Asturiel's Weekly: Is victory enough?

[Asturiel]

This thread has 59% more thunder than average threads and 90% less power!
[sub]Uncertainty of about +/- 50%[/sub]

So this question popped up between two members of our team. One who kept running the clock whenever he could once we had a lead (took his sweet ass time every single time with the goal kicks) and the goalie who would rush more and not try to be cheap with the clock. The goalie often said when the other defender questioned him that "he would feel bad if he won that way" well his words were something along those lines. My point is though, do you think winning through a questionable means is A-OK? Or that it siphons the very essence of the victory

Me personally I find it cheapens the actual prize at the end, but to live life and try to compete on ethics alone isn't exactly going to win you many games or move you forward, compromises need to be made and so forth. However I lean more towards the cheapening side of things, I often yell at some of my teammates for intentionally taking out the other player with dirty slides and such. So fabulous Escapist community, whats your take on this?

 

[Irridium]

I try to win fairly whenever I can. However when I'm matched up against someone who does anything to win, I switch from "winning fairly" to "making them lose at any cost". That doesn't mean I try to win, it means as long as the guy loses, I'm happy.

Kind of contradicting, but thats what I do.

 

[Steppin Razor]

It depends on the situation, but generally I lean towards yelling and screaming at the people that try to win in such a dodgy way. In video games I find it mildy annoying when a whole group of people decide to camp a defensive position with one hit kill weapons, such as the entire Terrorist team buying AWP's on Office, but in real life sports, especially football, I find it incredibly frustrating. Whether I'm watching or playing, I absolutely despise a team with a single goal lead passing the ball back and forth in their own half instead of making an attempt to score. Hell, we had it in the World Cup in one of the Spain games where they spent the last 30 or so minutes kicking the ball to each other without a single shot on goal.

 

[Pariah87]

I think it depends on the importance of the victory and what is more important to each individual, winning, or winning with honour.

Me personally? I'd rather have a good time and lose than play like a dick and win. One example on the original Left 4 Dead, before the patch were people could block the elevator with a bin to stop the survivors beating that level. The enemy team did this to us. We prepared for the eventuality however so we stocked up on pipe bombs to dislodge the bin. On our turn as infected one the randoms runs off and trys to do the same thing. My friend and I kicked him from the game. We then got a message from him asking "wtf??" where we explained that we didn't want to sink to the same level of cheating bastardry and if we're going to win we'd rather win through superiority.

If I win something by being a cheat, or using a cheap tactic such as "running the clock" down, the victory would be pointless. The idea of competition in any form is to test yourself against your opponents and try and prove which is superior.