|
your Country52797 Posts
On April 17 2015 23:55 Nirel wrote:
O.k I did the exact same process, only I looked at every player that ever played Starcraft and came up with this list, took me about 100 hours btw, I'd usually say I don't believe in perfection, but this list is.
10. Life
9. MVP
8.Cool
7.Tester
6.IntoTheRainbow
5.TheBest
4.HongUn
3.BitByBit
2.InCa
1.Clide
Bad list, TheBest definitely needs to be above HongUn IMO.
|
On April 18 2015 00:57 The_Templar wrote:
Bad list, TheBest definitely needs to be above HongUn IMO.
On April 18 2015 00:52 Shellshock wrote:
Cool behind HopeTorture?
Well your opinions don't matter since this list is based on objective scientific facts, I don't care about guesswork or popularity.
If you must know then HongUn is higher because even though TheBest introduced Banshee micro, you can't forget HongUn was the first to introduce safe and solid Protoss play, it was a close call but HongUn edged out in the end.
HopeTorture is obviously in a higher rank than FruitDealer in part because his 2nd place was much more impressive than FruitDealer's 1st, if you take into account the fact that the Meta was heavily favoring Zerg at the time (2 Zerg GSL champions in a row) and that the maps were heavily favoring Zerg (think how fast Zerglings could knock on your wall in Steps Of War), it's not even close.
Don't question science!
|
Top 3 has to have mc, mvp, life
so of the remaining players who got screwed?
Losira
SOS
Bomber
Taeja
Parting
Stephano
Polt
maybe its taeja, polt, stephano, parting, and bomber because they were so strong in the foreign tournaments and not like losira and sos in gsl and proleague.
Leaving SOS, and Losira for the final two????
|
your Country52797 Posts
On April 19 2015 10:30 tokinho wrote:
Top 3 has to have mc, mvp, life
so of the remaining players who got screwed?
Losira
SOS
Bomber
Taeja
Parting
Stephano
Polt
maybe its taeja, polt, stephano, parting, and bomber because they were so strong in the foreign tournaments and not like losira and sos in gsl and proleague.
Leaving SOS, and Losira for the final two????
sOs is #16.
|
for what its worth sOs should be on the list...but seriously people...read the leenock piece
|
After reading that Leenock piece I still think sOs belongs on the list over Leenock. In the last couple of paragraphs Stuchiu cites consistency as a deciding factor in making his decision, but if ProLeague results were a factor in his judgement I think things would be different. Obviously ProLeague is a best-of-one format which is inherently volatile so I understand why he would ignore it in favor of GSL series results for example, but I went through and added up some of his stats anyway.
sOs' StarCraft 2 stats from the 2011-2012 hybrid season to now (excluding play-off results): 74W - 35L = 67.89% win rate
You can say what you want about ProLeague and it's format but having an 67% win rate across all match-ups over a four year period almost exclusively against KeSPA players shouldn't be ignored.
|
Fiddler's Green42661 Posts
Then you'd have to include all of Leenock's GSTL stats as well as factor in the fact that hybrid season didn't include every relevant player and then remember that half of the players in 2012-2013 retired afterwards and then find a way to evaluate correctly how good they all were (outside of PL), then measure those against each other.
Oh and then you'd have to list every opponent they played, discount free wins (Terror/Inori come to mind for both), figure out their opponents' forms during that time period (especially problematic for the first 2 years of PL), include the metas then decide how you want to measure PL format vs All-Kill format.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
I think the only problem with the way you made the list is that you may have considered a bit too many factors lol. Sometimes choosing a smaller list of stuff to focus on means that you are able to give them more thoughts and come to better conclusions for each element in comparison to having, say, 20 items and trying to rank each player on them.
Having said that, I know that if I was making a similar list, I would've followed the exact same method and considered just as many points. It makes the list feel more complete since you tried to take everything into account, so, despite its subjectivity, I think it's good overall. Well done 
Other point that you could've done is breaking down the list instead separate times since it's pretty hard to compare Fruitdealer's victory to Mvp's victory or Life's in HoTS etc... I realize that's not the main point of your ranking though (greatest players of all time) so it makes sense why you didn't do it this way.
|
3 protoss out of 15 players. So much racism. No parting, squirtle, or sos. so much terran love. I would like to see the post one why not parting, sos, squirtle.
|
On April 16 2015 22:40 Samx wrote:
Dun get me wrong. It's a mighty good effort u have put in. Something the TL community can debate about and have interaction on.
Just an opinion on the methology. Because there is a system that you put in place makes it feels like a scientific venture. It can pass off as being a definitive list based on your system. As it attempts to cover as many facets as you can think of.
But in the end it carries as much weight as saying MVP is the GOAT because he won 4 GSL. It in itself is still an opinion no matter how much justification you add.
A point system or rather a quantifiable system is an exercise to determine the GOAT based on whatever is the predetermined scoring system.
Quantifying and systematizing stuff doesnt make it scientific. And something being scientifical doesnt mean it found truth or that it is definitive, Obviously his list is an opinion, and a quantified, systematic list would also be an opinion(the criteria used to quantify would always be subjective), and stuchiu made a SOUND argument(for anyone that is watching sc2 for a long time at least) to why a simple quantificative system like opisska's(or whatever) is deeply flawed. If you get jitters from being fooled into thinking this is a perfect list because it has deep criteria your interaction with reality is too simplistic. Complex, coherent explanations having depth doesn't mean they're truth. Finding grand, seemingly complex and systematic stuff the bearers of truth and reality is just a fallacy of authority.
On April 26 2015 21:16 tokinho wrote:
3 protoss out of 15 players. So much racism. No parting, squirtle, or sos. so much terran love. I would like to see the post one why not parting, sos, squirtle.
stuchiu explains why he didnt include parting here
|
I still don't understand how can you even mention stuff like "dropped a map to combatEX" as an argument. He probably didn't give a damn and watched some anime with one eye and texted on the phone with one hand, because he knew that if anything goes wrong, the second he starts playing seriously, he wins. SC2 is not figure skating, there are no point for style awarded and any serious competitor takes that into account in how much energy he invests to a given game. That's why only results should matter, because that was the goal the players tried to achieve, not "looking great" during the process. Also that's why "the runs" aka who they faced is a completely absurd metric. Some players could actually have benefited in this rating if they had dropped a game in a group stage just to get harder opponents in the bracket later (or refused to qualify for a tourney in one way to get to a highly stacked open bracket instead), not to mention the player-pick format of GSL ro16. But that's not what they were trying to achieve, was it? You are essentially evaluating players in disciplines they did not compete in.
|
I've finally gotten around to reading these criteria and I feel like you're discounting a huge potential game-changer when it comes to Greatest of All Time discussion: Teamleagues. There are players out there who, while they may not have had the world's best individual league results, have been absolute monsters in teamleagues. I wonder how the rankings might have shifted had metrics like Overall Teamleague Record, Ace Match Victories, All-Kills, etc. been considered.
|
Poland3748 Posts
Why results are based on Premier events only and not also non-online majors? Also it's inconsistent - you list most premiers but not all of them - MLG Global Invitiational, Code As are missing. On the other hand WCG Korea is listed - it wasn't premier. What's the deal? (Did I miss s.t.?)
Why not include some majors in i.e. lower tiers. Gainward is probably best example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
