Faded's Predictions Punishment

[Oles]

Can we talk about the fact that HO took the 44 tpe away, and then linked to punishments in which the tpe removed was double what the person in question illegally obtained? I know it doesn't matter now since he retired and all, but he really should've lost 88 tpe at the minimum if HO was trying to keep the precedence of losing double the amount of tpe. Doesn't really matter now since he retired though

88 was definitely on the table. I personally voted for 44 for a few reasons. One being that even though we knew it was virtually certain that he cheated overall, we could not be certain that he cheated in each one of the 11 instances.

The other reason, and the thing that makes this one different from the other cheating punishments, was that there was no actual smoking gun evidence. I understand the sentiment that we as HO should 'borrow some balls' as Adam so eloquently put it (btw Adam, there are those in HO with big balls already who were vocally supporting 88, so we don't need a full set ty), but I personally was conscious of how this unprecedented punishment would be received, especially as we were expecting a bitter reaction from Faded, his supporters and from those who would question how we could levy such a harsh punishment to someone with no hard evidence. But as I said earlier, things look very different now that Faded immediately heel-turned and admitted it.

my issue with the smoking gun argument is the fact that there is a clear pattern and the multitude of times it happened. 3 or 4 perfect weeks in a season would be on the extroadinary predictions end, so the fact that he was able to predict so many games correctly (especially certain upsets) just makes that the smoking gun to me. It just doesn’t happen and it is very very suspicious especially with the knowledge of when uploads happened and that he had access to the youtube channel. He may not have cheated in all 11 instances, but 11 perfect weeks in that span is just not something i think would ever happen. To me, even without his admittance, 88 should have been the minimum punishment especially with the precedence that was used to justify the punishment. It would not have been unprecedented to punish him for 88 tpe, I dont think many would have questioned keeping the tpe amount in line with previous precedents, as this now sets a new precedent especially for appeals. To me, this just starts a slippery slope where someone can steal tpe and be fine, only losing a minimal amount of tpe.