CHEAT TO WIN

[varadin]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ericscottb ... 149923152/

opps turns out he took that shot right.

[Arrakis]

Wow.

What happened there?

[YAS]

I believe that we call the Just-us-guys fighting technique:

CHEAT TO WIN.

[p_quick]

i wasn't there and don't know the situation but the dude is wearing armor

[Mirelle]

Thats a flail if you look closely, it looks like the ball actually could have gone between his legs.

(look for the downward angle of the chain)

[MagnusofDregoth]

Seriously, he is wearing armor. Plus, the ball may have gone completely between his legs and not hit him at all. I know Paddix is an honorable fighter (also he usually uses a sword, not a flail) and wouldn't cheat to win. Same for his opponent, for that matter.

[Brooder]

Faline is heralding and has good view. I trust her judgment.

This thread fails.

[varadin]

from the view of the peanut gallery we saw the hit to the back. Didnt relize it was collister hafting the **** out of the kid. He called armor and then took leg instead. Im pointing out that he was in the right and the peanut gallery was wrong. Though he still got hit in the back so it makes sense how we misunderstood.

For those who werent there the peanut gallery was behind the fight not at grandfather tree.

[Slagar]

Without directing this at anyone in particular, having never met most of you:

That's why the peanut gallery needs to shut its god * mouth. Most of the time you can't see ****, and calling other peoples' shots is just bad form.

/rant

Cool photo, though. Love me some ultraviolence, as Theros would say.

[Arrakis]

Agreed, Slagar.

Of course, there's calling shots from the peanut gallery and being wrong, and then there's the travesty of the XXIII Four Horsemen's Tourney. People have come to expect certain things out of those tourneys and especially out of certain groups and individuals in said tourneys.

[Skorr]

You're right. We only got 9 out of 10 right. Our bad. The heralds got 0 out of 0 calls right though, until I actually did stop heckling and don the yellow tabard.
After calling one guy dead and yellow carding him for blatant cheating (like ignoring a jump red-shot to the back that I was 10 feet away from) I didn't notice anything else.

You just have to be vigilant and let people know that you will call them out in front of everyone, and it stops. If the heralds could all do this consistently, there would be a less accusatory peanut gallery.

Science.

[Dacian]

I'll have to agree with Skorr on this one, but from what I remember, that fight was actually relatively clean. Same goes for a lot of the fights (at least moreso than last year).

It was good to have a couple heralds (Skorr and some others) that actually called shots this year. Hope to see more of it next Rag.

But yes, from what I remember, this fight was legit.

[Wisp]

So how does shot calibration work in a tourney with Reeves/Heralds who call shots? Say Joe Schome hits Bob X clean in the back but Bob X thinks it doesn't include sufficient force? Looked clean, made a nice thump, but for whatever reason, Bob likes it with more sting or whatever??? Reeve/Herald would want to call em' dead but Bob insists it was light. How does this impact the ability to call light for a fighter if a Reeve/Herald can determine whats hard enough and whats not?

Will

[varadin]

Problem is right now in dagorhir there is no "suffecient force" rule. Everyone still goes by it but by the rules if the herald sees you get hit he can call you on it. I by no mean agree with this but technically its the rules.

How they were doing it this year was, if a herald saw a shot he thought hit he would stop the fight, ask the getting hit if i thought he got hit, ask the hitter if he thought he got hit. If 2/3 thought the shot was good the shot was taken and the cheater was given a yellow card. I believe 3 yellow cards got you kicked out of fighting for the day. Magnus is the guy to ask though he ran them. I was going to herald but having done weapons check most morning i was busy eating when the tourneys started and only caught the last half of any of them.

[Arrakis]

Wisp, you have hit the nail upon its thorny head.

Either you're calling the shots as a Marshall or you're letting the combatants judge the blows. It's hard as hell to have it both ways and you can really only call blatant violations without looking like you're just micro-managing the match and besmirching the honor of both combatants.

[Derian]

Something I hear they do out West that I really like for judging tournaments --

Heralds watch the fight like normal. When it's finished, if there was cheating, they call the fight no good, do over. That way the fight doesn't have to stop and people don't get tempers during the actual fight.

[Kyrax]

Problem is right now in dagorhir there is no "suffecient force" rule. Everyone still goes by it but by the rules if the herald sees you get hit he can call you on it. I by no mean agree with this but technically its the rules.

WRONG - please re-read Dagorhir's rules before spouting them. Blows have to land solidly with noticeable force. Ignoring the first part of that is a common misunderstanding, but a misunderstanding nonetheless.

[Satanaka]

From many years as a judge in Martial Arts- just looking at the Pic from where the view we (the peanut gallary) I would NOT have called anything as a Herald- BECAUSE I could NOT see the ball clearly hit.
People will say "it had to have hit" But- some people are idiots. Unless you DIRECTLY see it hit- keep mouth closed- Bad form for a Herald.
Also to point out:
1. Much of the flail head force may be less due to the force of the haft hitting at hat angle and maybe stopping some of the flail head force.
2. The guy's leg looks in the air- like a shield kick- so- may have not hit the leg or hit with enough force.
3. I see how many Heralds standing and watching???? so- What gives?
4. Let the people have a chance to take a shot- The person getting hit reserves the right to call the shot- now the next best person to be able to know if it was a good hit it the person that threw the hit- I am not sure THIS person can tell that at this angle and swing.
5. The idiots on the side are as much cheaters as anyone on the field. If you are on the sideline yelling about people taking shots- YOU ARE A PROBLEM FOR THE GAME. People who do this cheat more than the actual people fighting. I have seen in over a thousand times where "insert random gang mentality unit" yells for their person THAT coule never lose and calls the other person about shot taking ALL THE TIME!! These are the people that do need to STFU!
6. Back to the Heralds- some people are not good Heralds and/ or won't make calls or call against their friends. Of course this is complete BS and they do NOT need to be on the field as a Herald.

This is a great shot to train (less Experienced) new Heralds- Give them the pick and ask- "what do you think?"
See what they see and how trhey would respond- and of course hit them with a ruller when they say something wrong... (of course I was just joking on the last- sorta)

[Bortas]

Something I hear they do out West that I really like for judging tournaments --

Heralds watch the fight like normal. When it's finished, if there was cheating, they call the fight no good, do over. That way the fight doesn't have to stop and people don't get tempers during the actual fight.

That's how it has been run at the last few Chaos. Most tourney's are double marshalled... if it looks rough the marshalls give each other a nod and call the fight no-good-do-over. This keeps the action rolling and the onus of responsibility on the combatants. Occasionally, the combatants will ask what went wrong, the marshalls generally will tell them after the tourney is clear.

After seeing tourneys run a few different ways, I like this method a lot. It's not perfect, but it's decent. We had several eastern fighters out at this CWXIII who go to many tourneys (including Dane, Cyric, Peter, even Dred) - what did you guys think of this method of tourney marshalling?

-bort

[p_quick]

i thought the tourneys at CW were run really well.

I liked how the heralds can force a redo of the fight, but not give the fight to one fighter or the other.

What wisp said about heralds calling shots on people without being the person getting hit, and not being able to feel the shot power is a real big problem with heralds calling shots. It is really hard to know what was a good hit and what wasn't a good hit.

heralding tourneys as they did at CWs is a great idea because it leaves the fighting up to the fighters, not up to a power tripping/impartial or novice herald.

Forcing a refight is as bad as calling out one of the fighters. but it leaves both fighters a chance to have a clean fight.

[Soo Ma Tai]

This is total bull **** IMO. At CW this year a fight was recalled because of video footage of the fight. When the **** did we start using an instant replay method. People on the sidelines should never call shots, ever, ever. Total bad form.

and I quote from the rules....

1. Adjudication

1.1. Marshal - Person responsible for rules enforcement and weapons inspection.
1.1.1. A Marshal has the authority to remove anyone from the field of battle.
1.1.2. A Marshal determines Equipment classifications according to the guidelines outlined in Appendix A.
1.1.3. A Marshal is responsible for safe conduct of battles, and therefore has the power to stop battles whenever a safety concern occurs.
1.2. All Equipment must be inspected and properly marked if appropriate, according to the guidelines outlined in Appendix A, before it is used in combat.
1.3. The target of an attack makes combat hit determinations.
1.4. Creative interpretation of the rules to gain any advantage is discouraged. These rules are intentionally sparse to allow for ease of use. The Marshal, according to these rules, and medieval foam combat precedent, settles all disputes.

pay special attention to 1.1.3 and 1.3. As a herald your job is to enforce the rules and conduct safe battles. Not make hit determinations. I can see calling someone dead in cases where the rules are obviously being broken, but if it is even questionable, the fighter may have blocked it, could have been light, etc., it should be on the honor of the combatants. Stopping an entire battle to talk about one hit is the dumbest thing I have ever heard of. Why ruin everyones good time because one guy isn't taking hits. If it's obvious and blatant, remove that person from the field for a time, hour, day, whatever. A herald is there to settle disputes, not to make unwarranted calls. Only in the case of a dispute, between the combatants, should a herald be making a hit determination. Not because some sideliner says hey that's BS, he got hit.

Rule 1.3 is the rules these heralds should be enforcing, and tell the peanut gallery to keep their collective traps shut. I realise this was a Dag event the pic is referring to, and IDK, they may have changed the wording so that Herald do make hit determinations. I don't pay the least ammount of attention to Dag rules, but in Belegarth, no herald should be calling hits unless they are settling a dispute between combatants.

[Cyric]

I also really liked the clean/not clean method of heralding tourneys. I'd like to see it implemented everywhere in the sport.

[p_quick]

This is total bull **** IMO. At CW this year a fight was recalled because of video footage of the fight. When the **** did we start using an instant replay method. People on the sidelines should never call shots, ever, ever. Total bad form.

i'll be open, it was one of my fights that was redone that had said video footage taken. and it wasn't me that was questioned. both heralds had decided to have us redo the fight before the footage was viewed, and the heralds didn't view the footage until after the second fight and the winner of the match was decided, if they watched it at all.

So Soo Ma Tai "IMO" you should learn to keep your mouth shut unless you were actually there.

again i hold that heralding at CW this year was superb and my hat is off to all the heralds.

[Big King Jimmy]

For the record, that is the **** looking equipment I've ever seen. And did anyone check flex on that flail?

[Soo Ma Tai]

Well Peter, I was there, I watched you walk off, a herald look at the video, and you walk back out and fight again. That is what I "saw", it may not be how it transpired, but that is what I saw when I was there. I was not the only person to see it that way either. I wasn't trying to be a * or call you out, just using that particular incident as an example.

I also thought the heralding at CW was excellent, as was the hit taking and honor on the field. I am not questioning your honor or anyone elses. From the sidelines it can look like a lot of people are cheating, and most of them aren't....it just "looks" that way. That's why I try not judge others honor based on what I see.

P.S. Having read my previous post over, I see it was a bit harsh and came off the wrong way. I have no problems with the heralding or hit taking at CW. I was simply trying to point out that the only person who really knows if they are hit is the person being hit, and it's hard enough to judge something like that from a few feet away as a herald, much less from the sidelines as a spectator or from video footage.

[Physic]

1. Adjudication

1.1. Marshal - Person responsible for rules enforcement and weapons inspection.
1.1.1. A Marshal has the authority to remove anyone from the field of battle.
1.1.2. A Marshal determines Equipment classifications according to the guidelines outlined in Appendix A.
1.1.3. A Marshal is responsible for safe conduct of battles, and therefore has the power to stop battles whenever a safety concern occurs.
1.2. All Equipment must be inspected and properly marked if appropriate, according to the guidelines outlined in Appendix A, before it is used in combat.
1.3. The target of an attack makes combat hit determinations.
1.4. Creative interpretation of the rules to gain any advantage is discouraged. These rules are intentionally sparse to allow for ease of use. The Marshal, according to these rules, and medieval foam combat precedent, settles all disputes.

pay special attention to 1.1.3 and 1.3. As a herald your job is to enforce the rules and conduct safe battles. Not make hit determinations. I can see calling someone dead in cases where the rules are obviously being broken, but if it is even questionable, the fighter may have blocked it, could have been light, etc., it should be on the honor of the combatants. Stopping an entire battle to talk about one hit is the dumbest thing I have ever heard of. Why ruin everyones good time because one guy isn't taking hits. If it's obvious and blatant, remove that person from the field for a time, hour, day, whatever. A herald is there to settle disputes, not to make unwarranted calls. Only in the case of a dispute, between the combatants, should a herald be making a hit determination. Not because some sideliner says hey that's BS, he got hit.

Rule 1.3 is the rules these heralds should be enforcing, and tell the peanut gallery to keep their collective traps shut. I realise this was a Dag event the pic is referring to, and IDK, they may have changed the wording so that Herald do make hit determinations. I don't pay the least ammount of attention to Dag rules, but in Belegarth, no herald should be calling hits unless they are settling a dispute between combatants.

I think that this is a great point. Fighting should be about honor. When a herald steps in and makes a call they are taking the honor element out of the game. This is something that I feel should be discussed in the Marshalling/Heralding section of the boards. It seems to me that active heralding is becoming more and more common and I dont think this is how hit taking should be dealt with.

[Bortas]

Physic, what do you think about the clean/not clean system discussed above?

-bort

[p_quick]

sorry soo ma i really read that the first time and took it as a shot at me.

sorry for the misunderstanding

[Soo Ma Tai]

No prob PtQ, sorry for the misunderstanding.

[MagnusofDregoth]

For the record, that is the **** looking equipment I've ever seen. And did anyone check flex on that flail?

So now we're not only calling shots over the internet, we're also deciding which weapons should fail?

I like the idea of the marshalls (for Bel) or heralds (for Dag) calling a re-do for fights that they think weren't clean. It is important that they not play the blame game; if someone was intentionally cheating, he/she will, I think, get the message anyway. Perhaps I will add that to the tourney procedures the next time I run one.

[Big King Jimmy]

Welcome to the internet? I didn't think you were new at this.

[Forkbeard]

Here's what I saw, from about 25 feet away.
Fight starts, fight ends. Peter walks off, out of the fighting circle, looking neutral-pissed(couldn't tell) and leaves the field.
Peters buddy calls to him "Peter, come back, the fight was UNCLEAN." exact words. Peter comes back on the field, some discusion happens that I can hear, and they fight again. Peter wins that fight.
Now,I dodn't know about the details of what was said or decided by the hearalds.
All I know is, once I take a death, or a limb, or foget to call armor, I never reverse MY decision. If I leave a tourney circle, the fight is over. If I take the death, You win. No go backsies. Not ever. I wouldn't walk back into a ring after taking a death even if the fight was for money.
Don't get me wrong, I've refought fights, just NEVER after leaving the circle and accepting the death.
The fact that a video tape was brought out to the hearalds to proive the fight was "unclean" from one perspective outside the ring is a totaly cheesy side note. They totally DID watch it, by the way, before they decided.
There is no rule about either of these issues. People are free to play this area of the game as they see fit.
Some of us just look at sportsmanship differently than others.
FB

[p_quick]

Fork beard i'm not really sure what you are saying in your post? are you saying i shouldn't of refought? or are you just shining your opinion on the situation? or are you saying that i cheated to win? Since somehow this thread has turned into a recap of one of my tournament fights

[Od1n]

Let's just say some people have too much free clam chowder in their eyes

[Physic]

Physic, what do you think about the clean/not clean system discussed above?

-bort

I think it is slightly better then a herald called fight, but not much. They are the ones still making the ultimate decision when it should always be up to the fighters. I believe the best way to deal with disputes is through communication. If there is a disagreement than the two fighters should discuss it. If they still cannot resolve it then they should seek the opinion of the heralds. If it still cannot be decided the fighters should either choose to re fight or someone should bow out. Any honorable person would choose to forfeit the match rather then have their honor questioned.

Something I notice that is very common and I can't stand is that people would rather walk off the field and talk bad about someone rather than have a respectful conversation over whatever happened on the field. You should always be able to resolve issues through communication whether it is on the battle field or in a tournament.

[edgethrop]

i am all for ctive heralding because i have watched clean in front of my eyes people blowing off shots. the heralds are their to keep the game within the rules and not aking your shots is against the rules. if the herald makes a bad call it happens.. marshals/heralds are our refs, and htey are human and canmake bad calls. i am anactive herald and unless i can tell cleanly that it hit or not i wont make the call unless i am positive.

[Soo Ma Tai]

Some time ago, prolly 4 years back, I was called dead in a Tournament by a herald. I took the death without question to the herald. After discussing it with my opponent we both felt the call was made in error, neither myself or the other combatant ( a well know, highly respected fighter) believed the shot to be no good. I thought it was unfortunate we weren't allowed to have our honor because the fight was called before we could say anything really.

[Arrakis]

Something I notice that is very common and I can't stand is that people would rather walk off the field and talk bad about someone rather than have a respectful conversation over whatever happened on the field. You should always be able to resolve issues through communication whether it is on the battle field or in a tournament.

I know, right? *. If I feel like someone is sloughing me, I ask them if that last shot was not perhaps good enough. If they say that it was not, I will continue and if I feel like they're continuing to blow off clean shots, in a non-tournament situation, I'll ask them to show me what level of force they find adequate and strive to be sure that I hit that level of force.

It can be very frustrating when someone is ignoring shots you feel are good enough, but communication never hurt anything.


Soo, good point! I think that agreement between the two combatants should always overrule any non-omniscient observer's judgment. I know SCAdians who would almost certainly protest winning in such a way and would walk right out of the lists if someone tried to hand them a victory in such a manner.

[Big King Jimmy]

Those that don't like the active heralding approach, is there a limit? Do you only feel this way about tournies or in general? I'm reminded of the NFL, where calls are made and they aren't always right, but refs don't hesitate to make them. What's the point to having marshals on the field if they don't make calls? Hasn't a mix of rampent cheating and quite heralds been a lot of people's problems at Rag for years?

I know that's a lot of questions, but I'm just trying to understand the other side. It's sounds a lot harsher than my fingers are typing it.

[Forkbeard]

I'm not saying you cheated. I'm sorry this thread is titled the way it is. I should have considered that. I didn't realize it until I read your post. It shouldn't be implied that you cheated. Sorry, man.
Neither am I saying you should or shouldn't have refought the fight.
I'm saying I wouldn't have refought it after walking away. I've always felt that leaving the ring is the end of the match, accepting the heralds decision whether I agree with I or not. It's an extention of the concept I play by in field battles. If I die, I stay dead, even if my killer tells me I'm not. Once I take myself out of play, I'm out.
So I guess I'm just shining my opinion on the scene. Much of sword tag is widely open to interpritation. Many of us have different styles of play. Many of us disagree on what is and is not sportsman like conduct. There is nothing wrong with this. The many different perspectives that make up our sport are what make it the most diverse and wonerful pasttime out there.
FB

[Ralimar]

Hahaha, this thread was dumb as hell, now it's hilarious.

Person 1: I think THIS happened at Chaos Wars.
Person 2: * is that supposed to mean??
Person 1: Oh, ****, sorry. I shouldn't have had said it like that. My bad.
Person 2: I'm sorry too. Lets make up. ::man kisses::
Repeat!

[Crynolyn]

At Chaos Wars, I heard complaints of 1 person cheating all week long.... from at least a dozen different people.

I don't even need to say who it was. Everyone who was there knows what I'm referring to.

[Arrakis]

But those of us who weren't there don't know who to ridicule! Is this one of those "opportunity costs" I keep hearing about?

[Dane]

Nah, it's just people not being as good as they think they are.

[BattleChrist]

It was me guys, you got me. I wont do it again

[Dane]

Psh. They gotta be able to hit you before you can cheat, BC. You're doing it wrong.

[Juicer]

Eventus stultorum magister.

[bo1]

dane has won the thread, thanks dane i often wonder what i would do with out your insite. thanks for being that guy!!!


the million dollar question is where is that video?

[Physic]

Those that don't like the active heralding approach, is there a limit? Do you only feel this way about tournies or in general? I'm reminded of the NFL, where calls are made and they aren't always right, but refs don't hesitate to make them. What's the point to having marshals on the field if they don't make calls? Hasn't a mix of rampent cheating and quite heralds been a lot of people's problems at Rag for years?

I know that's a lot of questions, but I'm just trying to understand the other side. It's sounds a lot harsher than my fingers are typing it.

Refs in the NFL have to be there because when your salary is based on whether you win or not there is going to be cheating. They don't play for honor, they play for money.

I feel that there are very few instances where a herald should ever call someone dead. Getting shot with arrows is something that a herald should step in and make a call. I know when I am wearing my leather I cannot feel most arrows hit. I'm ok with that, cause if I can feel an arrow through my armor I don't want that thing hitting my face. If someone is being blatantly unsafe and/or fighting with anger they should be pulled off the field. Other then that I don't really think a herald should call someone dead during a battle.

My opinion is the people that don't take their hits is due to ignorance and newbness than conscious active cheating. In my five plus years of fighting I cannot remember a moment where I thought someone was knowingly cheating and not taking their hits. I have seen many instances where people are not taking shots due to the fact that they were new, clueless or over excited. I think all of these situations are better dealt with by having a conversation with them after a fight rather then calling them dead during the fight.


The number one purpose of marshals on the field is safety. They are there to help with injuries, resolve disputes and keep the battles going. Calling someone dead that is cheating in a battle is the easy way out. If you call someone dead during a battle they are just going to throw out some lame * excuse. Talking with that person and letting them know that people are not happy with their actions on the field will fix more problems in the long run.

The small amount of people that do knowingly cheat during a fight, I say, Let Them. The worst thing you can do in any game of honor is lose your reputation. When that happens people will hate you on and off the field. They then have to decide to fix it or find another hobby.

[Reverend]

Here's what I saw, from about 25 feet away.
Fight starts, fight ends. Peter walks off, out of the fighting circle, looking neutral-pissed(couldn't tell) and leaves the field.
Peters buddy calls to him "Peter, come back, the fight was UNCLEAN." exact words. Peter comes back on the field, some discusion happens that I can hear, and they fight again. Peter wins that fight.
Now,I dodn't know about the details of what was said or decided by the hearalds.
FB

As one of the two heralds of that match, from my angle, it was an unclean match (IE: The person not taking the hit won).

As I was checking with the other herald to get his opinion, Peter started walking off.

The other herald shook his head at me, indicating that it wasn't clean from his perspective either.

At that point, I stated it was unclean ... and then Peter's friend entered the scenario.

We, as heralds, had already decided to have the fight run again, before the insta-replay got into it.

As for for the OP, just based on that image without seeing anything else... let the heralds do their job. You're not the one standing there in yellow and you're not the one being scrutinized.