Wednesday, April 16, 2008

The Treasure Hunters

Is treasure hunt a game or a sport?

An interesting question raised by GM Vincent Woo when I met him for the first time last year. He co-clerked an unofficial hunt together with GM VK Chong. We hunters had just clocked in at the finish station and were waiting for the results. He said the answer can be both, depending on the circumstances. In his opinion, when the hunt is for the purpose of "having fun" and not really for the winning (such as the hunt we had that day), then it is more of a game. When it's about winning—and ultimately the fight for the prizes—then it is more of a sport; or something to that effect (GM Vincent, if you are reading this, please correct me if I am wrong).

To a certain extent, I agree with GM Vincent. However, that suggestion raises 2 important questions. Firstly, how many people agree with his opinion?; and secondly, where do we draw the line between game and sport?

As far as I am concerned, whenever I hunt, regardless of whether it's official or unofficial, I will try my best to win that hunt—although perhaps I won't go as far as stripping down to my underwear like Dato' Ramesh. But on the other hand, I will also be all out to have fun. In fact, if I can help it, I will try to have equal amount of both! In such a case, am I playing a game, or a sport, or both?

I have spoken to a fair number of treasure hunters, both the regulars and newbies. And I am more interested in the answers given by the newbies or not-so-regular hunters. They almost all said that they're only hunting to have fun on a weekend. In fact, many of the regular hunters gave me that answer too. Yet, in spite of "having had a lot of fun" throughout the hunt—which the newbies readily admitted—they still complained that they're going home empty-handed. Therefore, although they refused to admit it, in fact they wanted very much to win too! That's why I don't really buy that famous line: "I am hunting just to have fun", because that is not exactly true. Winning still means a lot to all teams. And after a while, if they still can't achieve the podium finish, some of them will give up altogether. Then new teams will come onto the scene, and the whole cycle will repeat itself. This is of course speaking from the general point of view.

The regular hunters—I mean those really serious ones—are generally all out to win, although they're also having fun while pursuing the top prizes. Unfortunately, only some of them win frequently. They're the cream of the masters—the best of the best. The rest don't win hunts very frequently, yet they continue hunting for the challenge and for the fun of it. It is in this sense that I am more inclined to believe that they really mean it when they say they want to have fun. For if they're not having fun, I fail to see why they'd continue hunting.

So in my opinion, all teams want badly to win hunts, and all want to have fun too. I don't believe that only the stronger teams want to win—that they no longer have fun if they don't win anything in the end.

The not-so-serious hunters want so much to win, but they're not willing to work for it. They forget that those master hunters have put in years of hard work; experienced failures upon failures; disappointments upon disappointments; paid for hunts upon hunts and ended up with nothing to bring home; they persevered, they invested in huge collections of dictionaries, laptops and state-of-the-art gadgets for hunting. They don't win hunts by accidents; they win because they deserve it!

Yet the new hunters want the winnings too. And so in this beloved Boleh-Land of ours, hunt organisers throw in games; often ridiculous ones, and increasingly more of them too. Coconut bowling, paper aeroplanes, dart-throwing, guessing number of grapes—you name it—plenty of those. Standards are kept low; and even if tough questions are included, they're very few and carry much lesser points. All these for the sake of, hopefully, giving the new hunters some opportunities to measure up to the masters. Yet at the end of the day, the masters, the best of the best, still always prevail.

In almost everything else in this Boleh-Land, we see the same thing happening. When I was in upper secondary school, no calculators were allowed. These days all the kids have calculators—even in exams. Yes, I know we're trying to achieve the so-called "developed nation" status by 2020. I guess it would look good on paper if a big majority of our citizens have at least SPM qualification. But what is the value of those SPM certificates?

During the Rotarian District Assembly last week, we invited a Sabahan national swimmer, Alex Lim to share his experience. He's without doubt one of the best swimmers we've had in Malaysia. He said something which struck me as very significant. I just wished some of the new hunters were there to listen to what he had to say.

His daily routine includes training which starts at 5:00 am in the morning for 3 hours; then followed by another 3-hour session in the afternoon. He said when he swim against the other world class swimmers, his main target is to break his own frontier—that his main focus is to beat his own time. He said even if he loses a race, but if he breaks his best time, he's very happy. On the other hand, even if he wins gold but fails to improve on his time, he won't be very happy. And that, folks, was from an Olympic-bound swimmer. It takes a lot of hard work and sacrifices to become a champion!

I am not a master hunter; and I am also relatively new to this game/sport (I have 11 hunts under my belt so far). Therefore I am not speaking to the new hunters in a capacity of a master talking down to the lowly-rated rivals; rather I am speaking to my peers. Let us all rise to the challenge and fight—I mean really fight without handicaps. I am sure the win—when we eventually achieve it—will be much sweeter if it's not because we were lucky to have guessed the correct number of grapes or the coconut somehow rolled in a straight line on our throw.


CK said...

game vs sports?
hm...maybe get it inducted as an event in Olympic? haha...

game or sports, it doesn't matter. as long as we get the fun out of it, or whatever reason the hunters join in the 1st place.

Cornelius said...

Treasure hunt as an Olympic event, huh? Not likely to happen within our generation, ck.

Right now, there is just no clear-cut rules and regulations for this game/sport. You can't have an Olympic event without clear rules and regulations.

However, last year, a different kind of "hunt", some sort of "online treasure hunt" was organised by Volvo. It was a month-long hunt which forced many of those freak hunters to go through sleepless nights trying to crack puzzles etc online. Although there were puzzles, the nature of those puzzles were hardly anything close to what we have in our motorised hunts. Who knows, maybe Volvo will organise another one this year. But I sure as hell am not going to join. The mere thought of losing sleep for the whole month scares me immensely!

Lan Rambai said...

I am a newbie in treasure hunting but i just do not agree to the coconut bowling, sumpit etc just to make it easier for me to win. Sampai sekarang menyesal masuk Hunt for Miss Yasmin.

game or sport? whatever they call it.. i hunt to win. if no desire to win... why the hell want to "pecahkan kepala" on a weekend???

Cornelius said...


I wasn't in the Yasmin Hunt, but from what I heard, the organiser was overdoing it with the games. Thankfully, not all the hunts in KL are like that—at least not yet.

For this particular hunt, even the "best of the best" were defeated. It's like pitting the World Boxing Champ with one of his arms—his strong arm—chained up to the rink-side. And then both his legs are also tied up together.

Thank goodness the "best of the best" did not win in the Yasmin this year. Otherwise, the next time they organise the Yasmin, there will only be 1 hunt question; and the rest will be games throughout.

Anonymous said...

I know of "not-so-regulars" who hunt for the fun of it. These hunters join hunts only once or twice per year. Their main aim is to have fun and enjoy the hunt experience, dinner, and probably the overnight stay at the hotel. Winning a prize (even if it was just a blender to be shared among 4 people) just makes the outing more memorable. Again, their main aim is to have fun... But, there are also the not-so-serious hunters who probably join 5 hunts or more per year and are more keen on winning something than just enjoying the dinner and seaside upon reaching the destination. After a number of hunts, they would like something more than just fun. To these people, the prize becomes more important. And of course, there are those who are there just to win. I remember at the recent hunt around KL by Trailblazers, kokseng was quite pushy about "collaboration" and kinda insisted on an answer by the CoC on the punishment to be given if a team is found to do so. Of course, he is probably trying to ensure all is fair game here. He is probably worried that some not-so-regular teams might share answers and jeopardize his chances of winning. Aiyah... tutup mata-lah... newbies will tend to share among themselves, let them do so-lah... i remember some years ago in a hunt in Sunway Lagoon, he also wasn't very ethical by starting to look at the questions (curi-curi go into the toilet to buka the envelop) prior to the offical flagoff eventhough the CoC then had repeatedly warned not to open the envelop prior to official flagoff.

Joyce said...

Our team I would say is relatively new to this 'game'/'sport' and we have slowly grown addicted to it. Because we are not quite consistent enough, we tend to have highs and lows depending on which CoC we have more experience with. I have not joined hunts where luck was a factor of winning (bowling coconuts or counting grapes or whatsoever), but I think I'd prefer a hunt where brains takes precedence over brawns. We spoke to the famous grandmaster of hunts in last year Kiwanis hunt, and he was the one who said, this is not for fun, its a 'sport' and since then, we have definately adopted a more kiasu attitude, which I think is OK as well!

Cornelius said...

Arrived home from my run; had dinner; and now find some comments waiting for me. Let's see... let me respond to the Anonymous friend first.

I wasn't there at the TrialBlazers Hunt; so I'm unable to comment on any specific event that day.

This is not responding specifically to your comment on Kok Seng, but I feel very strongly that rules should be strictly adhered to by everyone. It is either all or nothing. If we are to "tutup mata" merely because the culprit(s) is/are a new hunter(s), then we need to be prepared to identify the exact point where we should "buka mata".

I'd like to be fair to all if I can help it. I don't claim to be perfect in my dealings. In my questions, my tulips, the manner I award points—these are all very important to me. For where is my accountability as the CoC if I allow rampant cheating?

As a hunter, if I witnessed a dishonest act by another party, I will bring it up to the CoC too. And I'd do that not because I'm afraid that that team is gonna beat me; rather it is because it's the right thing to do.

You must have noticed how I criticised some hunt questions here in my blog. It doesn't meant that I'm belittling the respective CoCs. And don't get me wrong—my team did get some of those questions correctly answered too! I raised them up because in my opinion we could all learn from the discussions—nothing personal to the CoCs. Honest!

So I would try my best to criticise any teams found cheating, even if they're the so-called newbies. We must instill the spirit of good sportsmanship in treasure hunts.

As for "curi-curi buka the envelop in the toilet", that is something I can't comment. After I had stopped laughing out loud to the extent of tears in my eyes, I can only wonder how did you know Kok Seng did that, unless you were there in the toilet with him?

It would make an interesting dinner time topic of conversation, but I'm just thinking why the CoC released those envelops in the first place? I think in the legal field, it is called entrapment.

As for ethics in treasure hunt, I have discussed this before in the blog. I must look it up to remind myself what was my view on this topic... hehehe

Cornelius said...

Hi Joyce,

First of all, I must say that I'm glad to know that you're gradually becoming addicted to treasure hunts. And I would echo Mike's comment in your blog—that you'd seriously reconsider about doing the Kiwanis next month. Besides, I would love to meet a real-life marathon runner to get some tips. I know another freak runner who'd travel around the country to collect running medals.

Yes, Joyce, that's the spirit; even if the organisers want to include some "fun games" into hunts, the bigger portion of the scores should still come from the questions and treasures. It is for this reason that many of the hunters in KK have said to me, that they'd gladly forgo the KK City Hunt if we have more hunts in KK.

As for the kiasu attitude, don't feel ashamed to admit it. I am kiasu too whenever I hunt. And let me tell you that I've had the opportunities to tumpang some grandmaster teams; they're equally kiasu too! That's when you can see people having trouble controlling their temper; or how they would hold their urine bladder for fear of losing time. May I repeat, it takes a lot of hard work and sacrifices to become a champion. But being a marathon runner, I suppose you already know that.

CK said...

so, WHEN'S THE NEXT HUNT??????????????????????????????????????????????????

Cornelius said...


Unfortunately the next hunt in KK will be the Sutera Harbour-Angkatan Hebat Hunt scheduled for 29 June (It was postponed from 27th this month). Because of the postponement, I'll be hunting in the West instead; in fact, all the way to Penang. The last time I was in Penang must have been at least 25 years ago. It takes a treasure hunt to bring me all the way back to Penang again! Then next month, I'm doing the Kiwanis. It'll be the first time I'll be joining these hunts. The excitement is mounting!

As for my proposed hunt, originally scheduled for June, it's been postponed to July or August because my sports club is concerned that it will clash with the Sutera.

And don't worry, I will still do my KK Challenge 4. But it will probably come during the third quarter of this year. Keep trying to push Main Tembak to do at least 1 Trash Hunt for us lah. I'm sure the KK hunters would like to try a different style.

Anonymous said...

How i know he did it? Because i was standing at the entrance of the toilet and noticed many people going in with envelops. Being curious, a check revealed that all were inside opening up sealed envelops to "buy" extra time. If you see a newbie (an unrecognizable face) doing it, never mind-lah. If you see the pros doing it, then you lose respect for them. I will give the newbies the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they were not too clear on the Dos and the Don'ts. Maybe they were overwhelmed by the whole new hunting experience. But for the pros, no excuses!

And of course, sometimes CoCs need to hand out the questions earlier for reasons such as having a 180 team participation and the flagoff is a mass flagoff type. Also, if there were several typo errors/wrong pictures/wrong routes to be clarified.

Cornelius said...

We seem to have different ideas, my friend.

My suggestions are:

1) We don't really need to throw in ridiculous handicaps to give advantage to the new hunters, because the end result is almost always the same anyway—the master teams usually win anyway;

2) Rules and regulations should apply uniformly to everyone, irrespective of hunting skills. There is no point to have rules and regulations if they're only created to punish those who've worked hard to reach a higher level of hunting mastery.

You seem to suggest some sort of leeway for the not-so-regular hunters. You seem to put more emphasis on the cheating "pro", but not the so-called newbies, and I find that odd. Why the double standard? If indeed all those people did what you said they did in the toilet (should this be referred to as the toiletgate scandal?), then all should be faulted, not only the "pro".

Organisers throw in games to balance the advantage of hard-earned cryptic knowledge of the regulars. And then now, if I understand you correctly, it's OK for the newbies not to follow rules too. So what is next?

At the rate we are going, sooner or later, the masters will have to walk in a motorised hunt while the new hunters can ride in their vehicles. This big joke has to stop somewhere, and the sooner the new hunters realise it, the better.

The message I'm trying to put across in this thread is for my fellow new hunters should learn to rise to the challenge without asking for handicaps.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, i think i deviated a little. What i was trying to get at was if the pros want so strict enforcement in rules, make sure they are truly abiding to them as well. The CoC of the Trailblazer hunt was put in a tight spot to answer his question accurately and i think he actually did that pretty well.

I don't suggest a handicap to be given to newbies, but, in some cases, where they share answers, tutup mata-lah. They are not going to win anyway. How many of the GM have not shared answers in their past? Sometimes, you can even see the pros (husband joins one team while wife joins another) and both end up scoring identical (or almost identical) scores. This also happens with siblings or parents and children. Coincidence?

Take the analogy of our good Dr Chua. I am sure many other man has done the same. But, he was the Health Minister. It is viewed differently. So, when i see the pros cheat, of course i lose respect-lah. The rest of the newbies, heck, i don't even know them.

Cornelius said...

I am an advocate of leadership by example; so yes, I agree with you that—speaking from the general point of view—it is not enough to insist on fair play and strict adherence to the rules; the preacher must practise it too!

On "tutup mata" when the new hunters share their answers with each other, I beg to differ. In my opinion, it is not really about winning or losing; rather it's about good sportsmanship.

Besides, I don't quite agree that it's OK for them to cheat because "they're not going to win anyway". As you probably already know, in a hunt where the questions are "newbie-friendly", the scores would be very close between teams. By the mere fact that the new teams sharing a couple of answers with each other, that could enhance their overall score by, say, 5 points. That's more than enough to push them up by a few rungs, thus inevitably affecting the entire positions of the other teams, although perhaps they still didn't win the hunt.

Although these cheating teams didn't win the hunt, their act had some repercussions to the other teams anyway.

I was not there at the TrialBlazers, but perhaps if there were no cheating, who knows maybe she would've achieved the top 15 position instead of top 20; and that in turn would have made a difference in the number of teams participating in the Kiwanis Hunt? It is very easy to dismiss the dishonest acts of the new hunters on account of "they won't win anyway". But the truth of the matter is that some other people, one way or another, will get hurt.

May I repeat, rules and regulations must be obeyed by everyone!

Anonymous said...

Hi Corny and all who read this blog & comments,

I guess you would have been expecting a reply from me in your blog over the accusation pointed at me by "anonymous Apr 17 4.20pm' - yes you, I am making specific reference to you.

Sunway Lagoon hunt? Me going to the toilet just to open the Q paper early? And you were standing outside the toilet doing what I dread to wonder in addition to that you have gone in there and have been satified with your sorry self that you have already opened your envelope and seen all the Qs and hence have the inferior complex that others are doing the same and hence negating your pitiful 5 seconds advantage? And quote "..a check revealed that all were inside opening up (not their zips but the) sealed envelops.." ?? I wonder what 'check' means - better get our beloved anti-rasuah Polis to be on the look out for a pervert like you or maybe you are a paedophile opportunist? If one was to do such thing (ie. opening the Q paper, not molest a child like the intentions of anonymous, perhaps?), why would you want to go to the stinky toilet where everyone is going to be there and witness you doing it? Duh?? Also, if there were going to be key messages from the COC, you wouldn't want to miss any part of that briefing by hiding yourself in the toilet and "buy time"?? - Double DUH??! Key tip to all - don't miss final briefings and be attentive.

My dear anonymous fellow Malaysian (if you are one), I don't know who you saw that day, I don't know your motives are or what it is that you have against me but I will not stand here quietly to take that accusation from you or anyone, especially from someone who still believes in the sick tutup mata syndrome that our country has fallen into. Will we ever progress with such mentality?

Given that the last I could recall participating in any form of treasure hunt involving Sunway Lagoon, that would be 31 Dec 2003, and the first being the Tahun Melawat Selangor back in 2000 I think (I started hunting in 1999), I would deduce that you have been in the treasure hunt circle for 'eons' compared to a newbie today, hence your continued mentality and support for 'tutup mata' surely is a reflection of your self-pitied life, one who refuse to progress or simply just cannot progress and see the bigger picture of all things and choosing to remain anonymous while making accusation at others? I rest my case, to the rest of the readers, you make your own judgement.

Kok Seng - I don't hide behind pseudonyms

Corny - my apologies for taking up so much space on your blog.

Anonymous said...

I totally agree with with Corn and Kok Seng regarding the fairness of hunts. Tutup-mata saja??? You've gotta be kidding Anonymous.

Till now I have joined about less than 20 hunts. When I started with my very first walk-hunt, I witnessed with my own eyes several teams collaborating and I remembered thinking to myself "Hey how can they do that?? Isn't that cheating???". At that time I was so green and didn't know much about rules of hunts, but still, it's a matter of principles. Well, those teams who collaborated didn't win anything, but my team (just 2 ppl) won 5th.

A very wise Master hunter and friend told me that true hunters do not and will never collaborate amongst participating teams. Those words I hold close to my heart.

Anonymous, perhaps some new hunters (or not so new) may share answers, but not all will!! If the COCs just "tutup mata" all the time, what kind of impression are you asking them to portray? As COCs, it is their duty to uphold the integrity of hunts, making it fair (in terms of rules) for all, regulars or non-regulars. In this way, new hunters will learn there are simple rules to this game/sport. In fact, it is not the COCs duty alone to uphold the integrity of hunts, it is ours too, newbies and regulars.

If we are forever going to play the "tutup mata" game, then how would you help improve this sitation (or any situation for that matter)?
"Maybe they [newbies] were not too clear on the Dos and the Don'ts".

I've got plenty more to say but wouldn't want dearest Corn to bar me from commenting on his blog again! ;)

Cornelius said...

Well, well, well, it seems that we have more people joining in the "discussion", huh?

Thanks to Kok Seng and Claire for getting onboard; and thanks for your support too. I'm glad to note that so far, new and regular hunters are all agreeable that it's not necessary to throw in handicaps into hunts. However, I suspect that many others might disagree. After all, this is Malaysia we're talking about; we're so used to getting help, so much so that it's so hard for us to stand and fight on our own.

Regarding the toiletgate debate, I say nothing. I am still in awe, but at the same time I am immensely amused too! I did not expect that this thread could attract such a debate!... hahaha

I think this thread is easily the most commented on so far in this blog. Please feel free to comment to voice out your opinions, and don't worry too much about taking up space. However, perhaps it's a good idea not to get personal please. That will only spoil what would instead be an interesting and valuable discussion.

Pray continue commenting, while I start working on the next discussion!

Anonymous said...

Not out to discredit any COCs - merely disagree with another 'tutup mata' variant where the COC/rep accepts inaccurate/incomplete answers from some teams (eg. not in top ten) and even elaborates that marking will be very strict for the top teams. This would be justified on the grounds of giving encouragement to weaker teams while at the same time not affecting the top 10 positions. How would you like to be in the team which would otherwise have received the 20th & last available prize but finished empty-handed due to the points of encouragement given to another team ? 20th place usually means nothing to teams who expect handicaps, but can mean a lot to teams who have striven hard for the achievement of getting a prize and not its monetary value.

Cornelius said...

Bullseye, renroc!

Indeed it is very easy to forget that leniency to some teams might result in injustice to other teams. Although the podium finishers are unaffected, many others who deserve the lower prize-positions might be affected.

I know that many of them want the recognition or personal satisfaction of achieving a certain position in the field. I should know, because whenever I go to West Malaysia to hunt, the monetery value of the prizes are but a small factor. With the amount of money I have to spend, it's highly unlikely that I can make a profit anyway. After allowing for the air tickets, bus & taxi fares, hotel accommodation etc, I'd be lucky if I can break even with a first prize winning. Thankfully, my good friend was kind enough to insist that I stay in his house.

At the end of the day, my main goal is, besides trying to learn something through the experience of the hunt, is to achieve a certain position in the hunt. I'll be damn if I failed to achieve my goal because some other teams pushed me down the rungs through the leniency of the CoC!

"Tutup mata" is in itself a handicap for the weaker teams, and it is the worst kind of handicap which can bring more harm than good. Let's apply the same standard to all the hunters.

Anonymous said...

kokseng, after writing so much and yet you didn't even deny being involved in the toiletgate scandal by opening it up early. For that, i applaud you. At least you know your boundaries. Good that you have the integrity not to tell a lie here. Anyhow, people who have been in the hunting circle for some time would already know how "ethical" you are(were) in hunting. But, generally, those are deemed as okay-lah. Others are also doing it, so don't bring up the matter to make such a fuss.

But, ethics is quite subjective. Should we be following all rules? Honestly, now how many of us can actually claim that we have not driven over the speed limit during a hunt? Driving recklessly while endangering others life on the road just to avoid being disqualified? Come on... be honest... Now, is that important? Should a team driving recklessly be disqualified? How many times have we seen that happening? Do we just tutup-mata? Is it fair to those who were disqualified for arriving after the DQ time for following ALL traffic rules?

Cornelius said...

Wow! We have gone astray from the original purpose of this thread, haven't we? But no matter, the point you have raised is interesting all the same, and I don't mind to indulge in this side discussion.

I shall carefully refrain from commenting on your specific reference to Kok Seng, as I know nothing about the "toiletgate scandal". Neither am I aware of what those people "in the hunting circle" know about ethical/unethical practice of the familiar faces.

I'd like to respond to this latest example that you've brought up—the one about driving beyond the speed limit; whether it's fair to those who lose out for obeying traffic rules. But I will do that later. I have an opinion on this subject, but would like to deliberate a little bit more, while at the same time allowing others the opportunity to respond.

Cornelius said...

Well, it seems that no one is keen to comment on driving beyond speed limit in treasure hunts.

This thing about speeding as raised by Anonymous is indeed against the "rule". I guess it is a norm in most hunts that the CoC will announce that "this is not a race; drive carefully and obey all traffic rules at all times."

But I am a realistic person; I am willing to accept that nothing is perfect. So there must be a balance. Some people will break the rules! It is impossible to to conduct an "air-tight" hunt in the sense that all the hunters will follow every single "rule". So in some cases, I will be lenient.

Let's consider the first scenario:

Every team is given the same amount of hunting time. All are subject to the same set of questions & treasures etc. But when the CoC marks the answers, he is lenient to some teams. There is nothing that the team which loses a prize position to another team can do, because their fate is in the hands of the unfair CoC. By answering their questions in full and completely does not help, because the team which gives the incomplete answers are awarded points they do not deserve. In this case, there is nothing the team that obeys the rules can do—they are totally at the mercy of the CoC. The responsibility, therefore, rests fully on the fairness of the CoC in this case.

Now let's consider a second scenario:

All the hunters are flagged off; all given 6 hours for the hunt. They all have full control on how they want to use that 6 hours. They can drop any question they like; they can spend 1 hour on a single question; it is entirely up to them how they want to manage their time.

And now they're in the final homestretch. They're rushing like mad to the finish control. Some will drive like the formula 1 drivers; some won't. Some will break the rule by speeding; some won't. And in the end, the CoC decides to be lenient to those who didn't obey the speed limit.

BUT! in this case, the losing team which obeyed the speed limit, had a choice. They're not totally at the mercy of the CoC. They could have managed their time properly and arrived with time to spare at the finish station. They had control on their fate. It is up to them!

From the 2 scenario above, we can see that in the first example, there's nothing the team can do to get a different outcome. But in the second example, they can do something for a different outcome.

Obviously it is not a perfect situation. But I don't consider breaking speed limit as cheating. Even if you consider that cheating, it is nothing like collaborating between teams.

Anonymous said...

By saying that breaking the speed limit rule is the norm as most hunters do it and therefore, acceptable is almost like saying that corruption is the norm in the present government, so, just tutup mata. Should we? Which brings us to the question of where do we draw the line when it comes to penalising for breaking the rules.

Take a look at one of the briefing notes (available at mike's site)
"(4) DO NOT SPEED! A Treasure Hunt is NOT a race." is bolded and placed in the "Rules" section. On the other hand, "3. You may use your hand phones for reference but NOT to collaborate with other teams." is not bolded and just placed under the "tips" section. Now, honestly speaking, if you were a newbie, please tell me which one is more important to abide to? A rule or a tip?

Now taking scenario 2 from what you have mentioned, assuming both teams spent equal time in the question sectors but the end point is some distance away (say 30km). Both teams were already on the verge of being DQ. One team decided to break the traffic rules by speeding and driving past a red light (this actually happened in the Sun Hunt of 2007 near Royal Selangor). While the other chose to abide by traffic rules and was eventually DQ-ed for arriving too late. Now, is it fair that one team got a prize while the other gets DQ-ed for obeying rules?

Anonymous said...

Oh! I do need to point out that i don't support cheating by way of collaboration. I just feel that if it is not going to make much of a difference, just tutup mata. Just like in the case of breaking traffic rules, reading questions earlier, some people will eventually do it. Close an eye-lah...

I am sure you have also heard some pros proudly exclaiming that they drove like F1 drivers and eventually made it on time. Driving pass the speed limit on a rainy day on the highway to make it to Malacca. Is this something to be proud of?

Cornelius said...

My friend, I have more or less reached a point where I'm having difficulties trying to fathom your mentality in this whole thing. I'm beginning to understand why other people won't even bother to respond to you. But I will try to keep "entertaining" all my visitors for as long as I can.

When I set out to post this thread, I intended to send out an important message to the hunters, especially the new ones. Firstly, to fight for the prizes without relying on handicaps; and secondly, to instill the spirit of good sportsmanship by not cheating.

You've since brought the discussion to the "toiletgate scandal"; and apparently trying to equate "sharing answers between teams", and "breaking speed limit".

The nature of those 2 "crimes" are totally different, and the possible repercussions upon the hunt results are also different. There is nothing the rule-abiding teams can do to deny the collaborating teams from overwhelming them if the CoC does nothing. But in time management, the rule-abiding teams has all the power to manage their time and arrive at the finish station within the allocated time without the need to speed. All teams mismanage their time at their own peril—that is not the fault of the CoC. Don't go blaming the CoC when you mismanage your time.

Regarding the link to Mike's blog, I have not bothered to check it out. I'm sure what's printed there is exactly as you said. But I think you've gone too far out from this topic; and I can't see how they can help to support your "tutup mata" idea. However, perhaps Mike would like to comment further on this.

Anonymous said...

the link is broken. anyway i have never used those words in my briefing notes, so I believe the document is not mine.

CoC should not include rules that he can't govern

Anonymous said...

Sorry Mike. I need to clarify to everyone that it is not from any of your hunts. It was the Maritime hunt. Just that you were kind enough to provide updates and links to briefing notes of hunts. I quoted from it because it demonstrates what i am saying about "rules" and it is available to everyone if they need to check out the authenticity.
Okay, Corny, i don't mean to upset you in your own blog. I am merely stating what i know and feel. No offence to you intended. I just feel that if really want to play a fair game, then ALL rules should be followed (irregardless deemed the norm or not). No exceptions to the rule. But, knowing the complexity involved, close an eye for trivial cases.

Cornelius said...

Don't worry about it, my friend. It takes a great deal more to make me upset (smile).

Well, obviously this hasn't been a very fruitful discussion. I guess it takes all sorts to make the world. Reading between the lines, I think we have at least agreed that there is a need to play a fair game. But you are of the opinion that we can close an eye for trivial cases. I suppose I can agree with that too, except that you have a more liberal and wider interpretation of that word "trivial".