EPT
[SPOILERS] Negative attitudes on the TSL and the ro32 winn…
| Blogs > Node |
|
Vain
Netherlands1115 Posts
| ||
|
Alou
United States3748 Posts
| ||
|
McKTenor13
United States1383 Posts
despite my plea for everyone holding hands and getting along, I believe that many of the foreign players that did knock out Korean favorites in this tournament would not even qualify for code A. so congratz to the winners! they deserve their victories. long live the TSL! | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
| ||
|
Weasel-
Canada1556 Posts
| ||
|
garbanzo
United States4046 Posts
...TSL3 has been so amazing! I think it literally has some of the best games of SC2 I've ever watched. I'm so bummed that there won't be any games next week. Maybe the MLG can also be super awesome. | ||
|
dRaW
Canada5744 Posts
Anyway, the matches are quite good there are some latency issues but as Jinro mentioned if you practice on the servers they are playable (once again MC completely owned, why can't the others?) - Fanboys need to stop being so die hard and just appreciate good starcraft, if your player happens to lose just take it like a man, it's not like they are retiring after 1 bo3 loss. | ||
|
seanisgrand
United States1039 Posts
People can say what they want about CrunCher but one thing is for sure, he punked IdrA in the games and in his hilarious ee han BM timing about as good as anyone could ever dream of. That was a moment that will live forever. That is what the TSL is all about. | ||
|
TheAura
96 Posts
The koreans and GSL-ers probably practice at least twice as some as the "no names", and even if practice time is on par I guarantee that their practice is alot more effective. Living in a house with many other top notch players going over every strategy and tactic possible while mastering the mechanics of the game. Now I didnt expect every korean to go through, there will always be upsets, but my conclusion from the Ro32 is that the game does not reward hard work beyond a certain level. You master the mechanics and a few timings and basic strats, and you can do very well. The countless hours of working with teammates and breaking down the game as much as im sure they do in the pro-houses just is not worth it, and i find that very bad for the future of e-sports. This game is too random, and has too many forced builds (especially for zerg), and the game is simply not hard enough. people who play almost casually, compared to the koreans, can easily compete with people who literally discuss builds and practice for 10+ hours a day with others. For example take QXC. He is obviously a very skilled player, but he is in school and that likely takes a good chunk of his time. He was against genius, who im sure has practiced much more, and likely effectively, than QXC. This is not right in any sport, maybe the few really good natural players can win without practicing as much, but not like this. This is not good for SC2, it needs to become more difficult such that the training regime shown in korea will actually pay off. On that note, I am not bashing the winners as they played the game and won, so congratulations to them. But i do think that alot of the players that won did not know nearly as much about the game as whom they beat, and that the simplicity of SC2 is what let them play as if they are equally skilled. Take cruncher for example, in game 2 he was outclassed so hard that if i only saw that much i would wonder why he was even in the tournament. In game 1 and 3 though, he simply just used easy builds that zerg has alot of trouble holding off, regardless of who is playing it. But congrats to him, as that was just epic lol.TL:DR; 1) Games is way too easy for pro level 2) Practice does not pay off like it should in competitions where there is so much money on the line 3) Winners won fair and square, but I feel that they are still not as good at all as whom they beat and won because of point 2) and the randomness of the game. 4) Looking forward to rest of tournament, GL to players. | ||
|
HULKAMANIA
United States1219 Posts
On March 28 2011 08:32 Node wrote: Hate to break it to you guys, but if NesTea, FruitDealer, MVP, IdrA, Jinro, HuK, Strelok, Ciara, Loner, Genius, NightEnD, Ret, Fenix, Haypro, ZeeRaX, or TLO were the better players on the day they lost, they would have won their games. Being a better player doesn't mean that you're stronger in long macro games, that you've got godlike micro, that you've got better multitasking, that your APM is higher, that you picked the "overpowered" race, or any combination of the above. If you're a better player, you win. If anything else mattered, then we wouldn't play the damn game -- we would pit players against a Very Easy AI, and whoever has a higher APM after fifteen minutes of pumping drones wins. There are too many variables in a game of StarCraft to declare an arbitrary combination of them an approximation of "skill". Skill wins games. Period. See I tend to think that a hard-line stance like this one (i.e.: the winner is the better player by definition) fails to accurately reflect the situation just as badly as the hard-line fanboy stance (i.e.: so-and-so only lost because of lag or imbalance or a coin-flip build order). Both extremes, predictably enough, are incorrect and inflammatory. The truth is somewhere in between them. I mean can’t you think of literally dozens of legitimate reasons why a superior player might lose to an inferior player? But in your post you’re insisting that the winner is ipso facto the “more skilled” of the two, at least “on that day.” That’s kind of strange idea to me. What if a player wins because he maphacks? Is he more skilled on that day? What if a player wins because his opponent has a heart attack? Did skill win the day? One if one player wins because his opponent becomes violently ill or is playing in subzero temperature or is blindfolded? What if tomorrow Blizzard patched SC2 so that zerglings had 2000 health—would all the one sided beatdowns of Protoss and Terrans be most parsimoniously explained in terms of the newfound skill of the Zerg users? Do you see what I mean? These examples are extreme and ridiculous hypotheticals! Of course! I agree. But that’s why they’re good responses to the extreme notion that the better player on a given day always wins his game. There are real factors that play into who wins a game other than skill and to ignore them is to think in the same type of unhelpful, simplistic terms that makes the partisan rhetoric of aggrieved fanboys so obnoxious to yours and my ears. You’re right about “skill” being a complex and various concept. So then let’s not turn it around and treat it like it can be accurately determined by a simple win/loss litmus test. Look: I totally agree with you that the negative attitudes certain viewers have expressed do not reflect well on our community. I totally agree that it can be a real buzzkill at times. I totally agree with you that it’s annoying to listen to the sort of transparent excuses people are offering in defense of their chosen hero. But let’s not radicalize in the opposite direction and start making similarly insupportable statements to defend the status quo. That’s called being a reactionary. Let’s instead focus on the TSL for what it is, a pretty badass tournament that’s exhibiting a lot of really, in my opinion, interesting games. And let’s remember that this tournament, or any tournament really, definitely takes skill to win but that things like luck and contest rules/conditions and the circumstances of a given player’s life and the current state of the game and the current state of the (forgive me, Chill!) metagame all factor into as well—to various extents. Let’s not oversimplify in either direction. Enjoying the TSL (or anything really!) is not about being “right,” its about appreciating what you happen to find most beautiful or interesting or cool about it. Let’s leave all of these antagonistic positions like that player A lost because he was cheated by fate or that player B won because SC2 is played in some perfect vacuum where only skill matters. Let’s leave off the debates. Try our best to ignore those partisans who simply can’t stop complaining. And just appreciate the insanity and wonder of the TSL3 for what it is. | ||
|
KingDime
Canada750 Posts
Practice doesn't always mean you'll compete well in the important games. Take Joe Thornton from the San Jose sharks in hockey. Supposedly he's a great player who has put many years into playing hockey at a high level but many would argue that he's a liability in the playoffs who does not have the will to win the important games. This is what I've been seeing out of Genius lately. I'm under the impression that he was outplayed in every aspect of both games, micro, macro etc. Heck, you could Mondragon as a great example here. From what I saw from other threads, he didn't have much practice in BW before TSL2 and was beating seasoned players who had been practicing hard for TSL2. (Might be wrong on this**) | ||
|
Warrice
United States565 Posts
Thats the thing, idra WAS the better player on the day he lost... thats why people are complaining, fairly simple. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Diglett
600 Posts
| ||
|
mierin
United States4943 Posts
| ||
|
Licmyobelisk
Philippines3682 Posts
I suppose IdrA will never learn from his BMing in the future... his just gonna say "that's just the way it is..." | ||
|
Tsagacity
United States2124 Posts
On March 28 2011 12:48 Warrice wrote: Better in an overall sense. He definitely wasn't better in those games."Hate to break it to you guys, but if NesTea, FruitDealer, MVP, IdrA, Jinro, HuK, Strelok, Ciara, Loner, Genius, NightEnD, Ret, Fenix, Haypro, ZeeRaX, or TLO were the better players on the day they lost" Thats the thing, idra WAS the better player on the day he lost... thats why people are complaining, fairly simple. | ||
|
Louuster
Canada2869 Posts
This isnt anything new, and unfortunately not something that is going to go away anytime soon. | ||
|
Azzur
Australia6267 Posts
| ||
|
DND_Enkil
Sweden598 Posts
How many here have not seen a football game where one team played brilliantly but just could not seem to get the damn ball into the goal, and then see the defensive team score a goal on thier one and only attack in the entire game? In Boxing one boxer can totally outbox the other boxer only to suffer an unlucky KO, or even worse TKO. Fairness comes most into play in games such as golf, track and field, swimming and similar, where each competitor is competing alone and the the result is compared to other individual results. In starcraft it is even more confusing since not only are there a vastnnumber of strategies and playstyles, there is also 3 different races. That being said something struck me after watching the Idra vs Cruncher games. I just came fresh out of watching the GSTL and there Tastosis talked a bit about snipers in SC2, a player whoose style is perfect for taking out another players style and with the implication of taking out a stronger player. Now what is Idra strenght? Awesome macro, superb game knowledge, great nerves. (my opinion) Idras weakness? I would say strong "all-inninsh" pushes in early and midgame, he likes to make small adjustments to his play when sometimes you just need to make a huge adjustement. Also, his micro is not awesome, or maybe it is and his decisions (tactics) in theese small engaments are not awesome. Crunchers strenght: Strong early and mid game pushes. Comes from Wc3 and has shown superb micro and decision making (tactics) in the engagements. Had i been a coach in a Team League i might have considered Cruncher a very good sniper to put up against Idra, he might not be as good a player overall but his style should work very well against Idra, assuming his skill is not to far behind Idras. | ||
|
Daniel C
Hong Kong1606 Posts
On March 28 2011 12:14 HULKAMANIA wrote: First of all let me say that you're right about TLers showing a disturbing amount of disrespect and evidencing a huge entitlement complex. You're absolutely right. And let me also say that I just wrote a similar blog yesterday about the negativity. So please don't think that I don't sympathize completely. I just wanted to talk a little bit about a certain section of your post that I think will cause as many problems as it will solve. See I tend to think that a hard-line stance like this one (i.e.: the winner is the better player by definition) fails to accurately reflect the situation just as badly as the hard-line fanboy stance (i.e.: so-and-so only lost because of lag or imbalance or a coin-flip build order). Both extremes, predictably enough, are incorrect and inflammatory. The truth is somewhere in between them. I mean can’t you think of literally dozens of legitimate reasons why a superior player might lose to an inferior player? But in your post you’re insisting that the winner is ipso facto the “more skilled” of the two, at least “on that day.” That’s kind of strange idea to me. What if a player wins because he maphacks? Is he more skilled on that day? What if a player wins because his opponent has a heart attack? Did skill win the day? One if one player wins because his opponent becomes violently ill or is playing in subzero temperature or is blindfolded? What if tomorrow Blizzard patched SC2 so that zerglings had 2000 health—would all the one sided beatdowns of Protoss and Terrans be most parsimoniously explained in terms of the newfound skill of the Zerg users? Do you see what I mean? These examples are extreme and ridiculous hypotheticals! Of course! I agree. But that’s why they’re good responses to the extreme notion that the better player on a given day always wins his game. There are real factors that play into who wins a game other than skill and to ignore them is to think in the same type of unhelpful, simplistic terms that makes the partisan rhetoric of aggrieved fanboys so obnoxious to yours and my ears. You’re right about “skill” being a complex and various concept. So then let’s not turn it around and treat it like it can be accurately determined by a simple win/loss litmus test. Look: I totally agree with you that the negative attitudes certain viewers have expressed do not reflect well on our community. I totally agree that it can be a real buzzkill at times. I totally agree with you that it’s annoying to listen to the sort of transparent excuses people are offering in defense of their chosen hero. But let’s not radicalize in the opposite direction and start making similarly insupportable statements to defend the status quo. That’s called being a reactionary. Let’s instead focus on the TSL for what it is, a pretty badass tournament that’s exhibiting a lot of really, in my opinion, interesting games. And let’s remember that this tournament, or any tournament really, definitely takes skill to win but that things like luck and contest rules/conditions and the circumstances of a given player’s life and the current state of the game and the current state of the (forgive me, Chill!) metagame all factor into as well—to various extents. Let’s not oversimplify in either direction. Enjoying the TSL (or anything really!) is not about being “right,” its about appreciating what you happen to find most beautiful or interesting or cool about it. Let’s leave all of these antagonistic positions like that player A lost because he was cheated by fate or that player B won because SC2 is played in some perfect vacuum where only skill matters. Let’s leave off the debates. Try our best to ignore those partisans who simply can’t stop complaining. And just appreciate the insanity and wonder of the TSL3 for what it is. QFT...agree 100% here. While you can't deny that lag did play a role in the KR games, it's hard to prove that that is was the only reason for the result (for example, could the KR players have prepared for it better?). However, at the same time, you can't proclaim "the better player won" because there ARE inherent factors that affect skill, as HULKAMANIA stated. So let's just enjoy the rest of the games and the results and let the victor be the victor, you can't really tell who's better than who in a Bo3, let alone if there's lag and other issues present. TSL is really a fantastic production in my opinion! | ||
| ||
