Lost in all the drama of Tom Kirby eccentricities and Games Workshop Annual report, was another story getting a lot of play online with the chattering class. It all started last week at the Bay Area Open when the Steve Sisk became the overall winner of the tournament going undefeated. Steve Sisk is a well-known old school 40k player in California. He is a great painter and one could say, has an unhealthy love for the Ultramarines, even sporting a Ultramarine tattoo. He has been a GW store manager and winner of many tournaments, dating back to the old GW tournament circuit.
Steve has a crew of devoted 40k friends as well, who enjoy both the hobby and competitive aspects of the game. By any measure 40k is a very important part of Steve's social life. Personally, I think I have talked to him maybe once and he came off as very standoffish. You can chalk it up to typical gamer social awkwardness or at worse Warhammer elitism. I have never played him in a game and only know him from stories throughout the years, with the constant refrain being his very competitive attitude and more often than not, unhappy endings.
So, when I heard that he might have cheated on his way to winning the Bay Area Open, I found it possible. Steve has many of the hallmarks of a cheater, but at the same time this was the first time I heard of him cheating. All I have heard was people telling me how horrible he was to play against, especially when losing. Another problem is many people in his crew, or affiliated with his crew are seen the same way. There is even a running joke by many players about how "Sacramento Players" (the area Sisk is plays in) are, and it ain't a good one. My experience with Sacramento players has been very pleasant, expect that one time... So, while many joke about Sacramento's reputation I haven't experienced first hand.
So, how did Steve Sisk's allegedly cheat?
Well if you want to know the details read it here, for the purpose of this article those details aren't important.
This intro is designed to paint a general perception many players have about Steve and his friends. In this context, you can imagine how quick people came to Steve's defense and how others had bad tales to tell. As it turns out attacking a 40k whistle blower is not about disputing the alleged transgressions, but is all about calling someone a whinny sore loser. It isn't new for any whistle blower to be attacked personally, that is why over the years people have anonymous emailed me their cheating horror stories, and as usual I do my duty to protect them. I can handle the backlash for many reasons, but mostly because my motive is harder to assail and I have this thing called evidence.
As for the Sisk cheating story, perception is what matters. Rightly or wrongly Steve has a perception of being ultra competitive. So, when a game happens he is creating an environment where his opponent can become very uncomfortable. It puts the player in a position to start to question things, especially after the shock of having a shitty time wears off. If the whistle blower had a good fun game and lost do you think he would have posted anything? He would have chalked up the "accusations" to just mind flubs. Instead, the unpleasant game is causing him to question everything, not because he is a sore losing, but because he is wondering why his opponent was such a dick. Now of course, you might ask well what if the whistle blower is really the dick? Well I know him and doesn't seem the type, a dirty hipster perhaps, but that isn't a punishable crime...yet.
The responsibility is between the players because no event can have a judge at each table, though I think once you get a few games in you should station a judge permanently at the top table. Having zero cheating tolerance (BAO does have) does help too.
What it does mean though, is even in a super competitive environment, each player has to be cognizant of each other. The whole idea of a win at all cost player isn't rooted in cheating, it is rooted in being unpleasant to play against. If Steve is guilty of anything it would be being unpleasant to play, I am sure he isn't that way with his friends, but with strangers it keeps on cropping up. Did Steve cheat, it doesn't matter, what does matter is the creation of the unfun environment for his opponent. Can everyone get along with everyone, hell no, but at least try because both of players have spent money to play in these events and common courtesy should count for something.
This is what everyone needs to think about in any game, but especially in a tournament. More often than not you are going to play someone you don't know, so instead of sliding to asshat mode try the opposite. It doesn't mean hand them the victory, it just means being open to a little give and take. I know this sounds insanely simple and it is even spelled out in the beginning of every 40k rule book, but damn does it always bears repeating! Because if nothing else Steve is now hit with cheater label and the whistle blower is forever a sore loser, avoidable if both were civil to each other.
Warning
Meat for Meta is rated editorial nonsense. These articles are meant to complain about some group, somewhere, that is playing the game for all the wrong reasons or simply to just make fun of 40k nerd rage.