EPTThe Ten Dragons - Page 6
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
Count9
China10928 Posts
| ||
|
dukethegold
Canada5645 Posts
Anyhow, the 6 Dragons are really just 6 Protoss players that hit their peak at the same time, causing a reign of Protoss dominance, empowered by the anti-Zerg Bisu build and Stork's PvT innovations. Favorable maps certainly helped a lot too. Carriers were still imba abuse against Terran back then. There was no real requirement or anything. Much would have made into the 6 Dragon rank as well if you were looking for the requirements that you listed. It's just that Much fell from his peak when the 6 Dragons hit theirs. Hell, even to this day, we are not sure what the requirements for a "bonjwa" is. 3 MSL and 1 OSL? What about Boxer? And why do OSL count more than MSL when technically, MSL system is actually more difficult for newcomers? All the requirements are pretty lolz worthy. You set the requirements in such a way that all former Protoss dragons except Bisu plus some extras would get included into your top 10 Protoss list, without giving sufficient backing as to why those requirements are set. The 100% win in Proleague ACE one really cracked me up. If any Dragon should be slain, it's Free. Guemchi or Stats beating Bisu in a BO series? Oh please. Good read before bed time. | ||
|
StuDToSs
116 Posts
| ||
|
dukethegold
Canada5645 Posts
On January 09 2010 14:53 StuDToSs wrote: They should have something like that for zerg and terran like the 6 Tyrants for zerg or the 3 musketeers for terran or something like that. The only "racial group" that I know of is the Three Kings, which consisted of Nal_ra, Kingdom and Reach, the three Protoss players. The reason behind that is that they were the only Protoss players that are worth anything for quite a long period of time... | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 09 2010 13:11 fearus wrote: roffles basically made up a set of criterias himself to determine the best protoss players around and to excluded bisu from the list.. yes, he deliberately excluded bisu.. because without excluding bisu....it wouldnt have been worth posting nor would any1 actually read it and care Nah, people would care if he excluded Stork. It just would have been a much more obvious troll. | ||
|
dukethegold
Canada5645 Posts
On January 09 2010 14:59 TheYango wrote: Nah, people would care if he excluded Stork. It just would have been a much more obvious troll. I think you underestimated the difference between Bisu fanboy and Stork fanboy. Just check out the sheer number of SKT fans and you would realize why Bisu is excluded. If he excluded Stork somehow, which is pretty impossible since Stork is clearly playing S-class, that would be super obvious troll and this thread would get lols. Nobody will actually try to put up an argument as to why Stork should be Dragon, cuz it's pretty obvious. Bisu isn't doing good, a kick on the Bisu fanboys and girls while they are down inspire far greater responses. | ||
|
numLoCK
Canada1416 Posts
On January 09 2010 10:00 Roffles wrote: Proposal for Dragon Requirements: Based upon data gathered and regressed (holding all else constant), we have concluded that in order to qualify as a dragon, one: Must have at least one Round of 16 appearance in either the MSL or OSL OR Must have a 100% win percentage in Ace matches in Proleague OR Must currently be within 90 points of their ELO peak OR Must have a career win % of greater than 65%. However, just like in ancient Norse mythology, there can only be 10 dragons at a time. Did ya get these straight from anti-bisu ideals? Was it like, "Hm, whats a good career winrate limit? What's Bisu at, 64.6%? Minimum 65% then. How about ELO peak. Bisu is what, 94 points below his peak? Lets go 90 points maximum then." And seriously, 100% winrate in ace matches? A teams top ace player is gonna play quite a few matches, and the more often they are sent out the more likely it is they are gonna lose at least one game. You've got Guemchi as a dragon. Would you feel safer putting money on guemchi or bisu to win against the same opponent? | ||
|
Purind
Canada3562 Posts
On January 09 2010 13:01 Sunyveil wrote: + Show Spoiler + On January 09 2010 12:57 Hinanawi wrote: An Advanced Statistical Study of Zerg Rankings: Abstract: In the past, uncertainty has gripped the Starcraft community regarding the ranking of Zerg players in terms of performance. A popular ranking system, known as the "Maestro Theory" has exhibited considerable popularity since its inception. Herein I discuss an enhanced player rating system based on Introduction: With the rise of the forces of Aiur and the rapid decline of the Zerg race, it has become increasingly With the aim of casting some light on the current Zerg situation, this article offers an overview of the complexity of ranking Zerg players and considers the diversity of success from various aspects of progaming. Historical Background: In the early days of progaming, Zerg players have always experienced hardships when it came to success. We all remember how However, even with their limited success, Zergs persevered onwards, finally gaining recognition as Savior, the Maestro burst onto the scene and shocked the scrub imba Terrans. Forever changing the way Zergs played against everyone, the Zerg race experienced it's first stint of success, with Savior leading the way. Why Only 1?: The volatile matchup of Zerg vs Terran has always been an Achilles Heel for Zerg players. Historically, Terrans have won over 53% of games vs Zerg players, and has generally been considered an easy matchup for Terrans. Mediocre Terrans such as CuteAngel have even been quoted saying, "HAHAHA, MANNER CC IN YOUR MAIN BISU" in the past (and that's not even TvZ). After statistical surveys compiled by Korean netizens, the Maestro (Savior) was selected for his Does this theory still hold?: Fast forward two years and a half later to mid 2009. The era of the Maestro has come and gone. Savior hasn't consistently made it to even the latter stages of Starleagues as of recent, not to mention winning a Starleague. With the Proposal for Maestro Requirements: Based upon data gathered and regressed (holding all else constant), we ('we' referring to me and my mum, who I asked for advice on this) have concluded that in order to qualify as a maestro, one: Must be a somewhat kinda decent Zerg player. AND Must not have been born on November 23rd, 1987. Statistical Analysis : Therefore from our proposal, we compile a list of Maestros, before and after. Current "Maestros": None New Maestros:  JaedongCalmEffOrtKwanroZerOOctZergSlain Maestros: sAviOr - Violates the second requirement.Ramifications: Entirely according to popular belief, Savior is no longer among the best of the Zerg race. With lackluster Proleague results and his disappearance from the latest Starleagues, Savior has fallen from his high and mighty throne. His fall from grace is evident by the fact that he failed to destroy everyone in 2009. Closing Comments: The analysis presented in this article may be debated by many people. The first of many arguments that may arise would be the "This is pretty dumb". You've got a point there. Sources: * theonion.com I think this pretty much sums up my thoughts That OctZerg is atleast the sixth best Zerg player in the world? | ||
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
On January 09 2010 15:02 numLoCK wrote: Did ya get these straight from anti-bisu ideals? Was it like, "Hm, whats a good career winrate limit? What's Bisu at, 64.6%? Minimum 65% then. How about ELO peak. Bisu is what, 94 points below his peak? Lets go 90 points maximum then." And seriously, 100% winrate in ace matches? A teams top ace player is gonna play quite a few matches, and the more often they are sent out the more likely it is they are gonna lose at least one game. You've got Guemchi as a dragon. Would you feel safer putting money on guemchi or bisu to win against the same opponent? I've got money on Guemchi against Bisu. He proved it during his run to the MSL Round of 16. Guess who made it to Ro16 in the MSL and who didn't? | ||
|
Kyuukyuu
Canada6263 Posts
love the serious responses too | ||
|
Niton
United States2395 Posts
On January 09 2010 15:02 numLoCK wrote: Did ya get these straight from anti-bisu ideals? Was it like, "Hm, whats a good career winrate limit? What's Bisu at, 64.6%? Minimum 65% then. How about ELO peak. Bisu is what, 94 points below his peak? Lets go 90 points maximum then." And seriously, 100% winrate in ace matches? A teams top ace player is gonna play quite a few matches, and the more often they are sent out the more likely it is they are gonna lose at least one game. You've got Guemchi as a dragon. Would you feel safer putting money on guemchi or bisu to win against the same opponent? That depends. Is the opponent Bogus? | ||
|
Whiplash
United States2928 Posts
| ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
bisu has been incredibly mediocre recently though | ||
|
excal
Canada166 Posts
I don't think many people honestly believe half that list of people can beat/do better than Bisu in a best of x. Even in a single match up, I'd put my money on Bisu. I don't think Bisu is performing right now, but even in his current state, I stand by my statement. | ||
|
ItsBigfoot
United States432 Posts
| ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
| ||
|
Noxide
United States2870 Posts
| ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 09 2010 15:21 jalstar wrote: bisu has been incredibly inconsistent recently though Fixed. There's a difference. Guemchi I wouldn't ever bet on being able to win a Bo3 or Bo5 against, say, Stork or Jaedong. Bisu, however, is capable of it on a day that he plays to his best. Bisu still plays S-class Starcraft on a good day (Bisu v Stork in proleague is an example of that). The fact that those days come less often doesn't mean Bisu's absolute skill has declined, but more that he's psychologically less capable of bringing that to the table as often as he'd like. | ||
|
horang3
United States261 Posts
| ||
|
sporkify
United States31 Posts
Your standards are pointless. They don't take into account the number of games. If a player played 5 ace matches and won 4, I'd take them more seriously than a player who goes 1-0. The Ro16 doesn't take into account difficulty of opponents. 65% is a number you pulled out of a hat. I believe I have also shown the flaw with using percentage for rankings. Edited cause I got mixed up with ELO and %. | ||
| ||
