Implemented Mid-round bans in individual tours

[Geysers]

Currently, when a user in an individual tour is banned mid-round, if they already played and won their game, both players are eliminated from the tour and whoever would have played them in the next round instead receives a bye. As far as I know, this has been official policy for a while.

This policy has some issues, however. Notably, it encourages banned users to sign up for tournaments with alts, as even if they are caught and banned, they may still have eliminated players and thus interfered with the tournament. If such a ban happens in a later round in a tournament, it can lead to byes in very small rounds, potentially removing interesting high-stakes matches. It also encourages playing games as late in a round as possible, especially against unknown players, as an opponent may be revealed to be an alt mid-week.

My proposal is that when a user is banned mid-round, their opponent is automatically given the win, even if they have already played. This solution seems like the fairest way to minimize the impact that alts can have on tournaments, by making it harder for banned users to impact the outcome, while also being practical. Unfortunately, this proposal doesn't do anything to people that a banned user eliminated earlier in the tournament, but attempting to fix that would require multiple extra matches and be thoroughly impractical. I hope that this proposal will disincentivize joining tournaments on alts and lead to more interesting tournaments.

The obvious problem here, to which there isn't really a good solution, is that it's unfair to people who got eliminated by the banned user in earlier rounds. Unfortunately, there's no good way to fix that, but the current situation isn't really any better. My proposal wouldn't hurt those players any more than they would be under the current system, and can only benefit non-banned rule-abiding players. I'm very much open to suggestions that would remedy that shortcoming.
this is my first pr post please tell me if I did something wrong
e: grammar fix

 

[dex]

As someone who was eliminated from OU kickoff by an alt (not even a banned user, just a dude (hi BO) alting for fun I guess), I can commiserate with you that it's a shitty feeling.

However, I do think the rule is fine as is, and your logic for why it should change is a bit flawed. I highly doubt banned users are alting in tours to "mess with the system" as it were. Most likely they just want to play the game and, importantly, win, and tours getting messed with is more of a byproduct of that. I highly doubt this change would impact the number of alts joining large tours.

Now I do get the sentiment of why the losing player should move on, but the way I see it, if you lost you lost. That might be a bit blunt, but losers moving on in tours just doesn't make a lot of sense. If you suspect your opp is an alt, john them and ask an SS to check them out. I should have done this before I played my last OU kickoff series, but only did so after. It does not take SS long to IP check accounts at all in my experience.

 

[DaWoblefet]

As far as I know, VGC events will overturn the result of a game if the opponent is DQed for any reason, just so long as it's caught and dealt with during the same round. So far as I understand, this is disqualification for any reason - if your opponent punched a judge in the face, you would be eligible for the win, even if you already played the round and lost.

Rule 7.2.6

Obviously, Smogon is distinct from TPCi, but it seems to me TPCi has got it right here. It's of course extremely difficult to redo brackets that were affected by participation of banned users (in the case of VGC Swiss events, basically impossible), but what's the harm in allowing the impacted player to continue? Especially if the reason a player is banned were for, say, logs said prior to the match occuring, the only reason they wouldn't have been banned sooner is because of the necessary time needed for user reporting, Senior Staff reviewing, and so on. If the evidence tied to the ban was from before the match was played, it seems to me the whole match is illegitimate and the opponent should be allowed to continue.

 

[Amir]

My proposal is that when a user is banned mid-round, their opponent is automatically given the win, even if they have already played. This solution seems like the fairest way to minimize the impact that alts can have on tournaments, by making it harder for banned users to impact the outcome, while also being practical. Unfortunately, this proposal doesn't do anything to people that a banned user eliminated earlier in the tournament, but attempting to fix that would require multiple extra matches and be thoroughly impractical. I hope that this proposal will disincentivize joining tournaments on alts and lead to more interesting tournaments.

While I agree to give the banned mid-round user's opponent a win for that round, wouldn't it be slightly fairer if the player who lost the previous round gets their loss flipped into a win and then has to face the opponent of the current round instead, with the additional option for an extension?

In addition to double-elimination tournaments, assuming the player dropped to the loser bracket from a banned user the prior week, that player should regain their eligibility to play for the winner bracket, while the opponent in the loser bracket should receive a bye.

 

[shnowshner]

If you suspect your opp is an alt, john them and ask an SS to check them out.

I can't help but feel this isn't a good approach to the problem, in the sense of "unwritten code that tour players follow," but then giving this advice may discourage newer genuine users from signing up since they'll feel scrutinized.

Moreover it doesn't help in situations where your opponent is a known user that gets banned anyway. (Assuming this falls under the rule in the OP) I can imagine it'd be awful to lose a match in an indiv only to find out that you were getting ghosted and the whole match is about as illegitimate and uncompetitive as it gets.

I find DaWoblefet's approach of "if the reason for a user's ban would have been enactable prior to the set, their opponent should be able to continue" a smart approach. It does leave the door open for individual interpretation which can get messy and, worse yet, leave some players feeling mistreated, but it's a far less punishing system against those who lost a game against someone who demonstrated they shouldn't have been allowed to compete in the first place.

 

[Merritt]

The TD team has discussed this issue, and will be instituting the following policy.

Tournament sets for a current round that were impacted by cheating will result in the non-cheating party moving on. This includes both standard forms of cheating (ghosting, ect), as well as information disparity via breaking tour rules (team leaking, alting), as series impacted by these are by nature not a fair set. Bans as a result of other actions will not overturn the result of a set, and a bye will advance into the next round barring exceptional circumstances.


To clarify a few points, if the current round set has not yet been played, the unbanned player will move on in the case of an individual tournament or will be given a forced substitute to play in team tournaments.

For tournaments that include winrate as a portion of the tiebreaker, this set will be excluded (assuming the not-cheating player lost) and their winrate will not be impacted by it.

"Current round" means the period from when a round is posted until the extension deadline (generally one/two weeks+3 days) or the series for the following round has been played, whichever comes first. The TD team will only go further back than this period in extreme cases, so that tournaments can continue in a timely fashion.

Thank you for your feedback.