5 minutes ago, Do I need a Username said:What about people who want to play in more tournaments and can do so by redistributing the prizes they do not want to people who do want the prizes but cannot go to the tournament?
I think I agree with you but boy that sentence turned my brain inside out.
I did the exact same thing two (jumpmaster disaster regional?) years ago at Origins. I was so fed up with the game, I had already decided that this would be my last tournament (until they made 2.0 thank Yoda) and I just wanted to go out my way. Interestingly that was also at a time when there was a bunch of hubbub on these forums about intentional draws and altering tournament results.
The rules stated you could not legally take action of any kind to modify tournament results, especially if material was on the line like in a final or something. But there was also a rule that said you could concede at any time.
It was the final round of day one and I was up to advance to day two on a win. I got paired against some kid, he had some weird list of scum. I was basically seal clubbing at the point they called time. Clearly both of us could see how this went. And Lil guy got a little bummed, two of his friends were going to day two and he needed this win to go with them. Well, I may be at times a raging internet *****-hat, but I would not be alive today if not for my friends. And I was not about to get between this kid and his. So I called a judge. After all, I had to have my fun too 😉
I laid it out to him, two rules: I can concede at any point in a round, so long as results have not been reported. And, I'm not allowed to "modify the results of the tournament" in any way, which would include the day two cut. I'm winning, time is called, we haven't started a new round. The game says I'm winning, it's actually determined as the instructions say to score and report at this point. Verbatim, "Can I concede? After the game had been scored?"
The judge very patiently listened to my question, the kid looked on kinda bewildered, I had a devil's grin. The judge thought about it, and in a not so subtle way to just get me out of his hair, said simply, "you may concede at any time." I'm having too much fun now, so I press "Even though it clearly modifies the results of the event?". He pursed his lips, then repeated himself, very intent on getting rid of me.
Now at this point the neighboring tables had picked up on what was going on, as well as those who had gathered. I was delightfully satisfied to end my 1.0 career getting a judge to low key scede the notion that I broke the system as my final act, and with an audience to boot. I mean c'mon, it was a game at time, for the day cut, with a judge call. Heads had turned.
I took the slip, signed the kid the full win, shook his hand and gave him the slip to sign. Thanked the judge. And went about the convention, and didn't look back at the game while the naysayers balked at the notion there'd ever be the 2.0 I knew was inevitable.
That was a good day. Cheers to you OP. I tip my hat to you.
12 hours ago, Hiemfire said:That's not what the discussion was about. It was focused conceding with the intention of altering who is in the cut to benefit someone, to gain an edge not availible to others in the cut, or to artificially change someone's standings in swiss.
And to me, such a decision is in the same class of "playing the tournament" versus "playing a single match" as deliberately choosing a list that won't exhaust me over the course of 7 rounds.
11 hours ago, ForceSensitive said:I did the exact same thing two (jumpmaster disaster regional?) years ago at Origins. I was so fed up with the game, I had already decided that this would be my last tournament (until they made 2.0 thank Yoda) and I just wanted to go out my way. Interestingly that was also at a time when there was a bunch of hubbub on these forums about intentional draws and altering tournament results.
The rules stated you could not legally take action of any kind to modify tournament results, especially if material was on the line like in a final or something. But there was also a rule that said you could concede at any time.
It was the final round of day one and I was up to advance to day two on a win. I got paired against some kid, he had some weird list of scum. I was basically seal clubbing at the point they called time. Clearly both of us could see how this went. And Lil guy got a little bummed, two of his friends were going to day two and he needed this win to go with them. Well, I may be at times a raging internet *****-hat, but I would not be alive today if not for my friends. And I was not about to get between this kid and his. So I called a judge. After all, I had to have my fun too 😉
I laid it out to him, two rules: I can concede at any point in a round, so long as results have not been reported. And, I'm not allowed to "modify the results of the tournament" in any way, which would include the day two cut. I'm winning, time is called, we haven't started a new round. The game says I'm winning, it's actually determined as the instructions say to score and report at this point. Verbatim, "Can I concede? After the game had been scored?"
The judge very patiently listened to my question, the kid looked on kinda bewildered, I had a devil's grin. The judge thought about it, and in a not so subtle way to just get me out of his hair, said simply, "you may concede at any time." I'm having too much fun now, so I press "Even though it clearly modifies the results of the event?". He pursed his lips, then repeated himself, very intent on getting rid of me.
Now at this point the neighboring tables had picked up on what was going on, as well as those who had gathered. I was delightfully satisfied to end my 1.0 career getting a judge to low key scede the notion that I broke the system as my final act, and with an audience to boot. I mean c'mon, it was a game at time, for the day cut, with a judge call. Heads had turned.
I took the slip, signed the kid the full win, shook his hand and gave him the slip to sign. Thanked the judge. And went about the convention, and didn't look back at the game while the naysayers balked at the notion there'd ever be the 2.0 I knew was inevitable.
That was a good day. Cheers to you OP. I tip my hat to you.
I’m not really sure this can be called the same thing. You didn’t engineer a way for both you and your opponent to get into day 2, you gave up your spot to your opponent. You weren’t having fun, but the kid would with being able to advance with his friends, so you conceded. You sacrificed for a stranger at a cost. As you said, I tip my hat to you.
The OP has three scenarios. The basis of all three is a low cost. A seat was not given up for another, but instead was potentially taken from a third party. That already makes it feel kind of ify for me on the terms of ethics. It being a friend is a little more and it being done to bring an easy opponent into the cut more so.
I’m not an authority or anything. Just my two cents worth.
it is not really related. this is a Santas Claus case where it actually benefited the tourney by not leaving an empty space. Little different than an odd man out getting a "by".
What we are talking about Specifically is a single person artificially engineering results in a tourney for their own personal profit in order to win prizes that they did not earn through game play. Folks keep throwing red herrings out to distract us from that narrow and specific topic.
I refer us back to the rules...
"Unsporting conduct occurs when a person behaves poorly toward another person at the event, seeks to gain advantage in the game by intentionally exploiting a factor that is external to the game or event, or cheats while playing in some way. Unsporting conduct directly violates FFG’s goal for Organized Play events, and thus will not be tolerated."
Note the bold words. the goal is to have the best player of the game win. intentionally conceding games you have already won, violates the intended goal.
"The following are some examples of inappropriate behavior that fall under minor unsporting conduct: 1. A player uses vulgar or profane language or makes profane or offensive gestures towards another person. 2. A player inappropriately demands that a Judge issue a penalty to their opponent. 3. A player insults another person , be they another player, a spectator, or a tournament leader......."
This is more of a stretch and one most players would not care about. it could be considered an insult to the player you are conceding to. I only include this because someone already mentioned it elsewhere.
"C. Bribery and Collusion – Disqualification Players come to Organized Play events with the intent to enjoy themselves playing a game they love while competing against others in a welcoming environment. Bribery and collusion can violate the integrity of this environment by putting more emphasis on manipulating the system than actually playing the game, which is not the kind of event that FFG wants to promote. Bribery involves a player offering some form of reward or incentive to their opponent in order to convince them to concede, draw, or even alter the results of a game. A bribe can come in any form that the opponent finds desirable, whether it be money, promotional material, prizes, or even personal favors. Bribery in any form, involving anyone at an FFG Organized Play event, is strictly forbidden and warrants a Disqualification from the Tournament Organizer for the player offering the bribe. If the opponent accepts the bribe, they are also guilty of this disruption and should suffer the same penalty. "
This is one of the key points. Even if the two players did not have the "conversation of hey i'll let you win so you can get ahead" it is there at the scoring where it is plain for both players to see where the bribe is the free win to "keep your mouth shut". if you offer the opponant the paper with the altered game results to sign off on, you are making the bribe offer and if they play along and sign off on it, they are accepting it which leads to the collusion.
"Collusion occurs whenever two or more players discuss an outcome for their game before the game’s conclusion and then artificially or randomly determine the results of the game based on that discussion. Collusion can take place at any time, even between tournament rounds, and is never tolerated. Collusion violates the integrity of a tournament as a whole by invalidating the efforts of those who earned their place in the standings purely through the skill of their gameplay. This can drastically decrease the enjoyability of the event as a whole, and thus collusion warrants a Disqualification for each player involved. Please note that concession, in and of itself, is not collusion. Players are allowed to concede a game at any time before the end of the game, so long as there was no discussion or solicitation involved. However, convincing or manipulating an opponent to concede in order to give any person a distinct advantage is dishonest and is considered a form of cheating. Asking an opponent to concede in any shape or form falls under collusion and is grounds for Disqualification. The following are some examples of collusion: 1. A player offers to concede to their opponent in return for some of the prizes their opponent will win. a. This is also a form of bribery. 2. Two players realize that they both will make the top cut regardless of who wins. After discussing it with each other, they decide to randomly determine the outcome of their game rather than play it out. a. As soon as there is discussion, the integrity of the game has been lost. If players do not want to play the game, then one of them should concede. 15 3. Player A and Player B are friends. Player A is already going to advance to Day 2, but Player B needs one more win to do so. After discussing it with each other, Player A offers to concede so that Player B can also advance, and Player B agrees. a. As soon as there is discussion, the integrity of the game has been lost. Player A is allowed to concede the game at any time, but should do so without soliciting the concession. For the purpose of determining collusion, a “discussion” is when the involved players negotiate and agree upon an outcome of some sort. It is largely up to a Judge’s interpretation on whether or not a particular conversation between players is a discussion leading to collusion."
Collusion can take place at any time. As noted above, this can take place when both players sign off on results that did not happen through game play. They give some examples and specifically use the word "some" to point out that there are many other examples.
They do not mention conceding when you have already lost because it is assumed that players want to win the tourney by being the best player and winning their games. But a savvy judge can merely skim through the rules and pick up on the glaring violations.
However...as has been pointed out, it is up to the specific judge who catches it. If your a player in another game and catch it, it is up to you to record or report it to the judge to decide. the only question would be how to judge it. Would the judge call it? if so, what would the penalty be? a loss for both? a loss for one? Force the win? disqualify one or both? Not for us to decide. We are all just putting forth our views and opinions.
Edited by EVIL INC
When you play in a tournament, any attempt to manipulate the outcome other than trying to win your match is cheating. in a more formal setting (like a tourney with big cash prizes or pro sports) you would go to jail if you were caught conceding to manipulate the bracket. its unethical to the point it can be illegal
5 pages of this? Really?
5 pages and no one's has stated that people have their own ethical lines? What is ok to one isn't going to be ok to another. 5 pages and no one has thought to point that out.
That said, if you're going on the internet to ask if you're ok ethically, you're probably not. You don't need the opinion of strangers if you know you did nothing wrong.
12 hours ago, Vontoothskie said:When you play in a tournament, any attempt to manipulate the outcome other than trying to win your match is cheating. in a more formal setting (like a tourney with big cash prizes or pro sports) you would go to jail if you were caught conceding to manipulate the bracket. its unethical to the point it can be illegal
I agree that it's unethical to try to game the bracket and you definitely shouldn't do it, but this is a little bit excessive.
7 hours ago, benlane17 said:5 pages of this? Really?
5 pages and no one's has stated that people have their own ethical lines? What is ok to one isn't going to be ok to another. 5 pages and no one has thought to point that out.
That said, if you're going on the internet to ask if you're ok ethically, you're probably not. You don't need the opinion of strangers if you know you did nothing wrong.
Your a bit late on that. Those exact same things you claim has not been pointed out has in fact been pointed out on each and every page. Nice try though.
As mentioned earlier, how do you prove anything related to why they are conceding? What if they wanted to see if they could finish the game in a certain amount of time, but at that point are planning to concede to be able to get a quick meal break or bathroom break before the cut? It's not something you can realisticly do, and starting mobs about concessions is probably not a good plan for the long term health of the game.
59 minutes ago, EVIL INC said:Your a bit late on that. Those exact same things you claim has not been pointed out has in fact been pointed out on each and every page. Nice try though.
Must have missed it when reading all the bull
When people go to a tourney, they know beforehand that it will be a long and hard day with little in the way of meal breaks. It is up to the individual to plan ahead and bring snacks to tide them through or have a partner with to make food runs. So the "I'm tired" or "I'm hungry" are no excuse or as benlane17 puts it "bull". But again, your scattering red herrings trying to distract us from the topic. The top is a very narrow and specific thing.... A person intentionally altering the results of games artificially (rigging the system) to gain personal profit at the expense of all other players who are honestly to win through the honest means of winning games.
Yet again as we have seen on each and every page in the topic so far, each person here has different views. and each has a right to their views. My own just falls in with the majority here as being ethical. Regardless of what side of the fence we are on, the decision at the tourney is up to the judge on the spot. By all means throw games you have otherwise won. Just be sure to let the judge know that you threw the game when you turn in your sheet so there is full disclosure. failure to do so is an admission that you have done something unethical and actually cheated.
On 8/10/2019 at 7:26 AM, Maui. said:I agree that it's unethical to try to game the bracket and you definitely shouldn't do it, but this is a little bit excessive.
Just curious whats excessive about it? The original poster is essentially asking if rigging the bracket is morally acceptable, which clearly it is not. In some states in the U.S. you could call the gaming comission and have the OP arrested if they actually did this
I've heard of sports teams intentionally throwing matches, or intentionally hampering their chances to win an officially sanctioned game, to gain some advantage or another. That happens all the time in sports. I've never heard of anyone getting arrested for it, nor have I heard of someone being criminally charged with violating the integrity of a gaming bracket.
Regardless of how distasteful you may find unethical behavior, the sanctity of an X-wing tournament bracket is not worth sending someone to jail over. Kick someone from a tournament? Sure. For serious and repeated offenses, a lifetime ban from competitive X-wing? Also reasonable! Arrest someone for a questionable concession in a tabletop miniatures game? Not reasonable. Take a deep breath, center yourself. It's not a criminal matter.
On 8/10/2019 at 7:14 PM, EVIL INC said:But again, your scattering red herrings trying to distract us from the topic. The top is a very n arrow and specific thing....
As if forum threads always stayed laser focused on the first post... It's completely fine and even on topic to point out that a certain motivation in one situation (OP's) might be questionable but fine in another one (@DoIneedaUsername's).
Specifically
On 8/10/2019 at 7:14 PM, EVIL INC said:When people go to a tourney, they know beforehand th at it will be a long and hard day with little in the way of meal br eaks. It is up to the individual to plan ahead and bring snacks to tide them through or h av e a partner with to make food runs . S o the "I'm tired" or "I'm hungry" are no e xcuse or as benlane17 puts it "bull".
conceding to get a longer break is an acceptable way "to plan ahead". I wouldn't personally, but that does not matter for others.
The point is important and on topic because the moral nature of the question rests entirely on the motivation of a player, and that will be unknown as long as the player does not state his motivation. It could be for a break, it could be to push someone into the cut.
It actually is off topic and not related. Planning ahead means you are aware that games take up time. And again, we are not talking about conceding to get a longer break. Thats just being a selfish jerk who is not mature enough to plan ahead (IMHO). We are SPECIFICALLY only talking about only a single person artificially altering results of games in order to ensure that the end results of the tournament are altered to their personal benefit so that they can win a tournament by means other than winning games.
BUT...
To the OP. I believe you have already answered your own question. If you truly felt it was ethical, you would not come to an online forum. You would do it and make SURE to outline to the judges you turned the results in to that you threw the game you were winning in order to get an easier opponent in hopes of higher overall ranking at the end of the tournament in order to win it. If you do not do so, it is because you know it is against the rules and unethical. It is not online forum-ers whose decision matters. if your unsure, pull all of the judges aside before the tournament starts and outline that plan to them and ask them if it will be ok. No different than asking them if using the pincer strategy in order to surround an opponents forces. or driving your whole force up the middle in order to dive the enemy forces. All are just tactics and strategies used to win the tournament. That way you will know beforehand instead of waiting until after the fact.
Edited by EVIL INC3 hours ago, EVIL INC said:We are SPECIFICALLY only talking about only a single person artificially altering results of games in order to ensure that the end results of the tournament are altered to their personal benefit so that they can win a tournam ent by means other than winning games.
And how do you tell the two cases apart as observer?
By looking at the table and seeing that one player has only a single ship on it's last legs being chased down by a fleet and suddenly seeing on the scorecard that the results are the exact opposite. That usually sets off alarms.
Of course, the judges need to have help from the players as the players should be honest and report such behavior as well. However, if the player truly felt that it was ethical and within the rules, they will have outlined the plan of artificially altering game results in order to win the overall tournament by means other than winning games, to the judges before the game or when they turned in their results for that match and the judge will already be aware of it.
We are not talking about whether or not the judge will see it happen or be aware of it. We are talking about whether or not that very specific instance is ethical. Most of feel that it is not ethical because it goes against the spirit, intent and the letter of the rules of the tournaments. However as pointed out, if you choose to do so, that is your business and the rest of us will never know about it unless you tell us.
That being said, judges miss stuff, players get so engrossed in their games that they tune out conversations from other tables and folks get away with stuff. We are talking about this very specific instance and the person intentionally and knowingly doing this going into the tournament as a strategy to win the grand prize before they even show up at the event. We have already established that it is against the rules. It is there in black in white. If someone chooses to deny that, they are welcome to discuss it with the judges at the event before the event begins. TO ME, breaking the rules is breaking the rules. It does not matter if it is employing this strategy, or the "magically telescoping tape measure to get a unit too far away from an object within range" or intentionally throwing dice at models when rolling in order to knock them over so you can stand them up inches from their original position or any other number of methods. I feel they are all unethical while someone else feels otherwise.
Edited by EVIL INC
1 hour ago, EVIL INC said:We ar e talking about whether or not that very specific instance is ethical. Most of feel that it is not ethical because it goes against the spirit, intent and the letter of the rules of the tournaments. However as pointed out, if you choose to do so, that is your business and the rest of us will never know about it unless you tell us.
[...] We have already established that it is against the rules. It is there in black in white. If someone chooses to deny that, they are welcome to discuss it with the judges at the event before the event begins. TO ME, breaking the rules is breaking the rules.
Let's shift to a hypothetical.
Do you think the same if he realizes and then concedes the game right at the beginning of the game?
It is not a hypothetical. it is a player intentionally going into a tournament with the intent to artificially alter game results in order to skew the tournament results in such a way as to win the overall tournament by means other than being better at playing the game or winning games. That is not a hypothetical, it is a "game plan".
If you scroll back through the thread, you can see where it is spelled out in black and white that it is against the rules. BUT, if feel that it is not and that it is ethical, by all means, try it at the next tournament you go to. Outline the plan to the judges before the game event and be sure to tell the judges which games your throwing in this manner when you and your opponent turn in the results (yes, your opponent needs to as well because when you both sign off on it, you have made an agreement to it).
As to whether it is ethical... I have my views as obviously, you have yours which is the opposite. We are all different. The thread is not about whether it is against the rules or not because it is, it is right there in black and white. It is about that specific exact instance and whether we feel that breaking the rules in this way for personal benefit is ethical.
13 minutes ago, EVIL INC said:The thread is not about whether it is against the rules or not because it is, it is right there in black and white.
Conceding at any time as long as there was no collusion between players is perfectly legal. If a player, on his own accord, realizes that winning the game is detrimental to him winning the tournament and concedes, that's fine.
Declaring it as...
14 hours ago, EVIL INC said:artificially altering results of games
is hardly black and white and I know many judges that would disagree with you.
On 8/9/2019 at 12:42 PM, EVIL INC said:it is not really related. this is a Santas Claus case where it actually benefited the tourney by not leaving an empty space. Little different than an odd man out getting a "by".
What we are talking about Specifically is a single person artificially engineering results in a tourney for their own personal profit in order to win prizes that they did not earn through game play. Folks keep throwing red herrings out to distract us from that narrow and specific topic.
I refer us back to the rules...
"Unsporting conduct occurs when a person behaves poorly toward another person at the event, seeks to gain advantage in the game by intentionally exploiting a factor that is external to the game or event, or cheats while playing in some way. Unsporting conduct directly violates FFG’s goal for Organized Play events, and thus will not be tolerated."
Note the bold words. the goal is to have the best player of the game win. intentionally conceding games you have already won, violates the intended goal.
"The following are some examples of inappropriate behavior that fall under minor unsporting conduct: 1. A player uses vulgar or profane language or makes profane or offensive gestures towards another person. 2. A player inappropriately demands that a Judge issue a penalty to their opponent. 3. A player insults another person , be they another player, a spectator, or a tournament leader......."
This is more of a stretch and one most players would not care about. it could be considered an insult to the player you are conceding to. I only include this because someone already mentioned it elsewhere.
"C. Bribery and Collusion – Disqualification Players come to Organized Play events with the intent to enjoy themselves playing a game they love while competing against others in a welcoming environment. Bribery and collusion can violate the integrity of this environment by putting more emphasis on manipulating the system than actually playing the game, which is not the kind of event that FFG wants to promote. Bribery involves a player offering some form of reward or incentive to their opponent in order to convince them to concede, draw, or even alter the results of a game. A bribe can come in any form that the opponent finds desirable, whether it be money, promotional material, prizes, or even personal favors. Bribery in any form, involving anyone at an FFG Organized Play event, is strictly forbidden and warrants a Disqualification from the Tournament Organizer for the player offering the bribe. If the opponent accepts the bribe, they are also guilty of this disruption and should suffer the same penalty. "
This is one of the key points. Even if the two players did not have the "conversation of hey i'll let you win so you can get ahead" it is there at the scoring where it is plain for both players to see where the bribe is the free win to "keep your mouth shut". if you offer the opponant the paper with the altered game results to sign off on, you are making the bribe offer and if they play along and sign off on it, they are accepting it which leads to the collusion.
"Collusion occurs whenever two or more players discuss an outcome for their game before the game’s conclusion and then artificially or randomly determine the results of the game based on that discussion. Collusion can take place at any time, even between tournament rounds, and is never tolerated. Collusion violates the integrity of a tournament as a whole by invalidating the efforts of those who earned their place in the standings purely through the skill of their gameplay. This can drastically decrease the enjoyability of the event as a whole, and thus collusion warrants a Disqualification for each player involved. Please note that concession, in and of itself, is not collusion. Players are allowed to concede a game at any time before the end of the game, so long as there was no discussion or solicitation involved. However, convincing or manipulating an opponent to concede in order to give any person a distinct advantage is dishonest and is considered a form of cheating. Asking an opponent to concede in any shape or form falls under collusion and is grounds for Disqualification. The following are some examples of collusion: 1. A player offers to concede to their opponent in return for some of the prizes their opponent will win. a. This is also a form of bribery. 2. Two players realize that they both will make the top cut regardless of who wins. After discussing it with each other, they decide to randomly determine the outcome of their game rather than play it out. a. As soon as there is discussion, the integrity of the game has been lost. If players do not want to play the game, then one of them should concede. 15 3. Player A and Player B are friends. Player A is already going to advance to Day 2, but Player B needs one more win to do so. After discussing it with each other, Player A offers to concede so that Player B can also advance, and Player B agrees. a. As soon as there is discussion, the integrity of the game has been lost. Player A is allowed to concede the game at any time, but should do so without soliciting the concession. For the purpose of determining collusion, a “discussion” is when the involved players negotiate and agree upon an outcome of some sort. It is largely up to a Judge’s interpretation on whether or not a particular conversation between players is a discussion leading to collusion."
Collusion can take place at any time. As noted above, this can take place when both players sign off on results that did not happen through game play. They give some examples and specifically use the word "some" to point out that there are many other examples.
They do not mention conceding when you have already lost because it is assumed that players want to win the tourney by being the best player and winning their games. But a savvy judge can merely skim through the rules and pick up on the glaring violations.
However...as has been pointed out, it is up to the specific judge who catches it. If your a player in another game and catch it, it is up to you to record or report it to the judge to decide. the only question would be how to judge it. Would the judge call it? if so, what would the penalty be? a loss for both? a loss for one? Force the win? disqualify one or both? Not for us to decide. We are all just putting forth our views and opinions.
The act of signing off is an agreement or "collusion". Besides, the rules are not some sort of menu where you get to pick and choose which you want to follow, you need to follow ALL of them. The perfect textbook example of where they appear to conflict is just this situation with the quoted post explaining exactly how with direct quotes from the rules and highlighted sections. However....
If you feel the it is legal and ethical, rather than try to justify it in an online forum, just go to tournaments outline your game plan to do this to the judges (all of them not just one, include the shop owner tournament organizer) at the event and argue it out with them if they disagree. Dont sugar coat it with hypothetical santa claus possibilities, explain fully and specifically that it is a direct altering of game results with the specific intent to win the tourney through means other than being the better player and winning games. After all, you might get lucky and find a set of judges that agree. Of course..... the ethical thing would also be to include all of the other player in it and point out to them exactly which games your throwing.
Edited by EVIL INC14 minutes ago, EVIL INC said:It is not a hypothetical.
1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:Let's shift to a hypothetical.
Do you think the same if he realizes and then concedes the game right at the beginning of the game?
Why do you even reply if you just ignore it anyway? I want to ask you about a different, hypothetical situation. A player does not play 70min of the game, does not have "most of the opposing ships destroyed as time approaches", and does not concede after clearly winning. Instead, this hypothetical player realizes that he has " a solid matchup vs his and could win a rematch" right at the beginning. He concedes immediately.
Is that ethical?
Changing the subject to a different topic midstream? We are specifically talking about a single player going into a tournament with the intent to throw games in order to ensure easier future matches in order to win the overall tournament. We are not talking about santa claus situations, or rematches or any other possible hypothetical, we are talking about this very specific situation. The situation of a single player going into a tournament with the game plan of throwing matches that they have otherwise won (which is impossible without the collusion of the other player) in order to ensure they have easier matches at the end of the tournament in order to wing the tournament as a whole through other means than being the best player or winning games. Any other situation or hypothetical is a different topic. Now if you want to start a different thread on whether it is a good thing to throw games to your son so they dont come in dead last or whatnot, id be glad to chime in on it. As it is a different topic and situation, I might have a different outlook on it. But in the actual tournament, it would still come down to the judges rather than random online forum members.