team with the highest seed points at the end of the season. Blast performed well all year, unfortunately they didn't take home the Gold, but they did manage to be the best overall and thats what the title is there for.

Anonymous said...

BLAST wins title for most events without gun penalty.

Reiner Schafer said...

Looking from the outside (and yes, you should be concerned what the outside world thinks), it seems rather sad when winners of a contest are those that seem to be able to cheat most effectively. I realize there is cheating and playing in the grey area in every sport, but paintball seems to be taking it to extremes. It's really not a lot of fun for many people if the need to cheat to win is prevelant. ONE of the reasons people are choosing to stay out of speedball competitions early on.

But you already all know that. You just choose to ignore it because everyone is doing it and there is no getting around it.

Baca Loco said...

Sorry Reiner but I'm gonna have to ask you to step down from your high horse and accept a VFTD timeout for sanctimonious commentary.

The issue isn't cheating, it's effective rules and consistent officiating--neither of which was a priority in past versions of the NPPL but may finally be front burner concern--which would be a good thing.

By far and away the most cheating in paintball occurs in scenario games but nobody really cares because the scores don't really matter and the promoters are purely interested in numbers.

Reiner Schafer said...

I'm in agreement with you on the scenario comment. But that has absolutely nothing to do with tournament ball.

And I understand that officiating is a major problem. But when you create a situation where it's almost impossible for good officiating, something is wrong. There is too much grey area. Humans can't be robots.

I'll step down now and take my time out. ;)

Missy Q said...

Reiner, I also have trouble with the old American argument of "Don't blame the poor kids for cheating, blame the people that don't stop them from cheating." Wheel out the traditional moral disclaimer, absolving the perpetrators from any recourse for their own actions, should they be cunning/devious to get away with them. A crime is only a crime if you're caught, right?
By the same regard, surely the cops should all go to jail for life, or at least be fired, because I'm pretty sure there's still some unsolved crimes out there. Blaming the criminals for getting away with it would be so unfair.
RIP Morality. I blame the Parents.

raehl said...

Blame doesn't have to be exclusive.

Some people are selfish. You can not expect to create an environment where selfish behavior is rewarded and then get all mad when some selfish people take advantage of that environment.

"There wouldn't be any cheating if the cheaters would stop cheating!" is about as rational as stating "The sky would be green if it wasn't blue!" If cheating works, people are going to cheat. That's reality. Ignoring reality isn't going to improve the situation. The solution is to change things so that cheating doesn't work.

Baca Loco said...

Paging Missy Q, reality check on aisle 9. With such a high-minded view of playing a game--equating rules violations with criminal behavior--I'm surprised you didn't voice an opinion when you were in a position to do something constructive--other than wring your hands and pass all the blame along to the criminal element.

Baca Loco said...

Dammit, I agree with Faction and he posted first. It's a dark day indeed at VFTD.

Missy Q said...

You and Chris both agree because you are both American. You are brought up to believe this, you learn it through your 'sportsmen' from an early age. No surprises.
I maintain that to admit to a problem, and not acknowledge the source of the problem, but only the means to contain it, is part of the problem.

Baca Loco said...

Missy
You can take the girl out of Harlem but you can't take the Harlem outta the girl--or so it seems. Would you care to expand the scope of your postulation? To say, speeding on public roads? Or the laws restricting certain narcotic use?

In fact, you are misreading the scenario. In our situation the rules define the game and the adjudication of the rules define the play of the game. Violating the rules does not alter the game, it exposes the violaters to the assigned penalties. Can it alter the lay of the game? Yes, it can but that now becomes a function of both the rules' effectiveness and that of the officiating.