Why Master Players Say They're Bad - Page 4

On March 05 2012 06:27 Noocta wrote:
It's actually weird. When you do sports, like Tennis, you usually don't think you're awfull for not being as well as Rafael Nadal.
In Starcraft, when i look at my play, i will compare it to proplayer's play, even if i try to not do it. And god i'm awfull at this game.

On March 05 2012 00:28 MrBitter wrote:
I think you can sum it up like this:

The better you become at Starcraft, the more obvious your lack of understanding becomes. I've always liked comparing it to martial arts. A black belt in a martial art isn't a symbol of your mastery. It's something that other martial artists can look at and say "okay, now he finally has the tools to really start learning."

it takes some sort of acceptance that you're bad and a willingness to improve to get here.

On March 05 2012 05:12 hunts wrote:


So you want me to tell you the exact things that I don't know that someone like DRG or nestea or Idra know? Well, if I knew those things and was able to tell them, I would certainly be higher up than mid master. But things like timings, economy management, exact responses to builds etc... The pros notice such subtle things about an opponents timings/building positioning that give clues as to what the opponent is doing that the average master player and commentators don't know and just ignore it. And the basketball analogy is a very bad one. Basketball is a lot more about just reaction and how well you can play with a ball, SC2 is a lot more about using your brain. Your analogy would work if SC2 was only mechanics and no strategy or thinking. In SC2 mechanics are not what separate players most of the time, it's their game knowledge. Like I can tell you that with my bad mechanics if I could have nesteas brain, I would easily be at the very worst a B team player, with my awful mechanics.

On March 05 2012 10:30 sc2superfan101 wrote:

let's just say that i'm not surprised that no one here has provided a single specific example of what the pro knows but the rest of us don't. im sure there are some little things that they do that the rest of us don't do, and they are surely on the forefront of developing builds and counters, but i seriously doubt that there is anything as big as the difference between having no idea that you should build more than 22 SCVs.

i think a lot of basketball players would be more than a little annoyed by that statement. maybe not, but then just substitute it with any sport. american football, being a QB for example.

On March 05 2012 10:30 sc2superfan101 wrote:

let's just say that i'm not surprised that no one here has provided a single specific example of what the pro knows but the rest of us don't. im sure there are some little things that they do that the rest of us don't do, and they are surely on the forefront of developing builds and counters, but i seriously doubt that there is anything as big as the difference between having no idea that you should build more than 22 SCVs.

i think a lot of basketball players would be more than a little annoyed by that statement. maybe not, but then just substitute it with any sport. american football, being a QB for example.

On March 05 2012 12:47 iamke55 wrote:

There are so many things pros know that we don't. For example, how does Protoss punish a Zerg who opens gas instead of no gas? I'm a high master player and I don't have an answer. There must be a way, because every single GSL level Zerg switched over to no gas openings. Yet I doubt you'll find many Protoss players outside of Korea who scout a Zerg opening gas and think "easy win, I'm so glad he didn't open no gas". coLRyze opens gas every game despite it being an outdated style, and I think it's likely because the foreigner metagame is too behind the Korean one for superiority of the no gas opening to make any difference.

On March 05 2012 13:01 lastshadow wrote:



This is a really nice example, but also somewhat flawed in saying that opening gas vs Protoss is always bad, it's not always bad, but yes, most of the time it can be.

Anyway another example, there is about literally 15 different ways to react to scouting a 1-1-1 in TvT, each way changes depending on every little detail, if they have 1 or 1 less marine, what time the techlab was placed, did they have to float the port to switch it, when was the reactor made, when was the second gas made, was it a 15oc or 16oc. Most "top foreigner" Terrans dont even know these answers, but I assure you people that are actually serious about the game do.

For example, how does Protoss punish a Zerg who opens gas instead of no gas? I'm a high master player and I don't have an answer

On March 06 2012 08:42 rauk wrote:
Onereason that bw or sc2 players have a skewed perspective on skill is the fact that we can play pros whenever we want as long as we're good enough to be matched on ladder. I think if people couldnt play anyone outside of their own city and only occasionally met players from just within their own province or state bianually for a statewide tournament people would have much higher opinions of themselves.

On March 06 2012 10:01 3clipse wrote:

This is part of it. Another part is the "iccup mindset" which allowed only elite players to even become B rank (something which we associate with an average grade). People also tend to dislike being seen as boastful (barring narcissists like combatEX). Another aspect is simply how long this game has been around and how many resources have been available to use to help us improve; for many of us who played bw from near the beginning, we can't even REMEMBER what it was like to be learning this game as a complete noob with no mechanical skill or higher level game knowledge. It has become intuitive to the competitive community.

I've made a couple posts like this before (and I may have expressed myself more eloquently back then), but I'll say it again. I am a high diamond/low masters player right now, and I will never refer to myself as "bad". I think it's frankly disrespectful to the majority of more casual players (and everyone I know IRL who plays that I didn't meet through tl). OF COURSE I'm good at this game. I've put thousands upon thousands of hours into it. I am worse than many, many people on teamliquid, but statistically, I am much better than the "average" starcraft player. That is the best possible measure of what is good and what is bad, not some theoretical model of perfection. You don't see biologists and kinesthesiologists calling olympic runners "bad" because they are not reaching the theoretical limits of their bodies; yet this is how we critique many sc2 GMs.

Edit: I also think this mindset can be rather demoralizing to many people. I think a powerful drive to improve and better oneself can easily exist independently of this sort of negative self-talk. I wouldn't want to see this kind of discourse be interpreted as elitism by newcomers and be one of the reasons why they are too intimidated to 1v1 ladder.

On March 06 2012 08:42 rauk wrote:
Onereason that bw or sc2 players have a skewed perspective on skill is the fact that we can play pros whenever we want as long as we're good enough to be matched on ladder. I think if people couldnt play anyone outside of their own city and only occasionally met players from just within their own province or state bianually for a statewide tournament people would have much higher opinions of themselves.