|
Renamed To ASL20 General Discussion.
WARNING: Contains Spoilers |
On September 28 2025 22:24 RogueTheGOAT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2025 19:56 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote:On September 28 2025 10:15 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 10:01 Azhi_Dahaki wrote:
Mini is better than Barracks If he were, he wouldn't have taken such a huge risk in game 7. Going Nexus first in the final game of a series says he doesn't think he would win a straight up game. Nexus first is a very common Mini thing on 4 player maps. Barracks and Mini are about equally good. Just statistic variations alone means one of the two will win a best of set, and that winrates will fluctuate up and down. Most players are about equally good and only a few are real true outliers who consistently win. Even with 55%/45% win rates someone can win or lose 5-10 in a row against a worse or better player given the sample size is big enough. Everyone and their mother knew that Mini was going Nexus first. The better player does not employ a strategy that has a 33% of working and that 33% being spawn position luck. A player takes that gamble if and only if they don't think they can win without a massive advantage.
If you talk about gamble then Barracks' BBS is way more of a gamble than Mini's Nexus first.
Nexus first can survive against any Terran openings other than proxy BBS.
The proxy BBS that Barracks did loses against any Protoss openings other than Nexus first, and even with Nexus first, it still has 33% chance to fail if Mini spawned top left.
|
On September 29 2025 07:24 TMNT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2025 22:24 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 19:56 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote:On September 28 2025 10:15 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 10:01 Azhi_Dahaki wrote:
Mini is better than Barracks If he were, he wouldn't have taken such a huge risk in game 7. Going Nexus first in the final game of a series says he doesn't think he would win a straight up game. Nexus first is a very common Mini thing on 4 player maps. Barracks and Mini are about equally good. Just statistic variations alone means one of the two will win a best of set, and that winrates will fluctuate up and down. Most players are about equally good and only a few are real true outliers who consistently win. Even with 55%/45% win rates someone can win or lose 5-10 in a row against a worse or better player given the sample size is big enough. Everyone and their mother knew that Mini was going Nexus first. The better player does not employ a strategy that has a 33% of working and that 33% being spawn position luck. A player takes that gamble if and only if they don't think they can win without a massive advantage. If you talk about gamble then Barracks' BBS is way more of a gamble than Mini's Nexus first. Nexus first can survive against any Terran openings other than proxy BBS. The proxy BBS that Barracks did loses against any Protoss openings other than Nexus first, and even with Nexus first, it still has 33% chance to fail if Mini spawned top left.
Come on, not everyone knows who you are on TL. Some people might just read your post and actually believe it, lol. Your serious tone when spitting those foolishs affirmations is off the chart. Calm down, bro
|
On September 29 2025 07:24 TMNT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2025 22:24 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 19:56 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote:On September 28 2025 10:15 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 10:01 Azhi_Dahaki wrote:
Mini is better than Barracks If he were, he wouldn't have taken such a huge risk in game 7. Going Nexus first in the final game of a series says he doesn't think he would win a straight up game. Nexus first is a very common Mini thing on 4 player maps. Barracks and Mini are about equally good. Just statistic variations alone means one of the two will win a best of set, and that winrates will fluctuate up and down. Most players are about equally good and only a few are real true outliers who consistently win. Even with 55%/45% win rates someone can win or lose 5-10 in a row against a worse or better player given the sample size is big enough. Everyone and their mother knew that Mini was going Nexus first. The better player does not employ a strategy that has a 33% of working and that 33% being spawn position luck. A player takes that gamble if and only if they don't think they can win without a massive advantage. If you talk about gamble then Barracks' BBS is way more of a gamble than Mini's Nexus first. Nexus first can survive against any Terran openings other than proxy BBS. The proxy BBS that Barracks did loses against any Protoss openings other than Nexus first, and even with Nexus first, it still has 33% chance to fail if Mini spawned top left.
Players can and should make choices that maximize their expected outcome. Since it was game 7, let's say that the baseline chance of winning is 50% (I'm assuming the map is not particularly favored either way since neither player picked it), and therefore, anything that results in a higher than 50% chance of winning is a smart play.
If you say that there was a 75% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .75 * .66 = 49.5%.
Let's say that BBS against any build other than Nexus first has a 10% win rate if placed on the correct side of the map. That's .25 * .66 * .1 = 1.65%
49.5% + 1.65% = 51.15%
If you say that there was a 90% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .90 * .66 = 59.4%.
.1 * .66 * .1 = 0.66%
59.4+0.66 = 60.1%
Barracks's decision to go for a BBS was a gamble in the sense that it largely took the results out of his hands, but it was not a risky play as it maximized his chance of victory. If you could tell a player going into a game 7 that if they do X that they'll have a 60.1% of winning, the only reason to NOT make that choice is that the consequences of losing and being clowned online could outweigh the benefits of winning the series.
|
On September 29 2025 08:12 RogueTheGOAT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2025 07:24 TMNT wrote:On September 28 2025 22:24 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 19:56 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote:On September 28 2025 10:15 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 10:01 Azhi_Dahaki wrote:
Mini is better than Barracks If he were, he wouldn't have taken such a huge risk in game 7. Going Nexus first in the final game of a series says he doesn't think he would win a straight up game. Nexus first is a very common Mini thing on 4 player maps. Barracks and Mini are about equally good. Just statistic variations alone means one of the two will win a best of set, and that winrates will fluctuate up and down. Most players are about equally good and only a few are real true outliers who consistently win. Even with 55%/45% win rates someone can win or lose 5-10 in a row against a worse or better player given the sample size is big enough. Everyone and their mother knew that Mini was going Nexus first. The better player does not employ a strategy that has a 33% of working and that 33% being spawn position luck. A player takes that gamble if and only if they don't think they can win without a massive advantage. If you talk about gamble then Barracks' BBS is way more of a gamble than Mini's Nexus first. Nexus first can survive against any Terran openings other than proxy BBS. The proxy BBS that Barracks did loses against any Protoss openings other than Nexus first, and even with Nexus first, it still has 33% chance to fail if Mini spawned top left. Players can and should make choices that maximize their expected outcome. Since it was game 7, let's say that the baseline chance of winning is 50% (I'm assuming the map is not particularly favored either way since neither player picked it), and therefore, anything that results in a higher than 50% chance of winning is a smart play. If you say that there was a 75% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .75 * .66 = 49.5%. Let's say that BBS against any build other than Nexus first has a 10% win rate if placed on the correct side of the map. That's .25 * .66 * .1 = 1.65% 49.5% + 1.65% = 51.15% If you say that there was a 90% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .90 * .66 = 59.4%. .1 * .66 * .1 = 0.66% 59.4+0.66 = 60.1% Barracks's decision to go for a BBS was a gamble in the sense that it largely took the results out of his hands, but it was not a risky play as it maximized his chance of victory. If you could tell a player going into a game 7 that if they do X that they'll have a 60.1% of winning, the only reason to NOT make that choice is that the consequences of losing and being clowned online could outweigh the benefits of winning the series.
I never understood why mini did that on Radeon of all games. It was an auto win if he did nexus first on game 2@Roaring Currents. I cannot believe nobody noticed that map is anti greed punish proof due to the way the map is structured. Map awareness seems lacking this season, or I'm reading too much into this.
|
On September 29 2025 08:19 mtcn77 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2025 08:12 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 29 2025 07:24 TMNT wrote:On September 28 2025 22:24 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 19:56 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote:On September 28 2025 10:15 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 10:01 Azhi_Dahaki wrote:
Mini is better than Barracks If he were, he wouldn't have taken such a huge risk in game 7. Going Nexus first in the final game of a series says he doesn't think he would win a straight up game. Nexus first is a very common Mini thing on 4 player maps. Barracks and Mini are about equally good. Just statistic variations alone means one of the two will win a best of set, and that winrates will fluctuate up and down. Most players are about equally good and only a few are real true outliers who consistently win. Even with 55%/45% win rates someone can win or lose 5-10 in a row against a worse or better player given the sample size is big enough. Everyone and their mother knew that Mini was going Nexus first. The better player does not employ a strategy that has a 33% of working and that 33% being spawn position luck. A player takes that gamble if and only if they don't think they can win without a massive advantage. If you talk about gamble then Barracks' BBS is way more of a gamble than Mini's Nexus first. Nexus first can survive against any Terran openings other than proxy BBS. The proxy BBS that Barracks did loses against any Protoss openings other than Nexus first, and even with Nexus first, it still has 33% chance to fail if Mini spawned top left. Players can and should make choices that maximize their expected outcome. Since it was game 7, let's say that the baseline chance of winning is 50% (I'm assuming the map is not particularly favored either way since neither player picked it), and therefore, anything that results in a higher than 50% chance of winning is a smart play. If you say that there was a 75% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .75 * .66 = 49.5%. Let's say that BBS against any build other than Nexus first has a 10% win rate if placed on the correct side of the map. That's .25 * .66 * .1 = 1.65% 49.5% + 1.65% = 51.15% If you say that there was a 90% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .90 * .66 = 59.4%. .1 * .66 * .1 = 0.66% 59.4+0.66 = 60.1% Barracks's decision to go for a BBS was a gamble in the sense that it largely took the results out of his hands, but it was not a risky play as it maximized his chance of victory. If you could tell a player going into a game 7 that if they do X that they'll have a 60.1% of winning, the only reason to NOT make that choice is that the consequences of losing and being clowned online could outweigh the benefits of winning the series. I never understood why mini did that on Radeon of all games. It was an auto win if he did nexus first on game 2@Roaring Currents. I cannot believe nobody noticed that map is anti greed punish proof due to the way the map is structured. Map awareness seems lacking this season, or I'm reading too much into this.
Mini did go for a 12 Nexus on Roaring Currents.
Barracks went for a tech build because the meta in daily proleague has evolved to feature a LOT of double proxy gates.
|
On September 29 2025 08:45 RogueTheGOAT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2025 08:19 mtcn77 wrote:On September 29 2025 08:12 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 29 2025 07:24 TMNT wrote:On September 28 2025 22:24 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 19:56 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote:On September 28 2025 10:15 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 10:01 Azhi_Dahaki wrote:
Mini is better than Barracks If he were, he wouldn't have taken such a huge risk in game 7. Going Nexus first in the final game of a series says he doesn't think he would win a straight up game. Nexus first is a very common Mini thing on 4 player maps. Barracks and Mini are about equally good. Just statistic variations alone means one of the two will win a best of set, and that winrates will fluctuate up and down. Most players are about equally good and only a few are real true outliers who consistently win. Even with 55%/45% win rates someone can win or lose 5-10 in a row against a worse or better player given the sample size is big enough. Everyone and their mother knew that Mini was going Nexus first. The better player does not employ a strategy that has a 33% of working and that 33% being spawn position luck. A player takes that gamble if and only if they don't think they can win without a massive advantage. If you talk about gamble then Barracks' BBS is way more of a gamble than Mini's Nexus first. Nexus first can survive against any Terran openings other than proxy BBS. The proxy BBS that Barracks did loses against any Protoss openings other than Nexus first, and even with Nexus first, it still has 33% chance to fail if Mini spawned top left. Players can and should make choices that maximize their expected outcome. Since it was game 7, let's say that the baseline chance of winning is 50% (I'm assuming the map is not particularly favored either way since neither player picked it), and therefore, anything that results in a higher than 50% chance of winning is a smart play. If you say that there was a 75% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .75 * .66 = 49.5%. Let's say that BBS against any build other than Nexus first has a 10% win rate if placed on the correct side of the map. That's .25 * .66 * .1 = 1.65% 49.5% + 1.65% = 51.15% If you say that there was a 90% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .90 * .66 = 59.4%. .1 * .66 * .1 = 0.66% 59.4+0.66 = 60.1% Barracks's decision to go for a BBS was a gamble in the sense that it largely took the results out of his hands, but it was not a risky play as it maximized his chance of victory. If you could tell a player going into a game 7 that if they do X that they'll have a 60.1% of winning, the only reason to NOT make that choice is that the consequences of losing and being clowned online could outweigh the benefits of winning the series. I never understood why mini did that on Radeon of all games. It was an auto win if he did nexus first on game 2@Roaring Currents. I cannot believe nobody noticed that map is anti greed punish proof due to the way the map is structured. Map awareness seems lacking this season, or I'm reading too much into this. Mini did go for a 12 Nexus on Roaring Currents. Barracks went for a tech build because the meta in daily proleague has evolved to feature a LOT of double proxy gates.
Wow, wow, at that point(3:40) tasteless guessed, then why would you not double proxy barracks cheese? He let it slip and mini did it on game 7 again and lost both games. Just wow...
PS: looks like mini had the map advantage and squandered it. All he had to do was play a normal core dragoon opening. He even had the option to take the bridge and do a little early aggression. Then he sent dragoons to the natural, reaver to the island. It sounds wrong the more I put it to words.
|
On September 29 2025 08:19 mtcn77 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2025 08:12 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 29 2025 07:24 TMNT wrote:On September 28 2025 22:24 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 19:56 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote:On September 28 2025 10:15 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 10:01 Azhi_Dahaki wrote:
Mini is better than Barracks If he were, he wouldn't have taken such a huge risk in game 7. Going Nexus first in the final game of a series says he doesn't think he would win a straight up game. Nexus first is a very common Mini thing on 4 player maps. Barracks and Mini are about equally good. Just statistic variations alone means one of the two will win a best of set, and that winrates will fluctuate up and down. Most players are about equally good and only a few are real true outliers who consistently win. Even with 55%/45% win rates someone can win or lose 5-10 in a row against a worse or better player given the sample size is big enough. Everyone and their mother knew that Mini was going Nexus first. The better player does not employ a strategy that has a 33% of working and that 33% being spawn position luck. A player takes that gamble if and only if they don't think they can win without a massive advantage. If you talk about gamble then Barracks' BBS is way more of a gamble than Mini's Nexus first. Nexus first can survive against any Terran openings other than proxy BBS. The proxy BBS that Barracks did loses against any Protoss openings other than Nexus first, and even with Nexus first, it still has 33% chance to fail if Mini spawned top left. Players can and should make choices that maximize their expected outcome. Since it was game 7, let's say that the baseline chance of winning is 50% (I'm assuming the map is not particularly favored either way since neither player picked it), and therefore, anything that results in a higher than 50% chance of winning is a smart play. If you say that there was a 75% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .75 * .66 = 49.5%. Let's say that BBS against any build other than Nexus first has a 10% win rate if placed on the correct side of the map. That's .25 * .66 * .1 = 1.65% 49.5% + 1.65% = 51.15% If you say that there was a 90% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .90 * .66 = 59.4%. .1 * .66 * .1 = 0.66% 59.4+0.66 = 60.1% Barracks's decision to go for a BBS was a gamble in the sense that it largely took the results out of his hands, but it was not a risky play as it maximized his chance of victory. If you could tell a player going into a game 7 that if they do X that they'll have a 60.1% of winning, the only reason to NOT make that choice is that the consequences of losing and being clowned online could outweigh the benefits of winning the series. I never understood why mini did that on Radeon of all games. It was an auto win if he did nexus first on game 2@Roaring Currents. I cannot believe nobody noticed that map is anti greed punish proof due to the way the map is structured. Map awareness seems lacking this season, or I'm reading too much into this.
I have a strong suspicion that the pros whose livelihood partially depends on them knowing the map well enough (particularly in the final RoX stages of tournaments) have more map awareness than you do.
For example, perhaps 12 Nexus is the default strategy for a reason? Maybe Protoss can and should get an early lead on this map to prevent something worse from happening later? Mini probably won 70%+ of his practice games using this strategy, against other pro players who were also trying to figure out the map, maybe he knew more than a random poster on TL who doesn't play the game at a high level?
Everyone makes mistakes. Appeals to authority are not proof. I know all of this, but somehow it seems more likely to me that he had a good idea of what he was going to do and why on this map, and that it was likely better than your understanding of the dynamics of the pro scene even if Mini ended up losing Game 7.
|
On September 29 2025 11:22 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2025 08:19 mtcn77 wrote:On September 29 2025 08:12 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 29 2025 07:24 TMNT wrote:On September 28 2025 22:24 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 19:56 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote:On September 28 2025 10:15 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 10:01 Azhi_Dahaki wrote:
Mini is better than Barracks If he were, he wouldn't have taken such a huge risk in game 7. Going Nexus first in the final game of a series says he doesn't think he would win a straight up game. Nexus first is a very common Mini thing on 4 player maps. Barracks and Mini are about equally good. Just statistic variations alone means one of the two will win a best of set, and that winrates will fluctuate up and down. Most players are about equally good and only a few are real true outliers who consistently win. Even with 55%/45% win rates someone can win or lose 5-10 in a row against a worse or better player given the sample size is big enough. Everyone and their mother knew that Mini was going Nexus first. The better player does not employ a strategy that has a 33% of working and that 33% being spawn position luck. A player takes that gamble if and only if they don't think they can win without a massive advantage. If you talk about gamble then Barracks' BBS is way more of a gamble than Mini's Nexus first. Nexus first can survive against any Terran openings other than proxy BBS. The proxy BBS that Barracks did loses against any Protoss openings other than Nexus first, and even with Nexus first, it still has 33% chance to fail if Mini spawned top left. Players can and should make choices that maximize their expected outcome. Since it was game 7, let's say that the baseline chance of winning is 50% (I'm assuming the map is not particularly favored either way since neither player picked it), and therefore, anything that results in a higher than 50% chance of winning is a smart play. If you say that there was a 75% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .75 * .66 = 49.5%. Let's say that BBS against any build other than Nexus first has a 10% win rate if placed on the correct side of the map. That's .25 * .66 * .1 = 1.65% 49.5% + 1.65% = 51.15% If you say that there was a 90% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .90 * .66 = 59.4%. .1 * .66 * .1 = 0.66% 59.4+0.66 = 60.1% Barracks's decision to go for a BBS was a gamble in the sense that it largely took the results out of his hands, but it was not a risky play as it maximized his chance of victory. If you could tell a player going into a game 7 that if they do X that they'll have a 60.1% of winning, the only reason to NOT make that choice is that the consequences of losing and being clowned online could outweigh the benefits of winning the series. I never understood why mini did that on Radeon of all games. It was an auto win if he did nexus first on game 2@Roaring Currents. I cannot believe nobody noticed that map is anti greed punish proof due to the way the map is structured. Map awareness seems lacking this season, or I'm reading too much into this. I have a strong suspicion that the pros whose livelihood partially depends on them knowing the map well enough (particularly in the final RoX stages of tournaments) have more map awareness than you do. For example, perhaps 12 Nexus is the default strategy for a reason? Maybe Protoss can and should get an early lead on this map to prevent something worse from happening later? Mini probably won 70%+ of his practice games using this strategy, against other pro players who were also trying to figure out the map, maybe he knew more than a random poster on TL who doesn't play the game at a high level? Everyone makes mistakes. Appeals to authority are not proof. I know all of this, but somehow it seems more likely to me that he had a good idea of what he was going to do and why on this map, and that it was likely better than your understanding of the dynamics of the pro scene even if Mini ended up losing Game 7.
It has been years since we had an island map. Last was in 2023. This harkens back to when terran was king at the beginning of starcraft as an esports. We would have battlereports of wraith builds beating pure terran mech. All I'm saying is these are exciting times with dusty old retro gameplay back in the spotlight. Stuff that will prove unwieldy to a pro might be just what you need. Remember, we had lots and lots of zerg pros commentating queens need too much apm to be utilised during the kespa days, yet here we are.
You are saying two things at once: everyone makes mistakes, and they know better. I don't think they know better all the time... When we root for them, we know their strengths and pitfalls. I'm saying this is new territory. We haven't even witnessed any zergs play with guardians holding the bridge over the bay. The map is too fast paced for any serious deep dive.
|
On September 29 2025 07:56 TornadoSteve wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2025 07:24 TMNT wrote:On September 28 2025 22:24 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 19:56 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote:On September 28 2025 10:15 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 10:01 Azhi_Dahaki wrote:
Mini is better than Barracks If he were, he wouldn't have taken such a huge risk in game 7. Going Nexus first in the final game of a series says he doesn't think he would win a straight up game. Nexus first is a very common Mini thing on 4 player maps. Barracks and Mini are about equally good. Just statistic variations alone means one of the two will win a best of set, and that winrates will fluctuate up and down. Most players are about equally good and only a few are real true outliers who consistently win. Even with 55%/45% win rates someone can win or lose 5-10 in a row against a worse or better player given the sample size is big enough. Everyone and their mother knew that Mini was going Nexus first. The better player does not employ a strategy that has a 33% of working and that 33% being spawn position luck. A player takes that gamble if and only if they don't think they can win without a massive advantage. If you talk about gamble then Barracks' BBS is way more of a gamble than Mini's Nexus first. Nexus first can survive against any Terran openings other than proxy BBS. The proxy BBS that Barracks did loses against any Protoss openings other than Nexus first, and even with Nexus first, it still has 33% chance to fail if Mini spawned top left. Come on, not everyone knows who you are on TL. Some people might just read your post and actually believe it, lol. Your serious tone when spitting those foolishs affirmations is off the chart. Calm down, bro
Have you ever made a post with actual content?
|
On September 29 2025 08:12 RogueTheGOAT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2025 07:24 TMNT wrote:On September 28 2025 22:24 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 19:56 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote:On September 28 2025 10:15 RogueTheGOAT wrote:On September 28 2025 10:01 Azhi_Dahaki wrote:
Mini is better than Barracks If he were, he wouldn't have taken such a huge risk in game 7. Going Nexus first in the final game of a series says he doesn't think he would win a straight up game. Nexus first is a very common Mini thing on 4 player maps. Barracks and Mini are about equally good. Just statistic variations alone means one of the two will win a best of set, and that winrates will fluctuate up and down. Most players are about equally good and only a few are real true outliers who consistently win. Even with 55%/45% win rates someone can win or lose 5-10 in a row against a worse or better player given the sample size is big enough. Everyone and their mother knew that Mini was going Nexus first. The better player does not employ a strategy that has a 33% of working and that 33% being spawn position luck. A player takes that gamble if and only if they don't think they can win without a massive advantage. If you talk about gamble then Barracks' BBS is way more of a gamble than Mini's Nexus first. Nexus first can survive against any Terran openings other than proxy BBS. The proxy BBS that Barracks did loses against any Protoss openings other than Nexus first, and even with Nexus first, it still has 33% chance to fail if Mini spawned top left. Players can and should make choices that maximize their expected outcome. Since it was game 7, let's say that the baseline chance of winning is 50% (I'm assuming the map is not particularly favored either way since neither player picked it), and therefore, anything that results in a higher than 50% chance of winning is a smart play. If you say that there was a 75% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .75 * .66 = 49.5%. Let's say that BBS against any build other than Nexus first has a 10% win rate if placed on the correct side of the map. That's .25 * .66 * .1 = 1.65% 49.5% + 1.65% = 51.15% If you say that there was a 90% of Mini doing a Nexus First, then .90 * .66 = 59.4%. .1 * .66 * .1 = 0.66% 59.4+0.66 = 60.1% Barracks's decision to go for a BBS was a gamble in the sense that it largely took the results out of his hands, but it was not a risky play as it maximized his chance of victory. If you could tell a player going into a game 7 that if they do X that they'll have a 60.1% of winning, the only reason to NOT make that choice is that the consequences of losing and being clowned online could outweigh the benefits of winning the series.
Your calculations are probably correct but doesn't it rely heavily on the chance of Mini going Nexus first more than 75%?
For the record I thought Mini would go Nexus first in that game too but you can't pin that chance down to a number like 75% to justify your choice of going BBS. A gamble is still a gamble.
If Mini built a Gateway in that game, the narrative would change totally and we'd be discussing how Barracks was not confident in his skills and had to resort to cheese. The correct read is what RJBTV said, it's just statistical variations. All of them gamble to different degrees in a series. You win some you lose some. And it just happens that Barracks won game 7 there.
|
I do like Mini a lot and tbh don't care much for Barracks but I have to say BBS in the deciding seventh game is both a giga brain and infinite size balls move
praise where praise is due
|
On September 29 2025 23:05 TMNT wrote:
you can't pin that chance down to a number like 75%
Yes, you can. That's exactly the definition of probability from the Bayesian perspective (subjective degree of belief), as opposed to the frequentist definition based on hypothetical long-run frequencies.
FWIW, you don't need to assume a single, exact probability of mini going nexus first, you can build a curve of probability of BBS resulting in victory given different probabilities of Mini going nexus first, etc, Which is what Rogue did (albeit just with two values).
|
On September 30 2025 00:11 laurasad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2025 23:05 TMNT wrote:
you can't pin that chance down to a number like 75%
Yes, you can. That's exactly the definition of probability from the Bayesian perspective (subjective degree of belief), as opposed to the frequentist definition based on hypothetical long-run frequencies. FWIW, you don't need to assume a single, exact probability of mini going nexus first, you can build a curve of probability of BBS resulting in victory given different probabilities of Mini going nexus first, etc, Which is what Rogue did (albeit just with two values).
I know, but the win probability for BBS is only more than 50% when the probability of Mini going Nexus first is more than 75%. That's what I mean. He chose 75% as a number to demonstrate that but that default assumption means Mini has to go Nexus first 3 out of every 4 games, which probably isn't true.
You can do the same kind of calculation for Mini's Nexus first opening and compare the numbers with the BBS opening, and Mini's opening will be considered the "safer" one.
I dont know why it has to be turned into a complicated matter like this. It's very obvious from a practical point of view: the more risky, gamble-ish builds get played less often. BBS is played less than Nexus first for that exact reason.
|
On September 30 2025 00:59 TMNT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2025 00:11 laurasad wrote:On September 29 2025 23:05 TMNT wrote:
you can't pin that chance down to a number like 75%
Yes, you can. That's exactly the definition of probability from the Bayesian perspective (subjective degree of belief), as opposed to the frequentist definition based on hypothetical long-run frequencies. FWIW, you don't need to assume a single, exact probability of mini going nexus first, you can build a curve of probability of BBS resulting in victory given different probabilities of Mini going nexus first, etc, Which is what Rogue did (albeit just with two values). I know, but the win probability for BBS is only more than 50% when the probability of Mini going Nexus first is more than 75%. That's what I mean. He chose 75% as a number to demonstrate that but that default assumption means Mini has to go Nexus first 3 out of every 4 games, which probably isn't true. You can do the same kind of calculation for Mini's Nexus first opening and compare the numbers with the BBS opening, and Mini's opening will be considered the "safer" one. I dont know why it has to be turned into a complicated matter like this. It's very obvious from a practical point of view: the more risky, gamble-ish builds get played less often. BBS is played less than Nexus first for that exact reason.
As far as I know, Mini had played 2 game 7s prior to his series against Barracks. Against Larva he did a proxy 2 gate. Against Rush he went Nexus first. He has very much decided that when the pressure is highest that he does NOT want to play a "normal" game. He could have come to that conclusion based on the idea that he would expect his opponents to play extremely standard in that situation because you look bad if you gamble and lose, so he's using that to get an advantage.
BBS is played less than Nexus first because a player typically plays BBS to counter a Nexus first. Unless the opponent is Mini and it is a 4-player map or one that does not encourage aggression, a Terran player does not maximize their chances of winning by going BBS because they can't expect their opponent to go Nexus first.
This discussion started with the statement that Mini is a better player than Barracks and me countering that a better player does not take the risk of going Nexus first in a win or go home situation. If Mini thought he was better than Barracks, he plays a more standard build and builds small advantages into a win. Barracks took what was on paper a risk, but was realistically his best play from an objective standpoint.
|
On September 30 2025 02:27 RogueTheGOAT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2025 00:59 TMNT wrote:On September 30 2025 00:11 laurasad wrote:On September 29 2025 23:05 TMNT wrote:
you can't pin that chance down to a number like 75%
Yes, you can. That's exactly the definition of probability from the Bayesian perspective (subjective degree of belief), as opposed to the frequentist definition based on hypothetical long-run frequencies. FWIW, you don't need to assume a single, exact probability of mini going nexus first, you can build a curve of probability of BBS resulting in victory given different probabilities of Mini going nexus first, etc, Which is what Rogue did (albeit just with two values). I know, but the win probability for BBS is only more than 50% when the probability of Mini going Nexus first is more than 75%. That's what I mean. He chose 75% as a number to demonstrate that but that default assumption means Mini has to go Nexus first 3 out of every 4 games, which probably isn't true. You can do the same kind of calculation for Mini's Nexus first opening and compare the numbers with the BBS opening, and Mini's opening will be considered the "safer" one. I dont know why it has to be turned into a complicated matter like this. It's very obvious from a practical point of view: the more risky, gamble-ish builds get played less often. BBS is played less than Nexus first for that exact reason. As far as I know, Mini had played 2 game 7s prior to his series against Barracks. Against Larva he did a proxy 2 gate. Against Rush he went Nexus first. He has very much decided that when the pressure is highest that he does NOT want to play a "normal" game. He could have come to that conclusion based on the idea that he would expect his opponents to play extremely standard in that situation because you look bad if you gamble and lose, so he's using that to get an advantage. BBS is played less than Nexus first because a player typically plays BBS to counter a Nexus first. Unless the opponent is Mini and it is a 4-player map or one that does not encourage aggression, a Terran player does not maximize their chances of winning by going BBS because they can't expect their opponent to go Nexus first. This discussion started with the statement that Mini is a better player than Barracks and me countering that a better player does not take the risk of going Nexus first in a win or go home situation. If Mini thought he was better than Barracks, he plays a more standard build and builds small advantages into a win. Barracks took what was on paper a risk, but was realistically his best play from an objective standpoint.
Is it me, or are there two camps of pros and both Barracks and Mini are in the danger group. Soulkey is in the safe opener group, same with Best and Snow. We could deliberate on this, I truly wish it was more elaborate, but I see no way out of this. It just doesn't seem all that complicated to me.
|
On September 30 2025 02:27 RogueTheGOAT wrote:
This discussion started with the statement that Mini is a better player than Barracks and me countering that a better player does not take the risk of going Nexus first in a win or go home situation. If Mini thought he was better than Barracks, he plays a more standard build and builds small advantages into a win. Barracks took what was on paper a risk, but was realistically his best play from an objective standpoint.
The probability issue aside, you forgot to take into account players' style when they make those decisions. We are talking about Mini.
This is not the first time he did something like that. Case in point: ASL14 Ro24 - elimination match - Bo1 - 3 player map (Sylphid), but he went Nexus first against Sacsri - a Ro24 quality player that he could easily beat with any opening he wanted. Even this season in the Ro24 elimination match against sSak, he chose a DT build that could get him eliminated if sSak just held. He just likes to take risk for no reason.
|
Well, well, well. We'll get a fresh ASL champion!
|
All 4 round of 16 group winners advanced to the round of 4. That hasn't happened since ASL season 10 in 2020 which was Flash's random season.
|
On October 01 2025 23:10 RogueTheGOAT wrote:
All 4 round of 16 group winners advanced to the round of 4. That hasn't happened since ASL season 10 in 2020 which was Flash's random season.
Cool observation.
|
So in case that Bisu actually beat Soma and Snow beat barracks. How is that final looking like ? Has Bisu any chance to beat Snow at protoss vs protoss ? Since i almost never watch pvp i have no idea if Bisu can put a challenge vs Snow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
