ECC4: Saturday stuff
Chocobo
A ton of people showed up as expected, but it was still a lot fewer
people than had signed up. For instance A3 had 120 signups, but only
around 80 people actually showed.
Tournaments were supposed to start at 10 AM but I'm pretty sure they
started late...
A3 results:
#1 John Choi
#2 Alex Valle
#3 Henry Cen
#4 Eddie Lee
3S results:
#1 Alex Valle
#2 Eddie Lee
#3 John Choi
MVC results:
#1 Eddie Lee
(not sure about the other places right now...)
As of 3 AM, the MVC and 3S tournaments were STILL going... VERY crowded,
and waiting an hour to play was very common, contrary to what our good
buddy Pete said. There were also not 4 cabinets for each game, as he
also said. MVC and 3S both had two.
Todd Dwyer (Zeruel) also announced right before the tournaments were
about to begin that 45% of each tournament pot is being taken by the
arcade, which wasn't well received by a lot of the people playing there.
Basically this is what he decided to do- instead of $5 entry fee and
pay-for-play (which on average costs each person $5), he put the entry
fee at $10 and just took out 45% of that to give to the arcade (which
replaces the money they would have made with all the quarters put into
the machine). There's nothing wrong with doing this, and in fact it
saves time and bother since no one has to run around getting tokens,
wasting time every time they have a match.
But what IS wrong is not telling people beforehand about this. People
were looking at the tournament pots and thinking they were much larger
than they actually are. For instance, someone in California might look
and think "hm, 100 people, $10 entry fee means $1000 for the pot...
that's $650 for first place and $250 for second place. So even if I just
get second, I paid for my plane ticket... cool, I'm going to go." Then
he goes and finds out that he won't be able to cover his costs if he
wins. This is really bad... these big cash prizes that never happened
probably got a least a few people to go to ECC where they wouldn't have
gone before.
In conclusion, ECC is suck, and you all should go to Chicago or B4 in
CA.
MasSnead2
>A3 results:
>
>#1 John Choi
>#2 Alex Valle
>#3 Henry Cen
>#4 Eddie Lee
>
>3S results:
>
>#1 Alex Valle
>#2 Eddie Lee
>#3 John Choi
>
>MVC results:
>
>#1 Eddie Lee
And I'm going to assume:
A2, Super Turbo: some rendition of the 2 Cali guys.
So the math behind your observation:
>But what IS wrong is not telling people beforehand about this. People
>were looking at the tournament pots and thinking they were much larger
>than they actually are. For instance, someone in California might look
>and think "hm, 100 people, $10 entry fee means $1000 for the pot...
>that's $650 for first place and $250 for second place. So even if I just
>get second, I paid for my plane ticket... cool, I'm going to go."
Probably won't be a big deal since it's the same results all the time.
Chocobo
> What characters did they players use?
I don't know. I'm sure that Choi must have used V Sakura, since that's who he
uses to win every A3 tournament. Aside from that, I can only guess that Eddie
used DWM for MVC.
MasSnead2 wrote:
> >
> >A3 results:
> >
> >#1 John Choi
> >#2 Alex Valle
> >#3 Henry Cen
> >#4 Eddie Lee
> >
> >3S results:
> >
> >#1 Alex Valle
> >#2 Eddie Lee
> >#3 John Choi
> >
> >MVC results:
> >
> >#1 Eddie Lee
>
> And I'm going to assume:
>
> A2, Super Turbo: some rendition of the 2 Cali guys.
>
Those haven't happened yet, so no one has those results yet. I'm sure that
Choi will win ST, and that Sirlin, Choi, and Valle will do well in A2.
>
> So the math behind your observation:
> >But what IS wrong is not telling people beforehand about this. People
> >were looking at the tournament pots and thinking they were much larger
> >than they actually are. For instance, someone in California might look
> >and think "hm, 100 people, $10 entry fee means $1000 for the pot...
> >that's $650 for first place and $250 for second place. So even if I just
> >get second, I paid for my plane ticket... cool, I'm going to go."
>
> Probably won't be a big deal since it's the same results all the time.
As far as what tournament money goes where, it's exactly the same. That's not
the problem. The problem is that people were led to believe there would be
very large tournament prizes, and that's not the case.
sol t kim
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
What characters did they players use?
>A3 results:
>
>#1 John Choi
>#2 Alex Valle
>#3 Henry Cen
>#4 Eddie Lee
>
>3S results:
>
>#1 Alex Valle
>#2 Eddie Lee
>#3 John Choi
>
>MVC results:
>
>#1 Eddie Lee
>(not sure about the other places right now...)
>
>As of 3 AM, the MVC and 3S tournaments were STILL going... VERY crowded,
>and waiting an hour to play was very common, contrary to what our good
>buddy Pete said. There were also not 4 cabinets for each game, as he
>also said. MVC and 3S both had two.
>
>Todd Dwyer (Zeruel) also announced right before the tournaments were
>about to begin that 45% of each tournament pot is being taken by the
>arcade, which wasn't well received by a lot of the people playing there.
>Basically this is what he decided to do- instead of $5 entry fee and
>pay-for-play (which on average costs each person $5), he put the entry
>fee at $10 and just took out 45% of that to give to the arcade (which
>replaces the money they would have made with all the quarters put into
>the machine). There's nothing wrong with doing this, and in fact it
>saves time and bother since no one has to run around getting tokens,
>wasting time every time they have a match.
>
>But what IS wrong is not telling people beforehand about this. People
>were looking at the tournament pots and thinking they were much larger
>than they actually are. For instance, someone in California might look
>and think "hm, 100 people, $10 entry fee means $1000 for the pot...
>that's $650 for first place and $250 for second place. So even if I just
>get second, I paid for my plane ticket... cool, I'm going to go." Then
>he goes and finds out that he won't be able to cover his costs if he
>wins. This is really bad... these big cash prizes that never happened
>probably got a least a few people to go to ECC where they wouldn't have
>gone before.
>
>In conclusion, ECC is suck, and you all should go to Chicago or B4 in
>CA.
>
--
THE PR0DlGY
enough to get far in tournies..
Donger
1 - Eddie Lee
2 - Josh (Strider128)
3 - Arturo Sanchez
As usual, Chinatown owned this tourney. I myself got eaten up
in the later rounds, but at least I got some good MSH
competition. That game rules.
Donger
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
FinalAtomicBuster
heroes vs Street Fighter. Shit! I didn't think anyone else was still
playing that game!!! You are right, that game does rule. :) was the
competition good? any infinates?... was there any in that game? I don't
remember hearing about them...
Paul Greer
used at ECC anyway. At the time the games were listed, the argument
was that MvC2 was too new. Based on the amount of analysis and play
on that game before ECC took place, that argument sure turned to shit.
Is there a release date/details for the official tape along with unofficial
ones?
FinalAtomicBuster <captain_fal...@excite.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:2a1814d4...@usw-ex0106-044.remarq.com...
MasSnead2
>was that MvC2 was too new.
Well,
I don't think all of the characters were released anyway.
So being 'too new' had some validity.
LIQUID 24
>
>uses to win every A3 tournament.
I did not see every Choi match , but every game I saw him play he used V-Ryu
>Aside from that, I can only guess that Eddie
>used DWM for MVC.
>
>
eddie used Strider/WarMachine
Ted
LIQUID 24
>I don't think all of the characters were released anyway.
>So being 'too new' had some validity.
No , all the Characters were not released yet and besides that there was only
one machine there . Besides , who really wants to see 200+ rounds of
Cable/Captain Commando/IronMan cheese
Ted
MasSnead2
>one machine there . Besides , who really wants to see 200+ rounds of
>Cable/Captain Commando/IronMan cheese
Was that machine still set at 75 cents?
Magicnerd8
winner's bracket, but by everyone involved)? Anybody have the guts to go with
Twelve, Hugo? Any Uriens?
"Let me see that thong...."
-J
rrevved
>who really wants to see 200+ rounds of
>Cable/Captain Commando/IronMan cheese
Me! Me!
:)
Chocobo
> Huh? Er, MvC = Marvel vs Capcom... and that shit shouldn't have been
> used at ECC anyway. At the time the games were listed, the argument
> was that MvC2 was too new. Based on the amount of analysis and play
> on that game before ECC took place, that argument sure turned to shit.
What are you talking about? That argument is perfectly valid. At least half of the
east coast players either have never seen MVC2, or don't have all the characters
on the machine. This is clearly too early for a big tournament. You can't have the
East Coast Championships and exclude much of the east coast players. It's at least
a few weeks too early.
> Is there a release date/details for the official tape along with unofficial
> ones?
Good luck on that. I wouldn't expect to see any tapes.
rrevved
>> Is there a release date/details for the official tape along with unofficial
>> ones?
>
>Good luck on that. I wouldn't expect to see any tapes.
Why?
Chocobo
Because ECC was a big mess just like last year, the same people as last year are
in charge of everything, it will be a repeat of the same events. You'll see the
results past the top 3 spots for one or two tournaments in February 2001, but
that's it. There will be no tape.
Donger
FinalAtomicBuster <captain_fal...@excite.com.invalid>
wrote:
>You are talking about Marvel Super Heroes aren't you? Not
Marvel super
>heroes vs Street Fighter. Shit! I didn't think anyone else was
still
>playing that game!!! You are right, that game does rule. :) was
the
>competition good? any infinates?... was there any in that game?
I don't
>remember hearing about them...
Yep, talking about Marvel Super Heroes. There was pretty good
competition there (I've been looking for about 3 years now :).
Tin was at ECC, and he had his entire repetoire of infinites/
megacombos on display. I kindly obliged by playing Juggernaut
half the time. Heh. That damn guy is good. Spiderman and
Wolverine infinites from hell!!! Everyone had an infinite in
that game. I forgot the URL for those infinites though. Anyone
know?
After about 10 games or so, I dusted off my Iron Man and whipped
up a few streaks here and there. The funny thing is, I was
playing that game all day. So when it came time for the MvC
tournament, I was pressing the wrong buttons for smartbomb,
attempting to insta-airdash, and actually using the repulsor
blaster. Oh well.
Donger
Pete
We have many hours of tape; it is just a matter of editing. As for the tourny, it
went fine. Everyone seemed to be having a good time. I know I enjoyed it. The
argument over money was fun to watch, and it was settled. The only thing is that 6
tournies should be run in 3 days, not 2. This would solve any time problems.
People will always find shit to complain about, but ecc was cool.
-Pete
WhoaMoses
clear that up.
shum...@my-deja.com
from down yonder lemme just make a couple of comments in regards to
ECC2000. The tournaments for the most part, despite the Saturday
controversy, ran pretty smoothly without too many problems. Todd, Gina,
Pete, and I worked diligently and made every effort to work out the
brackets via pre registration so we could get everything started asap.
Although we didn't start as early as we would have liked (which in
essence was not our fault) we did start earlier than last year. Our
biggest concern was in regards to the fact that players kept wandering
off thus delaying the matches even further. As far as turn out goes,
obviously we really had no control over that, the tournament was widely
publicized and preparations were pretty much set in place. Why almost
half the players signed up did not show I really can't say but what I
can say is that , for the most part, those who did show seemed to have a
good time.
As far as what happened on Saturday? The way I see it, it seemed to
be just one huge misunderstanding about the overall distribution of the
prize money. While I still feel that the prior system was acceptable
($10 + free play, part of the percentage of the pot goes to the
arcade/ecc staff) I agree that it wasn't fair for the players not to be
informed and on behalf of the ecc2000 staff I apologize for that.
Fortunately though we were able to work things out and get on with the
event. The only real unfortunate aspect of this whole mess was the fact
that the tourneys themselves were delayed for a couple of hours.
Now with that said , on to the great yellow bird who chose to stay
south this spring:
In article <39318C82...@mindspring.com>,
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> I wasn't at ECC4, I'm just repeating what I heard.
Oh really! Why I could have sworn that you were there Joe!? Oh, heh,
my fault buddy, it must have been some other skinny lil nothing of a
scrub drooling over an A2 cabinet wondering if he'll ever be as good as
"Those Cali. guys".
> A ton of people showed up as expected, but it was still a lot fewer
> people than had signed up. For instance A3 had 120 signups, but only
> around 80 people actually showed.
Again, not our problem. We advertised the event within every possible
venue. The sign ups more than prove that. The fact that only about half
the players showed? Well who knows but we all had a good time anyway.
> Tournaments were supposed to start at 10 AM but I'm pretty sure they
> started late...
First off Einstein we never once stated that the tourney would start at
10:00. The arcade was scheduled to OPEN at 10:00 (2 hours earlier than
usual) so we could finish up pre-registration and get going asap and as
a result we did get started at a reasonable time. Again not once did we
ever specifically state that the tournaments would start at 10:00 so get
your head out of your ass and get your facts straight.
>
> A3 results:
>
> #1 John Choi
> #2 Alex Valle
> #3 Henry Cen
> #4 Eddie Lee
A3 was on 4 cabinets and, despite the delay, it ran pretty smoothly.
These four guys played their butts off. Each player's level of speed,
intensity, and precision were just awesome to witness.
>
> 3S results:
>
> #1 Alex Valle
> #2 Eddie Lee
> #3 John Choi
I heard the matches went well. Todd ran this one so I didn't get to see
much of the matches. The final was well played but damn that game just
does not do it for me.
> MVC results:
>
> #1 Eddie Lee
> (not sure about the other places right now...)
>
#2 Josh
#3 Arturo
All from CTF which pretty much seems to be the MvC capital. Whether
that's a good or bad thing is one's own opinion ;-P
> As of 3 AM, the MVC and 3S tournaments were STILL going... VERY
crowded,
> and waiting an hour to play was very common, contrary to what our good
> buddy Pete said. There were also not 4 cabinets for each game, as he
> also said. MVC and 3S both had two.
And they were run simultaneously which was also a good thing. The fact
that it ended late was explained already. The fact that people waited an
hour to play is pretty much unavoidable for every tourney, even A3, but
only nit pickers like yourself would complain about being stuck in an
arcade for an hour to wait your turn "Gee what should I do wiff my
whittle self!!!". Get beat down repeatedly I suppose.
>
> Todd Dwyer (Zeruel) also announced right before the tournaments were
> about to begin that 45% of each tournament pot is being taken by the
> arcade, which wasn't well received by a lot of the people playing
there.
We all (Ecc staff and owner of the Break) decided upon this and thought
it was a fair deal being that prizes were included as well (full turn
out would have resulted in at least $500 for first plus prizes).
Apparently the players were not satisfied with the percentages thus the
delay but I'm happy to say everything was worked out.
> Basically this is what he decided to do- instead of $5 entry fee and
> pay-for-play (which on average costs each person $5),
Umm, think again at the very least players would spend 7$ for each
tourney while the more successful the player the more money they would
have to spend. We tried to balance this out with our prior policy.
he put the entry
> fee at $10 and just took out 45% of that to give to the arcade (which
> replaces the money they would have made with all the quarters put into
> the machine). There's nothing wrong with doing this, and in fact it
> saves time and bother since no one has to run around getting tokens,
> wasting time every time they have a match.
That's another reason why we did what we did. It was in an effort to
save time as well. But after the delay the tournies went back to $5 +
pay for play thus making matches last much longer.
We all decided upon this
> But what IS wrong is not telling people beforehand about this. People
> were looking at the tournament pots and thinking they were much larger
> than they actually are. For instance, someone in California might look
> and think "hm, 100 people, $10 entry fee means $1000 for the pot...
> that's $650 for first place and $250 for second place. So even if I
just
> get second, I paid for my plane ticket... cool, I'm going to go."
Well, in my view both parties were at fault here. I do agree that
players should have been informed in advance. However, in turn players
should not have assumed that ALL the money was going to the pot. I mean
how was the staff going to make their money? We're an independent group
mind you (not directly working for Chris/The Break) so this was our way
of guaranteeing that we come out of this with something (unlike last
year). Also Chris needed some way to make up for the games set on free
play so that's pretty much what the percentage was for.
> In conclusion, ECC is suck, and you all should go to Chicago or B4 in
> CA.
>
Dear Mr. Van Pelt (aka: and ugly, skinny ass, yellow nothing of a bird):
For a person who never was, is, nor ever will be found anywhere near
within the vicinity of any major tourney, even if you so happen to
actually physically be there anyway, you sure have quite a bit to say.
First off YOU of all people have no business commenting on an event
whose details were made clear to you merely by way of that wretched
grapevine. While some of it is accurate the majority of it is not. I
made the big mistake of thinking that your Internet persona had improved
or matured over the last couple of years but it is clear to me now that
you have not changed. You are still one of the most idiotic posters and
one of the most insignificant human beings that I have ever come across.
Your posts are hardly informative and your credibility as a poster is
lower than kobun's ASS while kneeling down in prayer. I still can't get
over how easy it was for me to bait you into responding to my trolling
posts back in the day. And even to this day you still fall for some of
the trolling crap that's spewed amongst this NG. I find it funny how,
while the majority of GOOD players from all over the country decided to
participate in this tournament, test their skills, and for the most part
have fun, you on the other hand decided that your pet sheep matilda
(soon to be Mrs. skinny lil yellow bird) needed that special dose of
love and attention over this holiday weekend. And despite your no show
you STILL feel inclined to log on to your lil ass PC (barely consisting
of a megabyte of anything) in your dusty ol trailer making comments
about people or events or whatever that you know lil or nothing about
and as a result should have no business even THINKING about. The only
reason why you attended last years event was simply due to the fact that
you thought you were remotely decent at A2. When you finally realized
that you couldn't make the top 5 with your stellar "South Eastern" Gief
you simply chose to stay home and tend to your loved one (can you say
BAAAAA). So do me and the rest of us a huge favor Joe, before you go on
rambling about this tourney or that person or what degree of suckage
anything or anyone is guilty of why don't you go pick up that lose
nickle right next to that hay stack. No not that stack the other one!!
Then walk down to the nearest broken down Richmond all-purpose farmer's
market, approach Wendy the "three toothed" cashier, and purchase
yourself some semblance of a clue. Better yet CHOCOBO why don't you
gather up some guts and show your sad face at an event before you
decide to pass judgement. Does the term common sense or "what else is
there to say besides DUH!" mean anything to you? Have a nice life ya
prepubescent dimwit!
Without the least bit of sincerity,
"Master" John
P.S.- On behalf of the ECC2000 staff I would like to thank all the
participants who showed up this weekend. Everyone for the most part was
very cool and I for one had a very good time (despite my poor play).
Again apologies for the big misunderstanding but everything seemed to
work out none the less. So guys, stay cool and hopefully we'll all be
able to play each other again and hang. I hope so because man do I need
the practice ^_^
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Chocobo
> By the way, just for the record guys, this was ECC5, not ECC4. Just thought I'd
> clear that up.
Oh yeah, sorry about that. I guess I got them mixed up because they were both big
crowded too-long tournaments with more than their share of problems.
Alexander J Koo
I wasn't there, couldn't make it due to other obligations.. I guess my
say doesn't count as much.
But yea, guys, try not to be so critical. Master John and the rest of
the ECC staff did this for you guys. It's the closest thing EC can get
to a "shgl" type tourney thing.
Better to have had it than not.. and "wonder" who's better than who among
the EC(and some of the west).
If there were any "big" problems, you can only hope they fix them next
year...
Good job at anyrate, staff of ECC. I couldn't imagine that it was an
easy task at all...
--
AK
Chocobo
> Now with that said , on to the great yellow bird who chose to stay
> south this spring:
>
> In article <39318C82...@mindspring.com>,
> Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > I wasn't at ECC4, I'm just repeating what I heard.
>
> Oh really! Why I could have sworn that you were there Joe!? Oh, heh,
> my fault buddy, it must have been some other skinny lil nothing of a
> scrub drooling over an A2 cabinet wondering if he'll ever be as good as
> "Those Cali. guys".
Please consult a book of jokes or something next time you try to do this.
> > A ton of people showed up as expected, but it was still a lot fewer
> > people than had signed up. For instance A3 had 120 signups, but only
> > around 80 people actually showed.
>
> Again, not our problem. We advertised the event within every possible
> venue. The sign ups more than prove that. The fact that only about half
> the players showed? Well who knows but we all had a good time anyway.
Did I say it was your problem? Did I blame you, or anyone, for that? As I
said, I was just repeating what I heard for the benefit of those on the
newsgroup who might not have found out this information.
>
> > Tournaments were supposed to start at 10 AM but I'm pretty sure they
> > started late...
>
> First off Einstein we never once stated that the tourney would start at
> 10:00.
It is stated in the ECC2K FAQ that ECC2K will start at 10 AM. That refers to
the tournaments, not the arcade.
> The arcade was scheduled to OPEN at 10:00 (2 hours earlier than
> usual) so we could finish up pre-registration and get going asap and as
> a result we did get started at a reasonable time. Again not once did we
> ever specifically state that the tournaments would start at 10:00 so get
> your head out of your ass and get your facts straight.
Get my head out of my ass? You're the one apparently trying to start a
battle of meaningless insults because I committed the horrible crime of not
telling the newsgroup readers exactly when ECC was planned to begin (which I
didn't even do anyway). Do you have any goal other than being contradictory
to everything I say?
> > MVC results:
> >
> > #1 Eddie Lee
> > (not sure about the other places right now...)
> >
> #2 Josh
> #3 Arturo
>
> All from CTF which pretty much seems to be the MvC capital. Whether
> that's a good or bad thing is one's own opinion ;-P
I heard that Valle and many west coast people didn't even enter.
> > As of 3 AM, the MVC and 3S tournaments were STILL going... VERY
>
> crowded,
> > and waiting an hour to play was very common, contrary to what our good
> > buddy Pete said. There were also not 4 cabinets for each game, as he
> > also said. MVC and 3S both had two.
>
> And they were run simultaneously which was also a good thing. The fact
> that it ended late was explained already. The fact that people waited an
> hour to play is pretty much unavoidable for every tourney, even A3, but
> only nit pickers like yourself would complain about being stuck in an
> arcade for an hour to wait your turn "Gee what should I do wiff my
> whittle self!!!". Get beat down repeatedly I suppose.
Your attempts at insults are very weak (and meaningless too). You also need
to read more closely. Nowhere did I complain about one hour waits. In an
earlier post, someone asked if ECC would have long one hour waits in between
matches, and "Pete" (I assume it's Pete Talley) replied and stated that the
one hour waits would not happen.
> > Todd Dwyer (Zeruel) also announced right before the tournaments were
> > about to begin that 45% of each tournament pot is being taken by the
> > arcade, which wasn't well received by a lot of the people playing
>
> there.
>
> We all (Ecc staff and owner of the Break) decided upon this and thought
> it was a fair deal being that prizes were included as well (full turn
> out would have resulted in at least $500 for first plus prizes).
It was a fair deal, since it would work out the same as if it was $5 entry
fee and then pay to play. But the problem is that people were led to believe
that the total prizes would be all of the $10 entry fee.
> > Basically this is what he decided to do- instead of $5 entry fee and
> > pay-for-play (which on average costs each person $5),
>
> Umm, think again
I do not need to think again. I am correct.
> at the very least players would spend 7$ for each
> tourney while the more successful the player the more money they would
> have to spend. We tried to balance this out with our prior policy.
>
Yes, and I understand that. The people who go out in two would spend $7,
while the players who get far could spend up to $17. On average, it's around
$10. So why did you tell me to think again?
> he put the entry
> > fee at $10 and just took out 45% of that to give to the arcade (which
> > replaces the money they would have made with all the quarters put into
> > the machine). There's nothing wrong with doing this, and in fact it
> > saves time and bother since no one has to run around getting tokens,
> > wasting time every time they have a match.
>
> That's another reason why we did what we did. It was in an effort to
> save time as well. But after the delay the tournies went back to $5 +
> pay for play thus making matches last much longer.
Right. It would have worked out fine if everyone had been informed
beforehand.
>
> We all decided upon this
> > But what IS wrong is not telling people beforehand about this. People
> > were looking at the tournament pots and thinking they were much larger
> > than they actually are. For instance, someone in California might look
> > and think "hm, 100 people, $10 entry fee means $1000 for the pot...
> > that's $650 for first place and $250 for second place. So even if I
>
> just
> > get second, I paid for my plane ticket... cool, I'm going to go."
>
> Well, in my view both parties were at fault here. I do agree that
> players should have been informed in advance. However, in turn players
> should not have assumed that ALL the money was going to the pot.
I disagree. In almost every tournament, all of the entry fee money goes to
the pot. When people see an entry fee for a tournament now, it's assumed
that it all is part of the pot. If it's going to be different than normal,
that needs to be stated.
> I mean
> how was the staff going to make their money? We're an independent group
> mind you (not directly working for Chris/The Break) so this was our way
> of guaranteeing that we come out of this with something (unlike last
> year).
Most tournaments are not run for the profit of the people in charge. I find
it amusing that you feel that way.
> Also Chris needed some way to make up for the games set on free
> play so that's pretty much what the percentage was for.
Of course. But still... some arcade owners wouldn't feel the need to charge
for tournament games, when the tournament has already brought him tons of
people buying food and playing all his non-tournament games endlessly for
the entire day, making him a lot of money anyway.
> Dear Mr. Van Pelt (aka: and ugly, skinny ass, yellow nothing of a bird):
This must be high comedy from a person who calls himself "Master" and thinks
that Honda's "oink oink" grunts are hilarious.
> For a person who never was, is, nor ever will be found anywhere near
> within the vicinity of any major tourney,
ECC4 wasn't? I'll take your word for it...
> even if you so happen to
> actually physically be there anyway,
Uh, ok. That really makes sense.
> First off YOU of all people have no business commenting on an event
> whose details were made clear to you merely by way of that wretched
> grapevine.
Why not? I have as much business doing this as anyone else. For the most
part, I was merely repeating what I heard. Aside from my opinion that B4 and
Chicago will be better tournaments (which is the truth, by the way), I
didn't insert my own comments.
> While some of it is accurate the majority of it is not.
The majority of my post was not true? Go read it again. It's ALL true. You
obviously have nothing to do but try to put me down and just say the
opposite of whatever I say just to be annoying.
> You are still one of the most idiotic posters and
> one of the most insignificant human beings that I have ever come across.
And your evidence of this is my posting of factual information? What the
hell?
> Your posts are hardly informative
I believe my very post that started this thread was informative. Wrong
again.
> and your credibility as a poster is
> lower than kobun's ASS while kneeling down in prayer.
Please buy a book of jokes. I mean it.
> I still can't get
> over how easy it was for me to bait you into responding to my trolling
> posts back in the day.
Good way to try to put down someone else's credibility, by bringing up the
fact that you often post trolling responses (just as you are now).
> I find it funny how,
> while the majority of GOOD players from all over the country decided to
> participate in this tournament, test their skills, and for the most part
> have fun
I am not a good player. I live in Richmond and there are no arcades and no
competition, so of course I can't get good. The only game in which I can
compete is Alpha 2, because I got good at that before the Richmond arcades
all closed and before all the competition quit playing. I didn't think it
would be worth all the money and bother to go up to NJ just for an Alpha 2
tournament.
> And despite your no show
> you STILL feel inclined to log on to your lil ass PC
I don't feel inclined to do anything for anyone, I just did what I felt like
doing.
> (barely consisting
> of a megabyte of anything)
Oh please, don't insult my computer... you'll hurt it's feelings. Jesus.
> making comments
> about people or events or whatever that you know lil or nothing about
Which I stated. I said that I was not there and that I'm only repeating what
I heard.
> and as a result should have no business even THINKING about.
So now you can tell me what I'm allowed to think about? Very fair of you.
> The only
> reason why you attended last years event was simply due to the fact that
> you thought you were remotely decent at A2.
Which I am.
> When you finally realized
> that you couldn't make the top 5 with your stellar "South Eastern" Gief
Top 5 at ECC was never a goal of mine. Before ECC4 I thought that I was one
of the better A2 players around, something like 3rd best on the east coast.
I proved that I was right last year, and there's nothing else that I felt
like proving this year.
> you simply chose to stay home
It wasn't worth nearly $200 to me to participate in that A2 tournament. It's
too bad that you somehow feel angry about this.
> So do me and the rest of us a huge favor Joe, before you go on
> rambling about this tourney or that person or what degree of suckage
> anything or anyone is guilty of
What are you talking about? Just more meaningless rambling as usual...
> Better yet CHOCOBO why don't you
> gather up some guts and show your sad face at an event before you
> decide to pass judgement.
I have, you fool.
> Does the term common sense or "what else is
> there to say besides DUH!" mean anything to you?
Actually, no. I have no idea what the hell you're attempting to communicate
here.
rrevved
>ECC2000.
Tapes?
If so, who to contact.
Thanks!
LIQUID 24
>participants who showed up this weekend. Everyone for the most part was
>very cool and I for one had a very good time (despite my poor play).
>Again apologies for the big misunderstanding but everything seemed to
>work out none the less. So guys, stay cool and hopefully we'll all be
>able to play each other again and hang. I hope so because man do I need
>the practice ^_^
i was going to try and give my outlook on the whole event with a complete quote
of some of the rest of this post but since this last statement sums it up for
me I'll just say thanks John , Gina , Todd , Pete , Chris , and on and on for a
great weekend of gaming and heres hoping we can do it all again next year sans
the arguing over money which most of us didn't have a shot at anyway . I had a
great time guys ... Thanks
Ted
shum...@my-deja.com
>
> Please consult a book of jokes or something next time you try to do
this.
Valiant comeback. Next.
>
> Did I say it was your problem? Did I blame you, or anyone, for that?
As I
> said, I was just repeating what I heard for the benefit of those on
the
> newsgroup who might not have found out this information.
So why bring it up? Obviously it was an aspect of the tournament that
you chose to point out. It was surely an attempt on your part to
emphasize your point in regards to your assumption that ECC2000 was an
unpleasant experience, a subject which you of course would know nothing
about.
>
> It is stated in the ECC2K FAQ that ECC2K will start at 10 AM. That
refers to
> the tournaments, not the arcade.
Can you read? Seriously! Is your ability to comprehend a grouping of
individual words that reflect a fully established thought process
intact? The FAQ CLEARLY states that ECC2000 begins yes but that hardly
means that the ACTUAL tournaments will be taking place at that time. We
do happen to make mention of pre-registration prior to actual tournament
play. Please read carefully next time.
>
> Get my head out of my ass? You're the one apparently trying to start a
> battle of meaningless insults because I committed the horrible crime
of not
> telling the newsgroup readers exactly when ECC was planned to begin
(which I
> didn't even do anyway). Do you have any goal other than being
contradictory
> to everything I say?
That's not my goal it just so happens that what you say is contradictory
to pure common sense. It also stems from your apparent basic lack of
research and a lack of true understanding of actual facts before making
a credible judgement or comment.
> I heard that Valle and many west coast people didn't even enter.
Choi didn't enter, Valle did, so did Sirlin and some others. Check your
sources again, although I doubt that you did that for your initial post.
>
> Your attempts at insults are very weak (and meaningless too).
Thank you ^_^
You also need
> to read more closely. Nowhere did I complain about one hour waits. In
an
> earlier post, someone asked if ECC would have long one hour waits in
between
> matches, and "Pete" (I assume it's Pete Talley) replied and stated
that the
> one hour waits would not happen.
I repeat:
So why bring it up? Obviously it was an aspect of the tournament that
you chose to point out. It was surely an attempt on your part to
emphasize your point in regards to your assumption that ECC2000 was an
unpleasant experience, a subject which you of course would know nothing
about.
> It was a fair deal, since it would work out the same as if it was $5
entry
> fee and then pay to play. But the problem is that people were led to
believe
> that the total prizes would be all of the $10 entry fee.
Again miscommunication by both parties. But resolved none the less.
>
> > > Basically this is what he decided to do- instead of $5 entry fee
and
> > > pay-for-play (which on average costs each person $5),
> >
> > Umm, think again
>
> I do not need to think again. I am correct.
see below
>
> > at the very least players would spend 7$ for each
> > tourney while the more successful the player the more money they
would
> > have to spend. We tried to balance this out with our prior policy.
> >
>
> Yes, and I understand that. The people who go out in two would spend
$7,
> while the players who get far could spend up to $17. On average, it's
around
> $10. So why did you tell me to think again?
Because it's basically a general assumption. The average can fluctuate
depending on the number of matches played and how big the tournament is.
For a 128 man bracket the least amount of money spent is $7 and let's
say the most is 17(although it could be more). Worst case scenario for
every player means the average amount of money spent per player still
comes out to approximately $7 and change and above. Where did you get $5
from? If I'm wrong on this, fine, so be it no skin off my back.
>
> Right. It would have worked out fine if everyone had been informed
> beforehand.
I agree. But it didn't work out that way. Even so it was still an
enjoyable experience for most. My beef with you now is that you choose
to bring up such points for one sole purpose it seems and that is to put
the tournament down for one reason or another. It's an EAST COAST
tournament put together by a group of individuals that worked extremely
hard to provide a fun time for a group of other very cool individuals.
And for YOU to start with this pseudo ECC2000 report and make some sort
of comment on it based on random facts is foolish on your part. I'm
tired of your crap.
> > Well, in my view both parties were at fault here. I do agree that
> > players should have been informed in advance. However, in turn
players
> > should not have assumed that ALL the money was going to the pot.
>
> I disagree. In almost every tournament, all of the entry fee money
goes to
> the pot. When people see an entry fee for a tournament now, it's
assumed
> that it all is part of the pot. If it's going to be different than
normal,
> that needs to be stated.
It was wrong for us to not make that clear yes. However, assuming that
all the entry fee ($10 + pay per head for a 128 man bracket mind you,
that's a lot of money) is all going to the pot is also a mistake IMO.
>
> Most tournaments are not run for the profit of the people in charge. I
find
> it amusing that you feel that way.
If the people in charge own the establishment yes. However, being that
we were not directly on THE BREAK's pay roll and with $10 + FREE PLAY
our cut had to come from somewhere. Again just a matter of poor
communication overall.
>
> > Dear Mr. Van Pelt (aka: and ugly, skinny ass, yellow nothing of a
bird):
>
> This must be high comedy from a person who calls himself "Master" and
thinks
> that Honda's "oink oink" grunts are hilarious.
(The "Master" ROTFL hysterically as the beaked one unleashes a furious
rebuttal that almost grazed the "Master's" fragile ego)
>
> > For a person who never was, is, nor ever will be found anywhere near
> > within the vicinity of any major tourney,
>
> ECC4 wasn't? I'll take your word for it...
Heh, read on sir.
>
> > even if you so happen to
> > actually physically be there anyway,
>
> Uh, ok. That really makes sense.
Take it any way you want. I think I've made my point here.
> > First off YOU of all people have no business commenting on an event
> > whose details were made clear to you merely by way of that wretched
> > grapevine.
>
> Why not? I have as much business doing this as anyone else. For the
most
> part, I was merely repeating what I heard.
Exactly, and doing a poor job of it as well. Inaccurate assumptions,
pointing blame (at Todd, don't think I couldn't tell what this post was
all about), and pretty much passing judgement based on another person's
comments without actually coming up with a valid conclusion on your own.
Aside from my opinion that B4 and
> Chicago will be better tournaments (which is the truth, by the way), I
> didn't insert my own comments.
OK, put the sheep down. No, put her down right now and read this very
carefully. The above statement that you chose to write clearly indicates
to me that you have ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY no inkling as to what the
hell you're talking about. Assuming that both tournaments will be
better, which basically cannot be determined at this point and in
essence is really not relevant, is a perfect example of your inept
thought process. The Scarecrow had nothing on you, for a lad such as
yourself is beyond the aid of a WIZARD.
>
> > While some of it is accurate the majority of it is not.
>
> The majority of my post was not true? Go read it again. It's ALL true.
Read again. oops, sorry, I forgot. Why don't you have your furry
companion read it aloud to ya.
> obviously have nothing to do but try to put me down and just say the
> opposite of whatever I say just to be annoying.
I'm not trying to be annoying, I'm dead serious. I've had enough of your
petty ass comments based on something you know nothing about. You did it
before and you've done it again. (B2 is a perfect example) And frankly
I'm tired of your bullshit.
>
> > You are still one of the most idiotic posters and
> > one of the most insignificant human beings that I have ever come
across.
>
> And your evidence of this is my posting of factual information? What
the
> hell?
Your interpretation of "factual information" clearly displays your lack
of credibility. heh, wait, having lack of credibility would be an
improvement for you.
>
> > Your posts are hardly informative
>
> I believe my very post that started this thread was informative. Wrong
> again.
Informative to a point but overall quite inaccurate. And yet you pass
judgement which is what I have a problem with.
>
> > and your credibility as a poster is
> > lower than kobun's ASS while kneeling down in prayer.
>
> Please buy a book of jokes. I mean it.
I thought that was kind of funny myself ^_^
> > I still can't get
> > over how easy it was for me to bait you into responding to my
trolling
> > posts back in the day.
>
> Good way to try to put down someone else's credibility, by bringing up
the
> fact that you often post trolling responses (just as you are now).
I used to troll. And you used to respond, then I'd laugh. Those were the
days *sigh* Now I'm dead serious. We all worked so hard to put this
thing together so the last thing I need to read is this crap coming from
a no show such as yourself.
> compete is Alpha 2, because I got good at that before the Richmond
arcades
> all closed and before all the competition quit playing. I didn't think
it
> would be worth all the money and bother to go up to NJ just for an
Alpha 2
> tournament.
Apparently other people thought it was. And mind you attending a
tournament of this nature is not solely for the purpose of winning or
thinking that one has a chance to win. It's a time for all enthusiasts
to get together, compete, maybe learn a thing or two and for the most
part have fun. Your attitude seems somewhat different, therefore I am
very relieved that you decided not to come.
>
> > And despite your no show
> > you STILL feel inclined to log on to your lil ass PC
>
> I don't feel inclined to do anything for anyone, I just did what I
felt like
> doing.
Which was a wrong move on your part. You have no business making such
comments.
>
> > making comments
> > about people or events or whatever that you know lil or nothing
about
>
> Which I stated. I said that I was not there and that I'm only
repeating what
> I heard.
Which was wrong as stated above. Thus the flame, thus your poorly
thought out response thus the additional flame. Thank goodness the
Knicks won yesterday or I'd really get nasty. ;-P
>
> > and as a result should have no business even THINKING about.
>
> So now you can tell me what I'm allowed to think about? Very fair of
you.
I DON'T WANT YOU TO EVEN DREAM IT. YOU THERE OUSTING VALLE IN THE FINALS
OF A2 WITH MATILDA BY YOUR SIDE! STOP THAT RIGHT NOW!!!!
> > The only
> > reason why you attended last years event was simply due to the fact
that
> > you thought you were remotely decent at A2.
>
> Which I am.
Barely.
> > When you finally realized
> > that you couldn't make the top 5 with your stellar "South Eastern"
Gief
>
> Top 5 at ECC was never a goal of mine. Before ECC4 I thought that I
was one
> of the better A2 players around, something like 3rd best on the east
coast.
> I proved that I was right last year, and there's nothing else that I
felt
> like proving this year.
You are not the 3rd best A2 player on the east coast. I can think of at
least five players that are better than you, some even in your area. I
think you know who they are. And just because you felt you had nothing
to prove you still could have come just for the fun of it. And before
you even think of saying it, people DID have fun last year and this year
as well. Heck I absolutely suck at A2 but I would probably stand a good
chance at beating you.
>
> > you simply chose to stay home
>
> It wasn't worth nearly $200 to me to participate in that A2
tournament. It's
> too bad that you somehow feel angry about this.
I'm not angry that you didn't attend. Far from it in fact. What ticks me
off is how you feel the need to claim that ECC sucked when you were NOT
THERE! What the hell kind of crap is that! Stay home I don't care, we
don't need someone like you in our establishment anyway. But if you're
going to make hollow comments be certain that you'll get a response of
this nature.
> > So do me and the rest of us a huge favor Joe, before you go on
> > rambling about this tourney or that person or what degree of suckage
> > anything or anyone is guilty of
>
> What are you talking about? Just more meaningless rambling as usual...
Your concluding comments. have matilda read them out to you in case
you've forgotten.
> > Better yet CHOCOBO why don't you
> > gather up some guts and show your sad face at an event before you
> > decide to pass judgement.
>
> I have, you fool.
No you haven't fool!!! Attending ECC4 does not give you the right to
comment on ECC2000. Obviously you have the freedom to do so but in doing
so you are made to look like the fool which apparently you truly are.
> > Does the term common sense or "what else is
> > there to say besides DUH!" mean anything to you?
>
> Actually, no. I have no idea what the hell you're attempting to
communicate
> here.
Exactly. I rest my case and feel sorry for your half breed off springs.
"MASTER" JOHN HAS SPOKEN!!!!!!
nuff said
Javier Moreno
<shum...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8h0td6$imt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>The tournaments for the most part, despite the Saturday
> controversy, ran pretty smoothly without too many problems.
I don't recall a tournament ending at 4am on a Saturday night being run
smoothly.
> Why almost
> half the players signed up did not show I really can't say but what I
> can say is that , for the most part, those who did show seemed to have a
> good time.
People did not show, because there were apparent problems in which Todd
pointed out... like the availibility of certain aracde boards, which made
the tournament overall look bad. Things like the availibility of the
cabinets, the sad fact that MvC2 was not one of the tournament games, and
the characteristic self-pity that Todd seems to display.
> As far as what happened on Saturday? The way I see it, it seemed to
> be just one huge misunderstanding about the overall distribution of the
> prize money. While I still feel that the prior system was acceptable
> ($10 + free play, part of the percentage of the pot goes to the
> arcade/ecc staff) I agree that it wasn't fair for the players not to be
> informed and on behalf of the ecc2000 staff I apologize for that.
A misunderstanding? I don't think the Break keeping 45% of the entry fees
is anywhere CLOSE to being just a misunderstanding. That is downright
greedy. By the supposed 250 people that were there... The break would have
made a killing ANYWAYS by selling those shit-inducing philly cheesesteaks,
fountain drinks with no ice in them..., 75 cent MvC2, plus the other random
games that are getting play because people are bored.... That alone is
reason enough why people will not travel far for something like ECC next
year. Let me reiteriate. It's not ECC2k staff's fault. It is the arcade's
fault.
> First off Einstein we never once stated that the tourney would start at
> 10:00. The arcade was scheduled to OPEN at 10:00 (2 hours earlier than
> usual) so we could finish up pre-registration and get going asap and as
> a result we did get started at a reasonable time. Again not once did we
> ever specifically state that the tournaments would start at 10:00 so get
> your head out of your ass and get your facts straight.
Which is true, but I thought the 10am opening would insure that the tourney
would have been started promptly. Again, this is where the greediness comes
into play.
> > MVC results:
> >
> > #1 Eddie Lee
> > (not sure about the other places right now...)
> >
> #2 Josh
> #3 Arturo
>
> All from CTF which pretty much seems to be the MvC capital. Whether
> that's a good or bad thing is one's own opinion ;-P
Bold statement, since Marvel vs. Capcom is way past its prime, and where
most people are now playing MvC2. Bad decision on part of the ECC2k staff,
and one of the main reasons why I, and other people didn't go.
> > Todd Dwyer (Zeruel) also announced right before the tournaments were
> > about to begin that 45% of each tournament pot is being taken by the
> > arcade, which wasn't well received by a lot of the people playing
> there.
Again, I can't stress enough on how this is unfair. Arcades usually follow
the "If you build it, they will come" philosophy, which arcades like SHGL
became places to play. Not the case in this scenario.
>
> We all (Ecc staff and owner of the Break) decided upon this and thought
> it was a fair deal being that prizes were included as well (full turn
> out would have resulted in at least $500 for first plus prizes).
> Apparently the players were not satisfied with the percentages thus the
> delay but I'm happy to say everything was worked out.
>
>
> > Basically this is what he decided to do- instead of $5 entry fee and
> > pay-for-play (which on average costs each person $5),
>
Yet most people did not get their refunds at Alpha 3, nor did some of the
people at some of the other tournaments.
> That's another reason why we did what we did. It was in an effort to
> save time as well. But after the delay the tournies went back to $5 +
> pay for play thus making matches last much longer.
Again, the arcade's fault.
. People
> > were looking at the tournament pots and thinking they were much larger
> > than they actually are. For instance, someone in California might look
> > and think "hm, 100 people, $10 entry fee means $1000 for the pot...
> > that's $650 for first place and $250 for second place. So even if I
>
> just
> > get second, I paid for my plane ticket... cool, I'm going to go."
>
>
> Well, in my view both parties were at fault here.
How are the players at fault here? That is a standard (albeit unofficial)
in SF tournaments!
I do agree that
> players should have been informed in advance. However, in turn players
> should not have assumed that ALL the money was going to the pot. I mean
> how was the staff going to make their money? We're an independent group
> mind you (not directly working for Chris/The Break) so this was our way
> of guaranteeing that we come out of this with something (unlike last
> year).
No, the staff should not get one penny, unless they work for the arcade.
Take a look, in comparison, to Jason Wilson and and his Midwest Tourney. He
doesn't get paid for it, he does it for the love, and for the people who
want to play in it. He takes time and dedication to make sure things run
correctly. He may not be the most lovable person in the world (haha), but
there is no questioning his ability to run things rather smoothly (as oppsed
to the infernal ecc tournaments). I agree the Ecc2k staff should come out
with something, but it shouldn't be money. It should be the satisifaction
that they did something productive to the SF and Tekken community, and the
ability to have people return. But alas, that statement alone testifies
that this is not the case.
Also Chris needed some way to make up for the games set on free
> play so that's pretty much what the percentage was for.
Like I said before, he had other ways to make the money. At least he could
have bought ice.
> > In conclusion, ECC is suck, and you all should go to Chicago or B4 in
> > CA.
Even though I had visible disappointment in the tournament, I had truly
hoped that ECC was going to be much better than it was last year. I had
hoped that Todd, John, Gina and crew would take the mistakes of ECC4 as a
learning experience, and prevent that from happening in ECC2k. Alas, this
was not the case. Greediness had reared its ugly head, from both the
Arcade, AND the ECC staff, to sour this experience. This is a point case
where you cannot the blame the tourney participants in anyway, whether they
are misinformed or not. Even though the tournament is for them, they still
have the power to change that in any way they see fit. Saturday's "strike"
was a very good example of this. You can't cheat the players. The only
thing it will do is discourage players from ever coming back. I truly fear
for the existance of ECC after this weekend.
>
> Without the least bit of sincerity,
>
> "Master" John
John, you should not insult people like that. A person in your position?
You should take constructive criticism, and not throw it in Chocobo's way.
I agree with him for the most part, but he also missed out on a few things.
That is no reason to start bashing him like that. If anything, it ruins
your own credibility, and your apparent ability to help run a tournament.
Javier Moreno
ja...@shoryuken.com
http://www.shoryuken.com
CHRISMUTT
>> how was the staff going to make their money? We're an independent group
>> mind you (not directly working for Chris/The Break) so this was our way
>> of guaranteeing that we come out of this with something (unlike last
>> year).
>
>Most tournaments are not run for the profit of the people in charge. I find
>it amusing that you feel that way.
>
i'd just like to comment on this particular aspect of tourneys.
i've seen alot of debating and arguing going on about whether the entry fees
and whatnot should go entirely to prize money or not. people say things like...
" the arcades shouldn't get any of it because they make enough from the
practicing and stuff. plus they get recognition and promotion for their
arcade.", " the people who run the tourneys should not be doing it make a
profit." etc., etc.
well i personally don't see how anyone could think like that. for one thing,
ANYONE that believes that arcades make tons of money from tourneys just on
people practicing and whatnot is simply misinformed. they do make money, but
not so much that they are worry free and jumping up and down with joy. for the
record though i do not think that the arcades should try to exploit and/or milk
the situations for all they are worth. by this i mean they shouldn't try to
have the games set at .50 cents per play, and they shouldn't try to take more
off the entry fees than neccessary. that being said, people need to realize
that arcades are there to make money. sometimes i think alot of players forget
that. if the arcade doesn't make much money then what incentive do they have to
hold a tourney? respect and props from players all across the country? that
doesn't pay the bills. the locals who already frequent the arcade will continue
to do so regardless of the tourney. so what new money or profits do they get
from them. none.
what i'm saying is this... good arcades are a dying breed. independent
successful arcades are very rare these days. they will not stay in business
simply because they have the respect of the players. the respect must come in
the form of money as well.
let's try to get basic idea of what we're talking about. if a tourney runs on
sat. and sun. and the games are set to free play for the entire time or even
most of the time then how is profit derived from that situation? games are .25
cents per play, and each game last an average of 3-5 minutes. that means that
the maximum amount of plays per hour is roughly around 12-15 games. that's
around $3.00-$4.00 dollars per hour, per game, max.( i'm talking about the
tourney games here, not about the arcades other various games. they do make
some money as well from the crowd. however, most people are there to play the
tourney games so there's probably not a small fortune being spent on the other
games. ) now if the games are on free play then there is no profit. do the
math. the games that are making .25 cents could bring in a maximum of about
$48.00 a day. if most of the games are on free play or are being used for the
tourneys, then there are only so many machines that could be making profit.
anyway, i don't think it's neccessary to go into the #'s too much more. i'm
sure some of you get the idea. arcades are not flourishing that well as
businesses. at least not so well that they can afford to have events without
making much money.
on the flip side, there are some things that arcades could do to generate
more money from the events. arcades that sell food and drinks could lower the
prices of their menu substancially ( while still maintaining a decent profit
margin ) during the tourney. that would encourage the players to spend their
money in the arcade rather than go out for food and drinks. that helps both the
players and the arcade. things like that.
as for the entree fees, i think it's only fair for the arcades to take a
good/fair % for their profits. they are holding the event, they're providing
the facility ( which includes rest rooms (sometimes), A/C (sometimes), paid
utilities, etc. ), the games (for the most part), and they're having to clean
up the place after 2-3 days of mess. imagine if an independent tourney
organizer had to throw a tourney without an arcade to hold it in. he'd have to
rent a facility, rent the cabinets and games, possibly pay the utilities, and
maybe pay to get the place cleaned up afterwards. who in their right mind would
go through all of that trouble? especially if many of the people feel that the
organizer shouldn't get anything for all of the work and trouble. gimme a
break. things just don't work that way. people will not put in their time and
effort to organize tourneys for nothing. at least not after a few times. it
just wouldn't be worth it. the only way to run tourneys without entree fees
being split up is to have events with sponsorships, and i really don't think SF
is big enough right now to recruit any decent sponsors. maybe just small local
ones, if that.
well, i just wanted to throw that in and give people some more food for
thought.
peace
Tom Cannon
[snip]
>Well, in my view both parties were at fault here. I do agree that
>players should have been informed in advance. However, in turn players
>should not have assumed that ALL the money was going to the pot.
No? What else would you have the players assume? When all the major
tournaments (Super Just Games, NCC, etc) give back 100% of the prize
money, why not ECC5? Unless you state othewise, I think this is the
only natural assumption.
>I mean
>how was the staff going to make their money? We're an independent group
>mind you (not directly working for Chris/The Break) so this was our way
>of guaranteeing that we come out of this with something (unlike last
>year). Also Chris needed some way to make up for the games set on free
>play so that's pretty much what the percentage was for.
Well, as an independent group you're certainly entitled to look for
a profit, but that should be a negotiation between you (the service
provider) and The Break. You should not IMHO be looking to take money
from the players, many of whom have already had to shell out considerable
funds just to attend.
I find your attitude somewhat disappointing given the grass-roots,
"for the players" attitude of the SF tournament scene up to this point.
Is ECC a for-profit franchise now?
[chomp]
---
Tom Cannon
inkblot[at]shoryuken[dot]com
James M
I've never heard of anyone else demanding a cut at any other
tourney.
If you are going to take a cut, you should say so BEFORE hand.
This is not a hard concept. I suspect you didn't say so before
hand because you knew people would complain.
I might also point out that instead of complaining that there
were a bunch of no shows, you should think about what would have
happened if everyone DID show up...the fact is you should be
glad people didn't show.
Before you demand a cut, maybe you consider a few things:
Players deserve to get accurate information about start and end
times of tourneys. There have been enough tournies at The Break
that the organizers should be able to come up with a good
estimate by now. If bad things always happen, PLAN for them.
Players should be told up front how the pot is split. (to say
both parties are at fault is a complete joke - the only "fault"
of the players is not being suspicious and assuming it would
work the way every other tourney works)
If you say you will have x and y boards available, you better
have them IN HAND.
Its really hard to see how the organizers deserve a cut when the
organization isn't any better (probably worse) than tourneys
that are organized w/o a cut for the organizers. Pay more, get
less...neat concept.
James M
Shaun Patrick Mcisaac
James M <jsm16N...@cornell.edu.invalid> wrote:
>Pay more, get
>less...neat concept.
Heh. If that isn't MS/Apple's motto, I don't know what is.
--
Shaun P. McIsaac
(773) 834 - 6508 People are more violently opposed to fur than
leather because it's safer to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs.
Rich DeLauder
who was watching this should have known that this kind of thing was going to
happen. The attraction got bigger and bigger, and the venue could never
change. All this proves to me is that we have about 3 groups in the US that
have the balls to do something great. The smallest and least resourceful of
the three was the first to have problems.. big whoop.
2) With the money issue, there were the organizers, the owners, and the
players... at one point each group was about to snap... IMO it really
doesn't matter who said what to who.. AFAIK everything was settled and noone
is unhappy now for any other reason than the incident happening. Which if
you see #1, was going to be unavoidable anyway. as i address later, this is
mainly caused because the people that are enthusiastic avout SF have no
capital, and the people who would probably don't like or understand SF
anyway.
Really, what people say now would be just to start a meaningless argument,
i'm starting to see the semantics, the emotion, and the insaneness of the
NG's latest rant. So far i've heard that everyone who wanted to enjoy
themselves enjoyed themselves, all the people who deserved their money got
it, and there aren't too many loose ends to tie up. From here we can take
two routes... we can make things bigger and better, maybe compensate for
tourney winnings by flying the winners to the other coast's tourney (after a
while), and other things... when the eventuality would be that someone
trustworthy and with capital can solve the funding problems we seem to have,
and get things moving. The other option is to continue a trend of
meaningless discussions, where i'm not even sure the involved parties owe
anyone anything anymore.
"Tom Cannon" <web...@best.com> wrote in message
news:393454e3$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com...
>
> [snip]
>
> >Well, in my view both parties were at fault here. I do agree that
> >players should have been informed in advance. However, in turn players
> >should not have assumed that ALL the money was going to the pot.
>
> No? What else would you have the players assume? When all the major
> tournaments (Super Just Games, NCC, etc) give back 100% of the prize
> money, why not ECC5? Unless you state othewise, I think this is the
> only natural assumption.
>
> >I mean
> >how was the staff going to make their money? We're an independent group
> >mind you (not directly working for Chris/The Break) so this was our way
> >of guaranteeing that we come out of this with something (unlike last
> >year). Also Chris needed some way to make up for the games set on free
> >play so that's pretty much what the percentage was for.
>
Chocobo
> > Did I say it was your problem? Did I blame you, or anyone, for that?
> As I
> > said, I was just repeating what I heard for the benefit of those on
> the
> > newsgroup who might not have found out this information.
>
> So why bring it up? Obviously it was an aspect of the tournament that
> you chose to point out.
You seem to think that I received pages and pages of information about ECC,
and that I chose specifically to point out the negative things and not
mention all of the things you liked, or something. As I've said many times
now, all I did was repeat what I heard. Everything I heard. Not just the bad
parts.
> It was surely an attempt on your part to
> emphasize your point in regards to your assumption that ECC2000 was an
> unpleasant experience
Wrong.
> > It is stated in the ECC2K FAQ that ECC2K will start at 10 AM. That
> refers to
> > the tournaments, not the arcade.
>
> Can you read? Seriously! Is your ability to comprehend a grouping of
> individual words that reflect a fully established thought process
> intact?
So you're implying that I can't read here...
> The FAQ CLEARLY states that ECC2000 begins yes
And then tell me that I did read it correctly? You make no sense.
> but that hardly
> means that the ACTUAL tournaments will be taking place at that time. We
> do happen to make mention of pre-registration prior to actual tournament
> play. Please read carefully next time.
It says "ECC2K begins at 10 AM". ECC2K is the set of tournaments. The Break
is the name of the arcade. It says ECC2K (meaning the tournaments) begins at
10 AM. There is no mention of when the Break opens AFAIK, so I don't know if
pre-registration might be at 9 AM or what. I can't believe you're trying to
make an insult out of this, and it's all meaningless anyway. Who cares?
> > Get my head out of my ass? You're the one apparently trying to start a
> > battle of meaningless insults because I committed the horrible crime
> of not
> > telling the newsgroup readers exactly when ECC was planned to begin
> (which I
> > didn't even do anyway). Do you have any goal other than being
> contradictory
> > to everything I say?
>
> That's not my goal it just so happens that what you say is contradictory
> to pure common sense. It also stems from your apparent basic lack of
> research and a lack of true understanding of actual facts before making
> a credible judgement or comment.
I suppose I should take this as a compliment since it comes from your warped
point of view.
> > I heard that Valle and many west coast people didn't even enter.
>
> Choi didn't enter, Valle did, so did Sirlin and some others. Check your
> sources again, although I doubt that you did that for your initial post.
My sources were just people talking on IRC. As I have said MANY times now, I
was simply repeating what I heard and I did not know anything for sure. Can
you go two sentences without tossing in an undeserved random meaningless
insult? You can't even try to pretend that your reason for posting is
anything other than to be a jerk.
> You also need
> > to read more closely. Nowhere did I complain about one hour waits. In
> an
> > earlier post, someone asked if ECC would have long one hour waits in
> between
> > matches, and "Pete" (I assume it's Pete Talley) replied and stated
> that the
> > one hour waits would not happen.
>
> I repeat:
>
> So why bring it up?
Because it was a fact that I heard about, and I was simply repeating what I
saw on IRC to the newsgroup. I was also pointing out that Pete was wrong,
yet again.
> > > at the very least players would spend 7$ for each
> > > tourney while the more successful the player the more money they
> would
> > > have to spend. We tried to balance this out with our prior policy.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, and I understand that. The people who go out in two would spend
> $7,
> > while the players who get far could spend up to $17. On average, it's
> around
> > $10. So why did you tell me to think again?
>
> Because it's basically a general assumption. The average can fluctuate
> depending on the number of matches played and how big the tournament is.
> For a 128 man bracket the least amount of money spent is $7 and let's
> say the most is 17(although it could be more). Worst case scenario for
> every player means the average amount of money spent per player still
> comes out to approximately $7 and change and above. Where did you get $5
> from? If I'm wrong on this, fine, so be it no skin off my back.
In an 80 person tournament, there will be around 159 "2 out of 3" matchups
(so every person loses twice to be eliminated, except for one person, the
winner). At 50 cents per credit, that means between $1.50 and $2 is spent in
each match (depends on if the match is 2-0 or 2-1), so that's between
$238.50 and $318 going into the machine total, or $3-4 per person. I guess
my average stated was a bit high, but it's around that level.
> > Right. It would have worked out fine if everyone had been informed
> > beforehand.
>
> I agree. But it didn't work out that way. Even so it was still an
> enjoyable experience for most. My beef with you now is that you choose
> to bring up such points for one sole purpose it seems and that is to put
> the tournament down for one reason or another.
I did not do that. I simply posted what I had heard about ECC, both positive
and negative.
> However, assuming that
> all the entry fee ($10 + pay per head for a 128 man bracket mind you,
> that's a lot of money) is all going to the pot is also a mistake IMO.
Your opinion is wrong. It is (almost) always assumed that the entry fees
will all go into the pot. This is how (almost) every tournament everywhere
works.
> > Most tournaments are not run for the profit of the people in charge. I
> find
> > it amusing that you feel that way.
>
> If the people in charge own the establishment yes. However, being that
> we were not directly on THE BREAK's pay roll and with $10 + FREE PLAY
> our cut had to come from somewhere.
Why do you feel that you have to get a cut, that you have to make money off
of this yourself? Most tournaments, especially the big ones, are not run for
anyone's personal profit. I don't see where you got the idea that ECC was
made to fill your pockets.
> > > even if you so happen to
> > > actually physically be there anyway,
> >
> > Uh, ok. That really makes sense.
>
> Take it any way you want. I think I've made my point here.
It made absolutely no sense, you made no point other than that you're being
an ass.
> > > First off YOU of all people have no business commenting on an event
> > > whose details were made clear to you merely by way of that wretched
> > > grapevine.
> >
> > Why not? I have as much business doing this as anyone else. For the
> most
> > part, I was merely repeating what I heard.
>
> Exactly, and doing a poor job of it as well.
I did a perfectly acceptable job of it. I took what I saw, and put it all
into a newsgroup post without changing things around. What more do you want?
I'm no news reporter, I was just putting what I read onto the newsgroups.
> Inaccurate assumptions,
> pointing blame (at Todd, don't think I couldn't tell what this post was
> all about),
I didn't point blame at anyone. My post wasn't about anything, I was just
putting what I had read onto the newsgroup so that other people could read
it.
> and pretty much passing judgement based on another person's
> comments without actually coming up with a valid conclusion on your own.
I didn't pass judgement on anything, aside from saying that these other
major tournaments will probably be better than ECC.
> Aside from my opinion that B4 and
> > Chicago will be better tournaments (which is the truth, by the way), I
> > didn't insert my own comments.
>
> OK, put the sheep down. No, put her down right now and read this very
> carefully. The above statement that you chose to write clearly indicates
> to me that you have ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY no inkling as to what the
> hell you're talking about. Assuming that both tournaments will be
> better, which basically cannot be determined at this point and in
> essence is really not relevant, is a perfect example of your inept
> thought process.
No... my above statement is based on facts. First of all, it's pretty clear
that B4 will be better. It's a huge CA tournament skill levels will be
higher, it's just a really big event, and the top winners get a trip to
Japan to play in a multinational tournament. No question about B4.
Now Chicago... it's being run by Jason Wilson, who has a hell of a lot of
experience running tournaments. To say the least, there will be no
last-minute decisions about entry fees and prize amounts, there will be more
than 2 machines for each tournament, and it sure as hell won't run until 4
AM trying to get things wrapped up. It also doesn't have Tekken wasting
space (this is an SF newsgroup, therefore on here SF is good and Tekken is
unnecessary), it has larger prizes I believe, it has more of the top players
attending... overall, all signs point to it being better than ECC. These are
simple facts. Telling me that I'm positively clueless for looking at the
facts and making a reasonable assumption is idiocy.
> The Scarecrow had nothing on you, for a lad such as
> yourself is beyond the aid of a WIZARD.
OK... this one is just too much. I gather it's an insult of some sort, but
this one's waaay out in left field. Could you please explain what this
means? I'm curious now.
> > obviously have nothing to do but try to put me down and just say the
> > opposite of whatever I say just to be annoying.
>
> I'm not trying to be annoying, I'm dead serious.
So you're dead serious about trying to annoy me. Same thing.
> > > You are still one of the most idiotic posters and
> > > one of the most insignificant human beings that I have ever come
> across.
> >
> > And your evidence of this is my posting of factual information? What
> the
> > hell?
>
> Your interpretation of "factual information" clearly displays your lack
> of credibility. heh, wait, having lack of credibility would be an
> improvement for you.
My post was entirely factual information. I dare you to point out one thing
in my original post that is not a fact, aside from my opinion that B4 and
Chicago will be better. You cannot do it.
> > > Your posts are hardly informative
> >
> > I believe my very post that started this thread was informative. Wrong
> > again.
>
> Informative to a point but overall quite inaccurate. And yet you pass
> judgement which is what I have a problem with.
The original post contained nothing but true facts, there were no
inaccuracies.
> > compete is Alpha 2, because I got good at that before the Richmond
> arcades
> > all closed and before all the competition quit playing. I didn't think
> it
> > would be worth all the money and bother to go up to NJ just for an
> Alpha 2
> > tournament.
>
> Apparently other people thought it was.
Good for them. That's completely irrelevant to me, though.
> And mind you attending a
> tournament of this nature is not solely for the purpose of winning or
> thinking that one has a chance to win. It's a time for all enthusiasts
> to get together, compete, maybe learn a thing or two and for the most
> part have fun.
I know. I never said that it is all about trying to win, and that it's
useless to go if you think you're not the best, or anything like that.
> > > And despite your no show
> > > you STILL feel inclined to log on to your lil ass PC
> >
> > I don't feel inclined to do anything for anyone, I just did what I
> felt like
> > doing.
>
> Which was a wrong move on your part. You have no business making such
> comments.
I have no business, as a fan of Capcom fighting games, posting information
about a large Capcom fighting game tournament in a newsgroup about Capcom
fighting games? What the hell? Of course I do.
> > > making comments
> > > about people or events or whatever that you know lil or nothing
> about
> >
> > Which I stated. I said that I was not there and that I'm only
> repeating what
> > I heard.
>
> Which was wrong as stated above.
What was wrong? Are you telling me that I wasn't only repeating what I
heard? What the fuck ever. So you're saying I was secretly at ECC? Your post
is totally senseless. You have no goal other than to contradict everything I
say, even including my statement that I wasn't at ECC! It's completely clear
to everyone that you are just being an asshole on purpose. Stop trying to
pretend that you're making sense, and just say "fuck you" already and be
done with it.
> > > When you finally realized
> > > that you couldn't make the top 5 with your stellar "South Eastern"
> Gief
> >
> > Top 5 at ECC was never a goal of mine. Before ECC4 I thought that I
> was one
> > of the better A2 players around, something like 3rd best on the east
> coast.
> > I proved that I was right last year, and there's nothing else that I
> felt
> > like proving this year.
>
> You are not the 3rd best A2 player on the east coast. I can think of at
> least five players that are better than you, some even in your area. I
> think you know who they are.
Name them. And then tell me why only two of them placed higher than I did at
ECC4 (which would make me 3rd, exactly as I had thought).
> And just because you felt you had nothing
> to prove you still could have come just for the fun of it.
Yes, I could have. It would have been a lot of fun to participate in that A2
tournament, and maybe even finally get a chance to play against Eddie Lee.
But, as I said, I didn't think it was worth spending nearly $200 to do
that... so I stayed home.
> And before you even think of saying it, people DID have fun last year and
> this year
> as well.
I wouldn't have said that.
> Heck I absolutely suck at A2 but I would probably stand a good chance at
> beating you.
Don't make me laugh.
MasSnead2
>is unhappy now for any other reason than the incident happening
What incident?
You mean I missed a chance to "restore order" (flashbacks of his bouncer days)
Greg Young
> The only
> reason why you attended last years event was simply due to the fact that
> you thought you were remotely decent at A2. When you finally realized
> that you couldn't make the top 5 with your stellar "South Eastern" Gief
> you simply chose to stay home and tend to your loved one (can you say
> BAAAAA).
Actually, he placed in the top 10, along with Omar Deloney, Kris Grytebust,
Mike Cheng, Eddie Lee, and myself. I wish I could say exactly what place,
but I haven't seen (and will probably never see) the official results. On
top of that, neither Chocobo nor myself were near prime form, which is
probably why we didn't do as well as we should have.
Regardless, I think that more than satisfies "remotely decent". We're not
the best at A2 (Choi, Valle, and Sirlin would probably eat us alive), but
we're definitely among the best on the East Coast.
shh listen,
Greg
__________________________________________________________
you...@jmu.edu
James Madison University
Class of 2000
shum...@my-deja.com
>
> I don't recall a tournament ending at 4am on a Saturday night being
run
> smoothly.
Like I stated before, the delay plus the change in entree fee policy
($5+ pay for play) made the tourneys end much later than they were
initially intended to. One question Javi, while I do have respect for
your opinion, did you attend this year's event?
>
> People did not show, because there were apparent problems in which
Todd
> pointed out... like the availibility of certain aracde boards, which
made
> the tournament overall look bad.
the only MAJOR concerns that we came across were obtaining enough 3s
boards, boards for all the other games were pretty much accounted for.
If you felt that the tourney outlook would suffer as a result of this
than that's unfortunate.
Things like the availibility of the
> cabinets,
Never really a problem, it was more of a matter of when not if we would
get the cabinets. Again not a major issue.
> the sad fact that MvC2 was not one of the tournament games,
That's your opinion. personally I'm glad we didn't have the MVC2
tournament this year for several obvious reasons. First of all there was
really no way we could acquire enough boards in order to hold a legit
national MvC2 event and running this kind of tournament with just one
board would take a considerable amount of time. Secondly, it would not
have been fair to everyone to have an MVC2 tournament without all 56
characters unlocked. It just doesn't make sense to me at all. I'm sure
you can agree with this. I, like many others would have loved to have
had an MVC2 tourney this year, but we just felt that it was not the
right time for it.
> the characteristic self-pity that Todd seems to display.
Todd has been under a tremendous amount of pressure to make sure that
YOU guys would come out of this with a good time. And for the most part
he succeeded. The man has worked his butt off for months trying to
remedy what mistakes were made in the past, and IMO,I think he did a
masterful job. For you to critique him without knowing all the facts is
just not fair on your part. Please don't be like Chocobo.
> A misunderstanding? I don't think the Break keeping 45% of the entry
fees
> is anywhere CLOSE to being just a misunderstanding. That is downright
> greedy.
Being that the entry was $10 per + FREE PLAY and with prizes and a HF
cabinet included we thought it was pretty fair. If you disagree, fine,
water under the bridge now. But again I do understand that players
should have been informed of this detail before hand.
By the supposed 250 people that were there... The break would have
> made a killing ANYWAYS by selling those shit-inducing philly
cheesesteaks,
Heh, I guess they didn't settle well with you last year . I can't get
enough of em myself. ^_^
> fountain drinks with no ice in them...,
That's a minor gripe that I have as well but no big deal.
plus the other random
> games that are getting play because people are bored....
That alone is
> reason enough why people will not travel far for something like ECC
next
> year.
If those are your own personal reasons for not showing up then fine.
That's your own opinion. Unfortunately, aside from the Saturday fiasco,
I think you missed out on a fun time.
Let me reiteriate. It's not ECC2k staff's fault. It is the arcade's
> fault.
Again those seem to minor gripes on your part. Sure, I agree with some
of your points but that's hardly enough to deem ECC as a disappointing
experience IMO.
>
> Which is true, but I thought the 10am opening would insure that the
tourney
> would have been started promptly. Again, this is where the greediness
comes
> into play.
Huh? Greed had nothing to do with it. The 10 AM opening signified the
start of ECC. Never was it specifically indicated when the tournaments
would start. And we made every effort to get this thing going but
unfortunately some late arrivals/registrations caused a bit of a delay.
God knows neither myself nor the rest of the staff wanted to be there
till 3-4:00 in the morning. And in essence we should not have been but
sometimes things don't work out the way we want them to. None the less
we all still had a blast.
> Bold statement, since Marvel vs. Capcom is way past its prime, and
where
> most people are now playing MvC2.
It was a general assessment. IMO CTF is the VS. capital right now. MVC
and MVC2 included. Some of the best players in the country are located
there, both ECC's more than prove that. Just MO of course ;-P
Bad decision on part of the ECC2k staff,
> and one of the main reasons why I, and other people didn't go.
Again I respect your opinion but being that you didn't attend this
year's event you really can't make an accurate determination as to how
the whole experience turned out. Each person who showed had their own
interpretation/opinions in regards to that weekend. So I find it hard to
accept your criticism if you were not their to judge the event for
yourself.
> > > Todd Dwyer (Zeruel) also announced right before the tournaments
were
> > > about to begin that 45% of each tournament pot is being taken by
the
> > > arcade, which wasn't well received by a lot of the people playing
> > there.>
> Again, I can't stress enough on how this is unfair.
I agree. yet fortunately we were able to work things out and have a good
time despite it all. Unlike the impression that you're giving which in
my view is highly unjustified.
> > > Basically this is what he decided to do- instead of $5 entry fee
and
> > > pay-for-play (which on average costs each person $5),
> >
>
> Yet most people did not get their refunds at Alpha 3, nor did some of
the
> people at some of the other tournaments.
People were informed of when and where to get their money back. It was
quite simple. If they didn't manage to do so that's their own fault not
the arcade's.
>
> I do agree that
> > players should have been informed in advance. However, in turn
players
> > should not have assumed that ALL the money was going to the pot. I
mean
> > how was the staff going to make their money? We're an independent
group
> > mind you (not directly working for Chris/The Break) so this was our
way
> > of guaranteeing that we come out of this with something (unlike last
> > year).
>
> No, the staff should not get one penny, unless they work for the
arcade.
> Take a look, in comparison, to Jason Wilson and and his Midwest
Tourney. He
> doesn't get paid for it, he does it for the love, and for the people
who
> want to play in it. He takes time and dedication to make sure things
run
> correctly. He may not be the most lovable person in the world (haha),
but
> there is no questioning his ability to run things rather smoothly (as
opposed
> to the infernal ecc tournaments).
As far as getting something in return I'm sure Mr. Wilson is compensated
one way or another for the time and effort he puts into his tournaments.
Heck we do it for the love of the game too. We also do it because it's a
chance for all us guys to get together and have a fun time. And we also
did it because we wanted to make an extra buck. I don't think there's
anything wrong with that. Sure it's all done for fun but at the same
time when many man hours, money out of pocket, and numerous preparations
come into play it does turn into a business as well. Now the way it was
all handled could have been better yes, but the initial goal of coming
away with some sort of a profit I feel is justifiable.
I agree the Ecc2k staff should come out
> with something, but it shouldn't be money. It should be the
satisifaction
> that they did something productive to the SF and Tekken community, and
the
> ability to have people return. But alas, that statement alone
testifies
> that this is not the case.
That's your opinion. (money issue explained above) We do gain
satisfaction from running such an event. And yes it was productive to
both communities. The SF players who were there (including Valle, Choi,
Sirlin, and the rest of team Cali.) seemed to have a good time and put
on quite a show for the other players. And I can't say enough about how
well the Tekken tourney went, to me the whole atmosphere of that crowd
was just incredible. Again it was unfortunate that you didn't attend,
you truly missed out on a fun weekend.
>
> Even though I had visible disappointment in the tournament, I had
truly
> hoped that ECC was going to be much better than it was last year.
It was.
I had
> hoped that Todd, John, Gina and crew would take the mistakes of ECC4
as a
> learning experience, and prevent that from happening in ECC2k.
We did.
Alas, this
> was not the case.
That's where you're wrong
Greediness had reared its ugly head, from both the
> Arcade, AND the ECC staff, to sour this experience.
What experience? You didn't even attend! Again with all do respect Javi
how would you know if this experience was at all SOUR. The way I saw it
most if not all the people WHO WERE THERE had one heck of a weekend.
This is a point case
> where you cannot the blame the tourney participants in anyway, whether
they
> are misinformed or not. Even though the tournament is for them, they
still
> have the power to change that in any way they see fit. Saturday's
"strike"
> was a very good example of this. You can't cheat the players. The
only
> thing it will do is discourage players from ever coming back. I truly
fear
> for the existance of ECC after this weekend.
The problem was fixed and the players went on to have a fine time. Again
it was a matter of miscommunication and a misunderstanding from all
parties involved. It was wrong of us not to be able to make players
aware of the policy in advance and IMO it was also a mistake on their
part to assume that ALL the money was going to the pot when the initial
fee was $10 + FREE PLAY.
>
> >
> > Without the least bit of sincerity,
> >
> > "Master" John
>
> John, you should not insult people like that. A person in your
position?
> You should take constructive criticism, and not throw it in Chocobo's
way.
> I agree with him for the most part, but he also missed out on a few
things.
> That is no reason to start bashing him like that. If anything, it
ruins
> your own credibility, and your apparent ability to help run a
tournament.
My beef with joe is for his lack of constructive criticism . He has no
business passing judgement "ECC suck" on an event or individuals
pertaining to such an event when he was never there in the first place.
He's had a history of this in the past and now he's doing it again. His
initial post is a clear indication that he had a specific agenda in mind
and that was to bash ECC and to bash the members of the staff for
whatever personal reasons. You may not pick it up from where your
sitting but I know how he operates. Again his opinions/observations are
not objective nor are they justified at all, merely just in an effort to
make a tournament, that was created for individuals such as himself,
seem like an unpleasant experience, thus the flames.
> Javier Moreno
> ja...@shoryuken.com
> http://www.shoryuken.com
Javi again I have tremendous respect for your opinion. I appreciate the
work you've done with your page and the SF info that you provide.
However, although you made many valid points, your overall opinion in
regards to this year's tournament experience/success is not a fair one
being that you were not there in person to make an accurate assessment
of the whole event on your own.
"Master" John
Tom Cannon
Rich DeLauder <rx...@psu.edu> wrote:
>1) somehow we got a national tourney at a small corner pool hall, now anyone
>who was watching this should have known that this kind of thing was going to
>happen. The attraction got bigger and bigger, and the venue could never
>change.
What does the venue have to do with tournament organizers wanting to
make money off of the players?
[snip]
>2) With the money issue, there were the organizers, the owners, and the
>players... at one point each group was about to snap... IMO it really
>doesn't matter who said what to who.. AFAIK everything was settled and noone
>is unhappy now for any other reason than the incident happening. Which if
>you see #1, was going to be unavoidable anyway. as i address later, this is
>mainly caused because the people that are enthusiastic avout SF have no
>capital, and the people who would probably don't like or understand SF
>anyway.
The "incident" was not unavoidable. It has been avoided in every other
major tournament because the organizers did not try to take money away
from the players.
In the US "the scene" gets practically zero support from Capcom; everyone
knows this. So the players have had to support themselves, with player-run
tournaments and gatherings that, so far, have been getting bigger and better
(ECC included).
Now all of a sudden comes ECC5, and the organizers are looking to make
a buck. Not from the arcade or from any corporate sponsorship, but
directly from the players themselves. This is a 180 degree reversal from
the old school tournament philosophy, and without real corporate sponsors,
it simply won't work.
[snip]
Javier Moreno
> ($5+ pay for play) made the tourneys end much later than they were
> initially intended to. One question Javi, while I do have respect for
> your opinion, did you attend this year's event?
Ouch.
> the sad fact that MvC2 was not one of the tournament games,
>
> That's your opinion. personally
<insert cut>
It was not also my opinion, but also the opinions based out of other people
who were expecting the game to be there. I do understand about the
availibility of the boards, though.
>
> Todd has been under a tremendous amount of pressure to make sure that
> YOU guys would come out of this with a good time. And for the most part
> he succeeded. The man has worked his butt off for months trying to
> remedy what mistakes were made in the past, and IMO,I think he did a
> masterful job. For you to critique him without knowing all the facts is
> just not fair on your part. Please don't be like Chocobo.
Ok, this point about Todd is now moot. He has admitted why he has done what
he has, and came out of it with nothing.
> Heh, I guess they didn't settle well with you last year . I can't get
> enough of em myself. ^_^
Ugh. You guys are lucky I decided to mark my territory elsewhere.
>
> That's a minor gripe that I have as well but no big deal.
>
Minor? Haha, that's like serving hotdogs without any condiments! It is
like serving beer hot!
> > Bold statement, since Marvel vs. Capcom is way past its prime, and
> where
> > most people are now playing MvC2.
>
> It was a general assessment. IMO CTF is the VS. capital right now. MVC
> and MVC2 included. Some of the best players in the country are located
> there, both ECC's more than prove that. Just MO of course ;-P
It is a general assessment. I believe that our friends on the West Coast
can match easily in Marvel vs. Capcom 2. The first game would be a
pointless arguement, since that game is in its twilight.
> People were informed of when and where to get their money back. It was
> quite simple. If they didn't manage to do so that's their own fault not
> the arcade's.
That would be true, but look at it this way. I don't think the arcade made
any priority to say "People who have not recieved their money, come get it!"
>
> As far as getting something in return I'm sure Mr. Wilson is compensated
> one way or another for the time and effort he puts into his tournaments.
<snip>
Nope. He is not compensated in anyway. You fail to realize the
"grassroots", as Tom Cannon perfectly put it, air that the SF community
takes.
> Heck we do it for the love of the game too. We also do it because it's a
> chance for all us guys to get together and have a fun time. And we also
> did it because we wanted to make an extra buck.
<snip>
Why make the extra buck? If all people thought the same way you do... would
there be any charities?
But you can look at Mr. Cannon's view of that philosophy,
<quote start>
In the US "the scene" gets practically zero support from Capcom; everyone
knows this. So the players have had to support themselves, with player-run
tournaments and gatherings that, so far, have been getting bigger and better
(ECC included).
Now all of a sudden comes ECC5, and the organizers are looking to make
a buck. Not from the arcade or from any corporate sponsorship, but
directly from the players themselves. This is a 180 degree reversal from
the old school tournament philosophy, and without real corporate sponsors,
it simply won't work
<quote end>
I think he sums it up perfectly.
I don't think there's
> anything wrong with that. Sure it's all done for fun but at the same
> time when many man hours, money out of pocket, and numerous preparations
> come into play it does turn into a business as well. Now the way it was
> all handled could have been better yes, but the initial goal of coming
> away with some sort of a profit I feel is justifiable.
It is not justifiable if it comes directly from the pot. You guys should
have worked out a deal with the Break. You simply don't take away from the
players. While it is true that the Break supplies the facilities, and you
(ECC2k staff) provide the personel, you have to realize that the players
make the tournament happen. You simply must keep the players happy, in
EVERY aspect. If not, it decreases the chances of people coming back.
> I had
> > hoped that Todd, John, Gina and crew would take the mistakes of ECC4
> as a
> > learning experience, and prevent that from happening in ECC2k.
>
> We did.
>
>
> Alas, this
> > was not the case.
>
> That's where you're wrong
I have to disagree on that. I recieved input from many players who
travelled a long way just to attend ECC, and people were soured on the
player pot, and the length on some of the tournaments.
>
> Greediness had reared its ugly head, from both the
> > Arcade, AND the ECC staff, to sour this experience.
>
> What experience? You didn't even attend! Again with all do respect Javi
> how would you know if this experience was at all SOUR. The way I saw it
> most if not all the people WHO WERE THERE had one heck of a weekend.
Again, I did not have a first-hand experience on this, but I did get enough
player input in which I can make an opinion. The tournament alone is not
going to make the trip worthwhile for me, it is the experience of meeting up
with old friends, making new ones, and just plain out having fun. If I was
there, I am pretty sure I would have a blast REGARDLESS of what happened at
the tournament.
> The problem was fixed and the players went on to have a fine time.
Too little, too late. The arcade owner even admitted that he wanted more
money!! How can you argue with that? He made his money. And he wants
more? I guess that is the nature of business.
> However, although you made many valid points, your overall opinion in
> regards to this year's tournament experience/success is not a fair one
> being that you were not there in person to make an accurate assessment
> of the whole event on your own.
It may not be fair to you, but I believe this is fair to the players you are
supposed to please. You have to remember, the players come first. Then
everything else falls into place. You simply cannot ask for money, because
you take time away from your daily activities. The SF and Tekken community
is not large enough to ask for something like that. The scene would have to
be on a more national level. Without sponsors, and the approval of Capcom,
what can we do? Our only chance is to keep growing (as it has in that last
few years), and attracting more attention. When that happens, maybe it will
be THEN that you should get some sort of compensation. But for now, we
support ourselves.
After all the events surrounding this fiasco about the player pot, the name
"East Coast Championships" has been tarnished. Although it is widely
believed that ECC can continue, it cannot thrive while the name is
associated with The Break. Don't take my word for it, you can simply ask
some of the more respected players and see what they think.
Rich DeLauder
> In article <8h24m0$1riq$1...@r01n03-e.telebeam.net>,
> Rich DeLauder <rx...@psu.edu> wrote:
> >1) somehow we got a national tourney at a small corner pool hall, now
anyone
> >who was watching this should have known that this kind of thing was going
to
> >happen. The attraction got bigger and bigger, and the venue could never
> >change.
>
> What does the venue have to do with tournament organizers wanting to
> make money off of the players?
They didn't *want* to make money off the players, they wanted to make money,
which IMO should happen, movements that start as grassroots do grow, then
die back down to the 'core' or finds someone to fund the system. ECC just
misjudged when it was time to make the change, and made it too early, as a
result didn't have the corporate support.
> >2) With the money issue, there were the organizers, the owners, and the
> >players... at one point each group was about to snap... IMO it really
> >doesn't matter who said what to who.. AFAIK everything was settled and
noone
> >is unhappy now for any other reason than the incident happening. Which
if
> >you see #1, was going to be unavoidable anyway. as i address later, this
is
> >mainly caused because the people that are enthusiastic avout SF have no
> >capital, and the people who would probably don't like or understand SF
> >anyway.
>
> The "incident" was not unavoidable. It has been avoided in every other
> major tournament because the organizers did not try to take money away
> from the players.
That type of incident is always unavoidable when dealing with a movement
such as SF, it's just a matter of details, who, and where. The earlier
statement was just a attempt to explain the process that SF will have to go
through, and to turn this discussion into something relavant instead of 'NG
scrubs vs the ECC staff: Battle of the Soapboxes VII'
> In the US "the scene" gets practically zero support from Capcom; everyone
> knows this. So the players have had to support themselves, with
player-run
> tournaments and gatherings that, so far, have been getting bigger and
better
> (ECC included).
But i'm sure you know, and as i talked about above, that these grassroots
type movements are destined to collapse, if they don't change structure as
they get bigger, no exception here.
> Now all of a sudden comes ECC5, and the organizers are looking to make
> a buck. Not from the arcade or from any corporate sponsorship, but
> directly from the players themselves. This is a 180 degree reversal from
> the old school tournament philosophy, and without real corporate sponsors,
> it simply won't work.
First the situation you described is not the one at hand, the plan was to
look for sponsorship, then everything fell apart. The players were simply
the desperation resource because the arcade wouldn't, and the corporations
didn't exist. This is not a reversal of old school philosiphy, just the
evolution thereof. Now even tho I know this is the way, the directors
became concerned with what others (who aren't as familiar) would think, went
and tried to do it themselves, and things broke down a mess of pride, trust,
and $.
So am i then condoning the actions as simply 'the way it is': absolutely
not... so then what's my point?.... If we pick up some papers or read the
news, there is some kind of 'tragedy' every few weeks, and with it 1000
other people who think they have something worth saying. Knowing this, I
definately feel bad for all the parties that are hurt or have some kind of
loss, I will help anyone I can. Other than that the lessons to me are
1) a continuing effort to control my emotions when others can't, I myself
fell victim to this emotional trap the day after ECC or so, but luckily i
had to do some other things and clear my head. (as clear as my head can be i
guess)
2) to be thankful that I still have the chance to help with tournaments and
to help people learn how to play.
But if someone has something else to discuss, by all means say so.
Chocobo
> >You fail to realize the
> >"grassroots", as Tom Cannon perfectly put it, air that the SF community
> >takes.
> >
> >> Heck we do it for the love of the game too. We also do it because it's a
> >> chance for all us guys to get together and have a fun time. And we also
> >> did it because we wanted to make an extra buck.
> >
> ><snip>
> >Why make the extra buck? If all people thought the same way you do... would
> >there be any charities?
> >But you can look at Mr. Cannon's view of that philosophy,
> ><quote start>
> >In the US "the scene" gets practically zero support from Capcom; everyone
> >knows this. So the players have had to support themselves, with player-run
> >tournaments and gatherings that, so far, have been getting bigger and better
> >(ECC included).
> >
>
> there it is again. the same pointless arguement.
It's hardly pointless.
>
> here's the situation... the SF "scene" in this country ( as stated above ) does
> not have a large following, thus no real support from any major sponsors. we
> all know this and it's been said time and time again.
>
> so... the players have to set up their own tourneys, organize them, and run
> them.
> the majority of past tourneys have been done with very little or no profit
> going to the organizers. that's all great and very nice, but so what? who's to
> say that all tourneys have to or should be run that way? that's up to the
> individuals running the tourneys themselves.
You're right, all the rules of the tournament are up to the people running the
thing. As someone who plays in the tournaments, you have no right to choose what
the rules will be.
> before i go any further let me just say that "yes", money and prize
> distribution matters should be stated clearly beforehand and not at the
> tourneys themselves. that's just common sense.
Exactly. And this is the entire problem at ECC. (reason why below)
> anyway, how many fucking major tourneys are there every year? 3-4 at most. ECC,
> Midwest, and 1 or 2 Cali. tourneys. the point being... any fucking tourney is a
> good thing. it's better than no tourney.
No one said that it would be better if ECC never happened.
> as i said in an earlier post, if some people choose to run tourneys without any
> compensation for their time, effort, and/or money then that's entirely their
> prerogative. i'm sorry, but that doesn't make people who choose to be
> compensated less noble or less respectable.
I think it certainly makes them more respectable if they do it for the other SF
fans, instead of for money.
> whether some people want to believe
> it or not, time is money and time is valuable. obviously more so for some
> people and less for others, but nevertheless that is just a true fact of life.
Time is valuable, but that doesn't relate to what happened at ECC. It's not like
the people running the tournaments wouldn't have been there anyway, and anyone
could have taken the trouble to do the brackets if they knew it was going to cost
all 100+ people a fair bit of money to let the tournament organizers do it.
> and if some people were against the
> 1 tourney because the organizers got compensation then they simply could choose
> not to attend. that's the beauty of freedom of choice isn't it?
Right. But no one had that choice at ECC. If it was known beforehand that the
arcade owner wanted 75% of the entry fees and that the organizers wanted to get
paid too, then everyone would have exercised their freedom of choice and not
attended. You can't change all the rules after the tournaments start.
> this business of saying that tourney organizers should be giving their time and
> effort only for mere self satisfaction though is total horseshit.
The people at ECC should have been, because that's the way it's always been done.
It is lame to run SF tournaments for a profit, bottom line.
> bottom line is, live and let live. the people who have a problem with the ECC
> organizers wanting to get compensated should just excercise their choice and
> not attend, then the matter would be settled. either there will still be enough
> turnout from the people who don't mind, or there won't be enough turnout and
> the ECC will never happen again. if it's the latter, then as SF players... we
> all fuckin' lose.
The whole problem was that it was being kept secret, the players weren't given a
choice. As it looks now, ECC may not ever happen again.
CHRISMUTT
>"grassroots", as Tom Cannon perfectly put it, air that the SF community
>takes.
>
>> Heck we do it for the love of the game too. We also do it because it's a
>> chance for all us guys to get together and have a fun time. And we also
>> did it because we wanted to make an extra buck.
>
><snip>
>Why make the extra buck? If all people thought the same way you do... would
>there be any charities?
>But you can look at Mr. Cannon's view of that philosophy,
><quote start>
>In the US "the scene" gets practically zero support from Capcom; everyone
>knows this. So the players have had to support themselves, with player-run
>tournaments and gatherings that, so far, have been getting bigger and better
>(ECC included).
>
there it is again. the same pointless arguement.
here's the situation... the SF "scene" in this country ( as stated above ) does
not have a large following, thus no real support from any major sponsors. we
all know this and it's been said time and time again.
so... the players have to set up their own tourneys, organize them, and run
them.
the majority of past tourneys have been done with very little or no profit
going to the organizers. that's all great and very nice, but so what? who's to
say that all tourneys have to or should be run that way? that's up to the
individuals running the tourneys themselves.
before i go any further let me just say that "yes", money and prize
distribution matters should be stated clearly beforehand and not at the
tourneys themselves. that's just common sense.
anyway, how many fucking major tourneys are there every year? 3-4 at most. ECC,
Midwest, and 1 or 2 Cali. tourneys. the point being... any fucking tourney is a
good thing. it's better than no tourney.
as i said in an earlier post, if some people choose to run tourneys without any
compensation for their time, effort, and/or money then that's entirely their
prerogative. i'm sorry, but that doesn't make people who choose to be
compensated less noble or less respectable. whether some people want to believe
it or not, time is money and time is valuable. obviously more so for some
people and less for others, but nevertheless that is just a true fact of life.
as players we can all choose from the tourneys we decide to attend. let's say
one year there are 3 tourneys in which the organizers get no compensation and 1
tourney where the organizers do get compensated through a small % of prize
money. i cannot speak for all players but i myself would consider 4 tourneys
better than 3. a tourney is a tourney imho, and if some people were against the
1 tourney because the organizers got compensation then they simply could choose
not to attend. that's the beauty of freedom of choice isn't it?
this business of saying that tourney organizers should be giving their time and
effort only for mere self satisfaction though is total horseshit. javi used the
concept behind charities as an example but that really is the wrong analogy.
tourneys are nothing like charities, and that goes for all forms of
tournaments. charities are fund raising activities with the purpose of helping
some needy cause or group. ( though some might argue that the SF community IS a
needy group )
anyway, the point is, there is nothing wrong with people wanting to be
compensated for their time and work. just because some people choose not to be,
that shouldn't make it the status quo. for ex., if the prize money for 1 game
tourney at the B4 is $500 and the entry fee is $10, and the same 1 game tourney
at ECC is $450 and the entry fee is also $10... then what the hell is the big
deal? so the organizers got a little bit of compensation. myself personally, i
would have no problem whatsoever with that. that's just rewarding them for
their efforts to put the tourney together. as players we're all there to enjoy
it and have a good time, and it would not have been there otherwise. i would
like for the cannons and company, j. wilson, and the ECC staff to be
compensated for their work and effort. why the hell not? why should only the
tourney winners get all of the money? they didn't put the tourney together,
they didn't do the legwork or whatever, and they didn't invest their time into
making the tourney happen. i just can't see how any winners could have a
problem with sharing a small amount of prize money with the tourney organizers.
they wouldn't be winning a gotdamn thing if there was no tourney to begin with.
maybe some organizers only want a pat on the back or just some simple "thanks
you's", but as i said before, that's up to each individual. there are alot of
factors that may affect how different guys feel about this too. some may spend
more time at it than others, some may have busier work schedules, some may
encounter more difficulties, etc., etc.. regardless though, if some guys want
to be compensated for running tourneys and some don't, then imho, that should
be ok either way. this attitude of "fuck the tourneys if the organizers won't
do it for nothing" is just plain silly. like there are so many SF tourneys out
there to choose from. instead of being glad that some people are even willing
to organize a tourney, some people just whine, complain, and try to tell the
organizers themselves what their motives should be.
bottom line is, live and let live. the people who have a problem with the ECC
organizers wanting to get compensated should just excercise their choice and
not attend, then the matter would be settled. either there will still be enough
turnout from the people who don't mind, or there won't be enough turnout and
the ECC will never happen again. if it's the latter, then as SF players... we
all fuckin' lose.
peace
CHRISMUTT
>and
>> effort only for mere self satisfaction though is total horseshit.
>
>done.
>It is lame to run SF tournaments for a profit, bottom line.
>
i just chose this particular clip but you actually referred to running a
tourney for profit a few times.
i think you're completely missing the point of my post because i never used the
phrase or the idea of running a tourney for "profit". i used the ECC guys as an
example for the point. i don't know how much they wanted or what their
intentions were but that's not was i was getting into anyway. i was talking
about organizers getting compensation for their time and work. i never
mentioned organizers running tourneys for profits or for business. there's a
distinctive difference. getting compensated just means getting a little
something to justify the time and effort. going for profit means trying to get
as much as possible.
just wanted to get that straight.
peace
a_sa...@my-deja.com
>
> Because ECC was a big mess just like last year, the same people as
last year are
> in charge of everything, it will be a repeat of the same events.
You'll see the
> results past the top 3 spots for one or two tournaments in February
2001, but
> that's it. There will be no tape.
*snip blistering reply, not worth it*
There *will* be an official ECC2k tape released. Work has already
begun on it, expect to see an announcement soon. We vowed to have the
tape completed, or nearly completed within a month, this year. As far
as unofficial tapes, I'm sure there are tons of em out there, as many
people brought camcorders this year. It's just a matter of finding out
who brought 'em, and contacting them regarding whether they will send
you a copy. I know Team Rutgers from NJ shot tons of footage.
Hope that helps.
Peace,
Gina
ECC2K co-director
Tom Cannon
This is all well and good. If someone can squeeze out some compensation
and still run a great tournament then more power to them. But you don't
get this money from the players. Get it from a sponsor, the host arcade,
from ad revenue on a website, whatever.
Just don't skim from the pot.
rrevved
>
>
>>
>> Because ECC was a big mess just like last year, the same people as
>last year are
>> in charge of everything, it will be a repeat of the same events.
>You'll see the
>> results past the top 3 spots for one or two tournaments in February
>2001, but
>> that's it. There will be no tape.
>
>*snip blistering reply, not worth it*
>
>There *will* be an official ECC2k tape released. Work has already
>begun on it, expect to see an announcement soon. We vowed to have the
>tape completed, or nearly completed within a month, this year. As far
>as unofficial tapes, I'm sure there are tons of em out there, as many
>people brought camcorders this year. It's just a matter of finding out
>who brought 'em, and contacting them regarding whether they will send
>you a copy. I know Team Rutgers from NJ shot tons of footage.
>
So the video will not be from recorders attached to the machines?
It will just be over-the-shoulder stuff from people who happened
to bring a camera?
>Hope that helps.
>Peace,
>Gina
>ECC2K co-director
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
--
* rrevved at bellsouth dot net
* unit.26 s.p.u.t.u.m.
* http://www.cabal.net
Tom Cannon
Rich DeLauder <rx...@psu.edu> wrote:
>
>"Tom Cannon" <web...@best.com> wrote in message
>news:39354103$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com...
>> In article <8h24m0$1riq$1...@r01n03-e.telebeam.net>,
>> Rich DeLauder <rx...@psu.edu> wrote:
[snip]
>>
>> What does the venue have to do with tournament organizers wanting to
>> make money off of the players?
>
>They didn't *want* to make money off the players, they wanted to make money,
>which IMO should happen, movements that start as grassroots do grow, then
>die back down to the 'core' or finds someone to fund the system. ECC just
>misjudged when it was time to make the change, and made it too early, as a
>result didn't have the corporate support.
And as a result they tried to take 45% of the pot! And as Master John
readily admits, a portion of that money was to go to the ECC organizers.
Regardless of what the original intentions were, when push came to
the people in charge tried to take money directly from the players and
put it in their pockets.
[snip]
Rich DeLauder
making sure the semantics were right?
"Tom Cannon" <web...@best.com> wrote in message
news:39368f87$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com...
blt
> cabinet included we thought it was pretty fair. If you disagree, fine,
> water under the bridge now. But again I do understand that players
> should have been informed of this detail before hand.
ECC2K A3 tourny matches were on free play... but I didn't
see any other machines on free play, in fact they cost way more
than they should have (50 cents for alpha3? i had to argue with
several people to get this turned down). When I tried to get
some practice matches in (on free play) the owner came and
changed the machine to cost money.
It's like: "We believe our cost was reasonable, $10 with FREE
PLAY, what a deal, $5 extra, you get 5 or 6 FREE games!"
I still spend more money for that free play $5 than for my matches
in some tourneys. Am I missing something here as to why tourny
free play is so wonderful that people use it to justify the cost?
Greg Young
Actually, the biggest matter would be actually doing it. It's been well over a year
since the last ECC event and I haven't seen a snapshot of last year's tape.
Come to think of it, I don't think anybody even released the official results of all
the tournaments from last year. I think it's funny that there's an argument currently
going on about how you know what happened when you weren't there. Well, I was there
last year, and I still don't know what happened. It's like a UFO sighting or
something... all of these people were there, but there are no records of it ever
happening. I'm glad I retired.
Greg
__________________________________________________________
greg....@viber.net
a_sa...@my-deja.com
> >
>
> So the video will not be from recorders attached to the machines?
> It will just be over-the-shoulder stuff from people who happened
> to bring a camera?
No, the official video will be direct-feed footage. i was referring to
the unofficial videos in my past statement about camcorders. sorry for
the misunderstanding..
Gina
ECC2k co-director
rrevved
>
>
>
>> >
>>
>> So the video will not be from recorders attached to the machines?
>> It will just be over-the-shoulder stuff from people who happened
>> to bring a camera?
>
>No, the official video will be direct-feed footage. i was referring to
>the unofficial videos in my past statement about camcorders. sorry for
>the misunderstanding..
>Gina
>ECC2k co-director
>
Great! Will you post the info here when it is available?
Thx.
Greg Young
When that time arrives, newsgroups will no longer exist.
Greg
__________________________________________________________
greg....@viber.net
Home: (540) 437-2222
Work: (540) 434-4120
Rich DeLauder
"Greg Young" <greg....@viber.net> wrote in message
news:393BA4B0...@viber.net...
Greg Young
> Given up SF and taking up trolldom?
Actually, yes. Believe it or not, I think it's actually more enjoyable
to irritate those who still waste their time with these games rather
than playing the games myself.
Greg
___________________________________________________________
greg....@viber.net
a_sa...@my-deja.com
> >
> Great! Will you post the info here when it is available?
>
> Thx
Definitely... Info. will be posted as soon as things are nearing
completion...
Thanks for your interest!
^_^
Gina
Rich DeLauder
build houses back up after natrual disasters, but there are lots of people
that love that more than I, so i will make the donations and let them do the
work.
I am not bothered in the least, there are people here to talk about the
game, and there are people here to satisfy their own ego.. some to vent
fustration.. some to 'get away' from problems in their own life... some just
from a total lack of respect for others. Whatever the reason, they are not
here to work with me, so i am not concerned or irratated about what they
say.
As for your case, i'm just glad we got your intentions out of the way early.
If this is a temporary condition, i hope you find a cure soon...
"Greg Young" <greg....@viber.net> wrote in message
news:393D27EA...@VIBER.NET...