So it was only an experiment to reveal auto-target users?
Well, I should have doubted that you d make such a tournament with free entrance.

But by doing that you biased the results of your experiment.
If you wanted to see only those who use auto target you should have made exactly the same tourney , with same rules and no auto-target.
Yet, you did a free entrance tourney. As a consequence people who cant join a paying tourney came in this one because it is free.

If you want to examine the influence of a parameter, you first have to fix the other parameters.

As an example, I would take myself who wanted to join the AT tournament and not the non-AT tournament. Reasons:

- It is free, the other was not
- I was not aware of the former tournament when it began.
- I had no Uv.
- I was not likeely to have a bearable computer.

And however I never use auto-aim.

This to say that it was not a concluding experiment and you cannot use your observations about it to make a list of auto-aimers since there are a lot of other parameters to take into account.

The current tourney was free, the contestants were from the record thread.

"If it's a matter of being able to record i recommend juma style."

No, it's not.

"The current tourney was free, the contestants were from the record thread."

You may have a point.

What if I told you that one might join the tournament to embarrass AT users.

Sure, especially for some of us who joined this tournament and considered playing without AT against AT.

"So it's safe to say anyone who joined the fake tournament is in fact an AT noob."

So it' not.

Has somewhere

o...k?