The 4 types of valid disputes
1. A source error.
The source used for the resolution published false information, and the challenge was resolved on that basis. You prove it with the official source.
Example: the source published “Real Madrid 2-1 Barcelona” while the official score, published by La Liga, is “Real Madrid 1-2 Barcelona”. If you had taken a side on Barcelona, your dispute is founded.
2. A corrected source.
The resolution relied on a source that was later retracted or corrected.
3. A misread wording.
The event's question could be read two ways, and the resolution went with a reading that doesn't match its wording.
Example: the challenge was about “a win in regular time” and the resolution counted extra time. Rely on the event's exact wording.
4. An official result changed afterwards.
The result was officially changed after the resolution: a sanction, a sports body's decision, an investigation.
Invalid reasons
1. “I'm disputing because I lost, it's unfair.” You took a risk; losing isn't a reason.
2. “My opponent got lucky.” Luck is part of the challenge.
3. “I changed my mind about what the wording meant after the resolution.” The wording is there to read before you start the challenge.
4. “The result is right, but I'm disputing the commission.” A dispute is about the result, not the commission: for a commission question, write to support at support@ktkarena.com.
5. “I'm disputing just in case.” Without a precise factual reason, the dispute is rejected.
The gray area
Some cases call for interpretation:
- Two sources that contradict each other: the event page shows its verification source when there is one (“View source”). Start from it, and show where it's wrong.
- An event in several phases (sets, extra time, penalties): reread the event's exact wording, it's what the challenge is about.
In every case, the administrator has only two outcomes: uphold the result or correct it. An event that has already been resolved can no longer be canceled.