"Things", including but not limited to:
-zero has been playing sc2 while sea has been playing bw.
-sea was playing on team 8, and like all of team 8 was underperforming.
-both players are several years older than they were
-both will have come out of team house environments, sea has been out for longer

When you consider all of these factors, it is reasonable to say that what little weight a 4-2 record might have over any current prediction is considerably less important than the variances introduced in the time betwen then and now.

miercat

394 Posts

November 01 2013 20:02 GMT

#163

On November 02 2013 03:41 kerpal wrote:
"Things", including but not limited to:
-zero has been playing sc2 while sea has been playing bw.
-sea was playing on team 8, and like all of team 8 was underperforming.
-both players are several years older than they were
-both will have come out of team house environments, sea has been out for longer

When you consider all of these factors, it is reasonable to say that what little weight a 4-2 record might have over any current prediction is considerably less important than the variances introduced in the time betwen then and now.

Your premise seems fairly solid, and I wouldn't necessarily disagree. However, the point I originally made, was conceptually separate from this, and not necessarily in conflict with your statement. Although, I would view the relevant "things," in a slightly different manner - some being highly relevant and overpowering, others - not as much.

The 4-2 record (although realistically speaking, the 4-2 record is not singular statistic, but rather part of, or an indication of a number of other relevant data, as indicated in my previous post) may or may not have the most relevance (out of all potential relevant factors) at the moment. However, that distinction was not critical with regards to the point I was making:
There is no information regarding Zero's current ability. The only concrete relevant information we have, is the 4-2 record. It is hypothetically possible, for example that Zero has actually, due to one, or any number of relevant "things," completely lost the ability to beat Sea. However, whether this is the case or not is irrelevant, we do not have access to that information, and consequently, at the very least (which was originally my only point) you cannot completely disregard the record's predictive ability, and state that Sea would definitively beat Zero, whether they play now, or after Zero has practiced.

I would make one explanation though qualifying the predictive power of the record: Obviously, lets say Zero doesn't practice BW at all in the past 2 years, and plays a match with Sea today. No one is going to argue the prediction for that game - whether Zero had 4-2 record against Sea, is irrelevant in this situation - he most likely wouldn't fare well.

But now, think about what the 4-2 record encompassed/meant (which I alluded to in my previous post): Sea and Zero, two of the best in the world, hours of preparation, TvZ advantage, Sea's strong record other Zergs at the time, # of other things tilted in the favor of Sea etc. In this atmosphere, the fact that Zero had a 4-2 record hints at some significant underlying strength against Sea.

In addition to past records (of the nature in question), I believe that the single most important factor, regarding predictive power, is simply: current amount of high level BW practice i.e. what Sea, and the other Afreeca BJs are doing. All practicing more or less, X number of hours per day. The extent to which Zero realizes an the demonstrated implied advantage against Sea, will simply be dependent on the extent to which he practices (e.g. against high level Terrans). It is under this conceptual framework, that the record retains its predictive power, whatever the result may be.

Kyuukyuu

Canada6263 Posts

November 01 2013 20:10 GMT

#164

On November 02 2013 05:02 miercat wrote:
"So yes, I repeat, it is true, that in taking into account Zero's 4-2 record against Sea (and perhaps (but very nearly not necessarily), all of the associated statistics, and contextual information, from the time period in question, which you may or may not even be aware of, or inclined/able to effectively consider) you cannot definitively assume that Sea will beat Zero (whether it's now, or when Zero has practiced up to his potential). "

Not only is this poorly written, but also completely inane. Yeah, you can't say X progamer will definitively beat Y. When can you ever? Sea holds the definitive advantage at the moment. If Zero gets back to his prime ZvT level then who knows what will happen. This is common sense.

miercat

394 Posts

November 01 2013 21:37 GMT

#165

On November 02 2013 05:10 Kyuukyuu wrote:

Show nested quote +

It is a completely inane concept, and based on common sense, which is why I stated that the original refutation, made no sense at all. Additionally, I was responding to the assertion that past records have no predictive ability, and the relevance of change as a factor in this situation - both of which were somewhat detached from the original point I was making.

If you think it was poorly written, it's more of a negative reflection on you, than me. You essentially re-iterated the theme of my original post, missed two specific and clear refutations, and added nothing of value. If you're going to comment, please try and follow the conversation better.

kerpal

United Kingdom2695 Posts

November 01 2013 23:30 GMT

#166

On November 02 2013 06:37 miercat wrote:

Show nested quote +

Be nice. If he can't follow the conversation it's probably because of the way you write. You sound like you're trying to make your syntax intentionally obtuse in order to confuse. I don't know what you intend, but you sound as if you're trying to make yourself seem more intelligent but actually stray often into non-sequiturs.

And what's more it seem this is all to discredit what was clearly a fanboyish hype statement by epoxide, which he was non intending to submit to a rigorous statistical peer review.

Fuchsteufelswild

Australia2028 Posts

November 02 2013 01:31 GMT

#167

I think miercat is trying to use commas for relative clauses, but he's just unintentionally going over the top with them. His bracket and comma usage became very messy, but I don't believe it was intentional.

miercat

394 Posts

November 02 2013 02:11 GMT

#168

On November 02 2013 08:30 kerpal wrote:

And what's more it seem this is all to discredit what was clearly a fanboyish hype statement by epoxide, which he was non intending to submit to a rigorous statistical peer review.

Partway through writing, I realized there was probably some mis-communication one way or another, but I decided to finish anyways. In any case, it was pretty much a waste of time - common sense should have been enough. I don't really see any value in discussing it further.

Black Gun

Germany4482 Posts

November 02 2013 02:33 GMT

#169

awesome news!

it seems like bw indeed does have some more years of life in it. in the long run however, it is destined to die. old bw pros come back to the game, yes, but no new, young talent is being fostered. once the generation of killer, sea, zero, jangbi, bisu, flash, jd and so on leaves progaming, sospa and professional bw will die.

but... you know, sometimes parents live longer than their children...