We were recently made aware of allegations of intentional underperformance by Shitouren during the Into the Arcane Tactician's Crown to benefit LiLuo. As we’re committed to maintaining a fair and professional environment for all participants, we immediately began reviewing the situation in accordance with our standard processes.
After reviewing the situation and all available evidence, we have determined that the allegations are unsubstantiated. At this time, we are not opening formal disciplinary proceedings against Shitouren or LiLuo.
The full competitive ruling is available below.
Competitive Ruling:
This ruling has been presented in an exceptionally detailed manner to provide transparency and visibility into our assessment process for this specific case. While Riot Games remains committed to transparency, competitive integrity and fair decision-making, the level of detail in this ruling should not be interpreted as a standard expectation for future rulings.
TIMELINE
On March 15, 2025, Cao Liang (“Shitouren”) played in the final match of the day for the Into the Arcane Tactician’s Crown with seven other competitors, including Li Guangcan (“LiLuo”) and Yin Shengjie (“Saopimi”). Shortly after the conclusion of the match, Riot Games was made aware of allegations that Shitouren may have underperformed in order to deliberately lose in a match-up against Saopimi, which may have guaranteed LiLuo’s progression in the tournament.
Upon becoming aware of these allegations, Riot Games conducted a preliminary assessment of the facts, gathered further technical evidence from the Teamfight Tactics game team, reviewed the full game footage, and conducted live interviews with Shitouren and LiLou to gather individual testimonies and evidence.
RELEVANT RULES
Esports Professionals must abide by the Riot Games Esports Global Code of Conduct, 2025 edition (hereinafter also referred to as the “Global Code of Conduct”). In particular, the below provisions are relevant to the present cas

Framework for Assessment
To determine whether a breach of Article 4.2 of the Global Code of Conduct occurred, Riot Games conducted a multi-layered assessment, recognizing that the elements of performance and intent are deeply intertwined. A finding of intentional underperformance requires not only evidence of suboptimal gameplay but also a clear determination that the actions were deliberate:
Performance Evaluation – Riot Games assessed whether the player’s in-game performance fell below the expected competitive standard for the level of play and tournament in question. This evaluation considered objective gameplay data, tactical decision-making, and contextual factors such as game state, strategy execution, and the player's historical performance trends.
Intent Determination – If a player’s performance was deemed below expectations, Riot Games then examined whether this was the result of intentional actions. Determining intent requires an analysis of the player's behavior within the broader competitive context.
Given the inherent variability in professional gameplay, the burden of proof for intentional underperformance is high. A ruling of deliberate underperformance must be supported by compelling evidence that a player knowingly and intentionally acted against their competitive obligations. Mistakes, strategic experimentation, or unexpected performance fluctuations do not, on their own, constitute a violation of Article 4.2 of the Global Code of Conduct.
Considerations
Based on the evidence available, Riot Games carefully reviewed whether there were any indicators suggesting that Shitouren deliberately underperformed during the match. Based on this evaluation, Riot Games found no evidence to support a finding of intentional underperformance. Key considerations include, but are not limited to:
Platform Familiarity: Shitouren primarily competes in Fight for the Golden Spatula (FFGS), a licensed mobile version of TFT in China. The transition to competing on a deskto

Game Mechanics and External Factors:
Due to the "No Scout No Pivot" augment, Shitouren was unable to place Sevika onto the board for a full 6 Pit Fighter trait bonus.
A graphical error on broadcast falsely displayed completed items on Shitouren’s item bench. Our investigation revealed that this was not the case. Pre-combat, a Reforger was used on Shitouren’s Vi to remove a Redemption. The Redemption became a Protectors Vow that was placed on Vander. The other items were placed after the start of Combat, which was not reflected on the item bench graphic shown on broadcast as it stopped updating until the following round.
Shitouren competes primarily on mobile in FFGS; his unfamiliarity with competing on a desktop computer and a consistently high (200ms) ping resulted in Shitouren placing items and units slowly. This slow placement of items by Shitouren was observed throughout the tournament.
4. Consistent and Corroborated Testimony: During the interview process, Shitouren provided clear and internally consistent explanations for his decisions, which aligned with observed gameplay and external factors. No contradictions or irregularities were identified that would suggest deceptive intent.

No Indicators of External Influence or Match-Fixing
As part of its assessment, Riot Games conducted a thorough review to determine whether any external factors may have influenced Shitouren’s gameplay decisions, including incentives related to match-fixing for betting or competitive advantage, or any other additional motives.
In particular, Riot Games examined whether Shitouren had any reason to provide LiLuo with a competitive advantage. This assessment included an analysis of both players’ testimonies, open-source information, and review of all in-person and relevant digital communications between the players. Notably, but not limited to, the following:
During their respective interviews, both players provided consistent and corroborated testimonies, with no contradictions in their accounts.
No prior relationship between the players was identified, which is supported by open-source information.
There was no observed means of direct communication between the two players during the event. They were seated in opposite areas of the venue, and the on-site competition PCs did not allow for private messaging.
No evidence was found suggesting that Shitouren and LiLuo had previously been in contact or had engaged in discussions about the tournament outcome.
Shitouren and Liluo compete on different versions of the game, and qualified to the event through different tournament paths, indicating that they have limited opportunities to interact or regularly compete against each other.
Additionally, while Shitouren's gameplay decisions resulted in a suboptimal performance, there was no rational incentive for him to deliberately underperform. A higher placement in the tournament could have directly benefited Shitouren by securing a larger share of the prize pool, reinforcing his competitive motivation to win.
Based on these findings, Riot Games found no evidence to suggest that Shitouren had any external incentives or pre-existing agreements to underperform in favor of LiLuo or

白皮狗出来！官方都说没问题

Based on these findings, Riot Games found no evidence to suggest that Shitouren had any external incentives or pre-existing agreements to underperform in favor of LiLuo or anyone else.
Conclusion
While we are not fully satisfied that Shitouren’s overall performance in the game fell below expected standards, it is evident that the player made suboptimal decisions during the concerned round in question. While Shitouren’s strategic choices in the match were unconventional and may have resulted in a higher probability of losing the game, there is no compelling evidence to suggest that these decisions were made with the intent to deliberately underperform. Shitouren’s actions can be reasonably attributed to in-game adaptation, desperation due to a losing position, and mechanical constraints rather than a willful violation of competitive integrity. Accordingly, Riot Games finds that Shitouren did not breach Article 4.2 of the Riot Games Esports Global Code of Conduct. No disciplinary action will be taken in this matter.
Upon issuance of this ruling, the matter is considered closed, and the ruling is final and cannot be appealed. However, if new, substantive evidence comes to light, it may warrant a review of the matter at the discretion of Riot Games.

能不能贴一下链接

翻译一下啊

竞争性裁决：Shitouren & LiLuo
竞技 TFT
@CompeteTFT
·
2分钟
关注
我们最近了解到，Shitouren 在 Into the Arcane Tactician's Crown 期间故意表现不佳以使 LiLuo 受益。由于我们致力于为所有参与者维护公平和专业的环境，因此我们立即开始根据我们的标准流程审查情况。
在审查了情况和所有可用证据后，我们确定这些指控没有根据。目前，我们不会对 Shitouren 或 LiLuo 启动正式的纪律处分程序。
完整的竞争裁决如下。
竞争性裁决：
该裁决以非常详细的方式呈现，以便为我们对这一特定案件的评估过程提供透明度和可见性。虽然 Riot Games 仍然致力于透明度、竞争诚信和公平决策，但该裁决中的详细程度不应被解释为对未来裁决的标准期望。
时间线
2025 年 3 月 15 日，曹亮（“石土人”）与其他七名选手一起参加了当天的决赛，争夺 Into the Arcane Tactician's Crown，其中包括李光灿（“李罗”）和尹胜杰（“Saopimi”）。比赛结束后不久，Riot Games 获悉 Shitouren 可能在与 Saopimi 的比赛中故意输球，从而表现不佳的指控，这可能保证了 LiLuo 在比赛中的晋级。
在得知这些指控后，Riot Games 对事实进行了初步评估，从 Teamfight Tactics 游戏团队收集了进一步的技术证据，审查了完整的游戏画面，并对 Shitouren 和 LiLou 进行了现场采访，以收集个人证词和证据。
相关规则
电竞专业人士必须遵守 Riot Games 电竞全球行为准则，2025 年版（以下简称“全球行为准则”）。特别是，以下条款与本案有关：
第 4.2 条 表现不佳。电子竞技专业人士应履行各自的职责，并在所有 Riot 电子竞技比赛中尽其所能竞争。禁止故意表现不佳。
裁定
在对此事进行全面审查后，Riot Games 发现 Shitouren 没有违反《全球行为准则》第 4.2 条，该条款禁止故意表现不佳。
以下是调查结果的摘要。考虑了所有可用的事实和证据。以下内容仅指认为有必要解释案件的推理。
Riot Games 在本次审查中的目标是区分自然的竞争差异和故意表现不佳或操纵比赛，对游戏性能、战略决策、潜在意图和案件的任何其他相关要素进行严格且以事实为导向的分析。
评估框架
为了确定是否违反了《全球行为准则》第 4.2 条，Riot Games 进行了多层次的评估，认识到绩效和意图的要素紧密交织在一起。发现故意表现不佳不仅需要提供次优游戏性的证据，还需要明确确定这些行为是故意的：
表现评估 – Riot Games 评估玩家在游戏中的表现是否低于相关游戏和锦标赛水平的预期竞争标准。该评估考虑了客观的游戏数据、战术决策和上下文因素，例如游戏状态、策略执行和玩家的历史表现趋势。
意图确定 – 如果玩家的表现被认为低于预期，Riot Games 会检查这是否是故意行为的结果。确定意图需要分析玩家在更广泛的竞争环境中的行为。
鉴于专业游戏固有的可变性，故意表现不佳的举证责任很高。故意表现不佳的裁决必须有令人信服的证据支持，证明玩家故意违反了他们的竞争义务。错误、战略实验或意外的绩效波动本身并不构成对全球行为准则第 4.2 条的违反。
考虑
根据现有证据，Riot Games 仔细审查了是否有任何迹象表明 Shitouren 在比赛中故意表现不佳。根据这项评估，Riot Games 没有发现任何证据支持故意表现不佳的结论。关键注意事项包括但不限于：
平台熟悉度：Shitouren 主要参加 Fight for the Golden Spatula （FFGS） 比赛，这是 TFT 在中国的授权移动版本。在本次比赛中过渡到在台式电脑上比赛引入了一个调整系数，在评估 Shitouren 的整体游戏执行时考虑了该系数。
亏损头寸中的战略调整：
Shitouren 在第 6 轮到 3 胜之前连续输掉了六轮，这表明他们在比赛中的位置受到了损害。这六轮连败包括在第 5-5 轮输给 Saopimi，Shitouren 在第 6-3 轮面对的同一名球员。
Shitouren 在第 6-3 回合之前的准备阶段做出了一个可以说是有害的战略转变，这似乎是出于绝望而不是故意破坏。在现场采访中，Shitouren 向 Riot 表示，他认为无论如何他都可能会输掉比赛，并选择了全押调整以试图改变势头。
作为此次调整的一部分，Shitouren 将三个已完成的物品从三星 Violet 换成了 2 星 Vi，认为

还有呢，最关键的结果你没截图到。。

官方最权威的一集

用deepseek翻译了一下

帅！全球石头人给予重庆石头人力量，大脑宕机几天都无所谓了

亏损头寸中的战略调整：
Shitouren 在第 6 轮到 3 胜之前连续输掉了六轮，这表明他们在比赛中的位置受到了损害。这六轮连败包括在第 5-5 轮输给 Saopimi，Shitouren 在第 6-3 轮面对的同一名球员。
Shitouren 在第 6-3 回合之前的准备阶段做出了一个可以说是有害的战略转变，这似乎是出于绝望而不是故意破坏。在现场采访中，Shitouren 向 Riot 表示，他认为无论如何他都可能会输掉比赛，并选择了全押调整以试图改变势头。
作为此次调整的一部分，Shitouren 将三个已完成的物品从三星 Violet 换成了 2 星 Vi，认为这可能会改变结果。在采访中，他承认这可能削弱了他的董事会，但这是为了挽救不断恶化的状况。
“Long Distance Pals”的使用增强了定位决策，包括将 Vi 放在左上角以补充 Draven 的位置。
3. 游戏机制和外部因素：
由于“No Scout No Pivot”的增强，Shitouren 无法将 Sevika 放在棋盘上以获得完整的 6 Pit Fighter 特性加成。
广播中的图形错误地在 Shitouren 的物品长凳上显示已完成的物品。我们的调查显示，情况并非如此。战斗前，在 Shitouren 的 Vi 上使用了 Reforger 来移除 Redemption。救赎成为施加在 Vander 身上的保护者誓言。其他物品被放置在战斗开始后，这并没有反映在广播显示的物品基准图形上，因为它直到下一轮才停止更新。
Shitouren 在 FFGS 中主要在移动设备上竞争;他不熟悉在台式电脑上比赛，并且 ping 一直很高（200 毫秒），导致 Shitouren 放置物品和单位的速度很慢。Shitouren 的这种缓慢放置物品在整个比赛中都观察到。
4. 一致且确凿的证词：在面谈过程中，Shitouren 为他的决定提供了清晰且内部一致的解释，这与观察到的游戏玩法和外部因素一致。没有发现任何表明欺骗意图的矛盾或违规行为。