MrPainfulTruth wrote:Patches Perry wrote:
I mostly agree with the rest of your post, and I don't think it's unreasonable to think it's plausible, but it seems as a first principle it should be assumed that outcomes are not directed/rigged/coerced, because if 1 outcome is rigged, then you can't really be confident that any of them aren't rigged. It's like if you knew that at least 1 cookie in the cookie jar was poisoned, you couldn't trust that any of them could be eaten safely. Because of this, it seems to me that either all of them can be trusted, or none of them can.
What do you call "rigged" exactly? I ask because i am not a native english speaker. Maybe we have different understandings.
Do you think contact on Jokic is officiated comparable to Embiid or other, smaller bigs? Or, for that matter, guards?
Do you think star players are treated like normal players or even rookies?
If you think there is no rigging, then you believe every player is officiated according to the exact same rules, right?
If you believe that in those examples, the answer is no systematically, not just anecdotally, then it means the officiating follows an agenda, not the rulebook only. Which would be my understanding of "rigging" games.