|
On December 24 2007 11:10 machack wrote:
#104 sheis didn't have trouble vs leilei - the only game he lost was the first one, where he decided to go nukes mid game
The following games he stopped underestimating his opponent and won all of them with relative ease
This isn't GG.net, so you can't really call people by their post number, seeing as how it's actually their post count :p
|
On December 23 2007 20:09 TheFoReveRwaR wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2007 15:06 The Storyteller wrote:
Did Savior win because of his bo or in spite of it? You really love to simplify bw matches into neat little children's stories  It's admirable but bw really doesn't work that way. His bo put him in a position that obviously allowed him to win. Although to do so required superior micro and game management skills. There is no real answer to your question though. It would be like asking if a baseball player hit a homerun because of his swing, or in spite of it. Obviously a silly question
NOT an obviously silly question, which you would realise if you thought about it a moment more. I am not familiar with baseball so I'm leaving that analogy aside and going back to Starcraft.
What I'm asking is, since my stream was buffering so much that I couldn't see much, did Savior win because his bo give him the late game edge? Therefore, he looked as if he had a lot of close calls, or was losing, when actually this was because he planned to go in strong later. This is what used to happen to him when he was still at the top: his sunken line would get hammered and he'd be close to defeat, but that was because of his bo - he was simply stalling long enough to get defilers to turn the game around, and he didn't mind cutting it close because he knew his muta harrass had caused enough damage so his opponent wouldn't reach his base in time.
On the other hand, he could have won in spite of his bo. His bo could have been flawed. Hwasin was actually winning. And then Hwasin makes a mistake which Savior capitalises on. A mistake that Savior did not force him into making.
In poker, a player could call with a lousy hand and still win, but he won in spite of his call, not because of it. In football (soccer), the team could have 1 lousy player and win in spite of their line up, not because of it. This concept applies to all sorts of things and it's not hard to understand.
|
u gotta skate8152 Posts
|
|
|
On December 24 2007 15:16 KizZBG wrote:brrrrrrrrap
I'm pretty noob with image editing and stuff, but I would blur the hand and gun more since it should be more out of focus
|
On December 24 2007 11:42 ShaLLoW[baY] wrote:
This isn't GG.net, so you can't really call people by their post number, seeing as how it's actually their post count :p
Oh my God, you're right. I saw how post and suspected it was directed at me. So, I scrolled up the page, saw the number and though "yep, it is". Hilarious
Anyway, machack, maybe I didn't watch that closely as terran mirrors can sometimes all seem the same, but Sheis didn't seem impressive in any of his games at IEST. The only thing I remember liking was how he controlled and used his one wraith in the game that he lost against LeiLei.
|
On December 24 2007 11:42 ShaLLoW[baY] wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2007 11:10 machack wrote:
#104 sheis didn't have trouble vs leilei - the only game he lost was the first one, where he decided to go nukes mid game
The following games he stopped underestimating his opponent and won all of them with relative ease This isn't GG.net, so you can't really call people by their post number, seeing as how it's actually their post count :p
it's the post ORDER, not TOTAL post yo.
|
On December 25 2007 00:33 iloveHieu wrote:
it's the post ORDER, not TOTAL post yo.
Ehm, yeah, the post order and hence the numbering of the posts. He was pointing out that maphack mistakenly referred to my total number of posts
Well, actually, the posts are numbered on these forums, it just isn't visible. Yours is 227.
|
oh my mistake, thought he quoted some text from gg.net
what do you mean 227 by the way?
|
On December 24 2007 15:16 KizZBG wrote:brrrrrrrrap
LAWLWL now we need those dark swarm pics of the twin towers and stuff back.
|
On December 25 2007 01:53 iloveHieu wrote:
oh my mistake, thought he quoted some text from gg.net
what do you mean 227 by the way?
227 is the ID of your post within this thread, with posts numbered chronologically. So, to pinpoint a post precisely, you need the topic id as well as the ID of a post. The problem referring to it is that this ID isn't shown. You can see it in the address-line when you quote a comment, for instance. I'm not sure if there is a built-in feature that allows you to refer directly to a post, but I didn't find one.
Edit: Nevermind, I found out how to refer to a specific post. This link refers to my original one is this thread, however, it doesn't seem that there are any frames linked when you refer to a post, so all it does it put you to page 11. Unless I got it wrong, of course.
|
just watched the last game, darkelf played amazing, pressure terran to the max
|
On December 25 2007 07:14 Asjo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2007 01:53 iloveHieu wrote:
oh my mistake, thought he quoted some text from gg.net
what do you mean 227 by the way? 227 is the ID of your post within this thread, with posts numbered chronologically. So, to pinpoint a post precisely, you need the topic id as well as the ID of a post. The problem referring to it is that this ID isn't shown. You can see it in the address-line when you quote a comment, for instance. I'm not sure if there is a built-in feature that allows you to refer directly to a post, but I didn't find one. Edit: Nevermind, I found out how to refer to a specific post. This link refers to my original one is this thread, however, it doesn't seem that there are any frames linked when you refer to a post, so all it does it put you to page 11. Unless I got it wrong, of course.
oh I see, fancy stuff -_-;
|
On December 24 2007 11:46 The Storyteller wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2007 20:09 TheFoReveRwaR wrote:On December 23 2007 15:06 The Storyteller wrote:
Did Savior win because of his bo or in spite of it? You really love to simplify bw matches into neat little children's stories It's admirable but bw really doesn't work that way. His bo put him in a position that obviously allowed him to win. Although to do so required superior micro and game management skills. There is no real answer to your question though. It would be like asking if a baseball player hit a homerun because of his swing, or in spite of it. Obviously a silly question NOT an obviously silly question, which you would realise if you thought about it a moment more. I am not familiar with baseball so I'm leaving that analogy aside and going back to Starcraft. What I'm asking is, since my stream was buffering so much that I couldn't see much, did Savior win because his bo give him the late game edge? Therefore, he looked as if he had a lot of close calls, or was losing, when actually this was because he planned to go in strong later. This is what used to happen to him when he was still at the top: his sunken line would get hammered and he'd be close to defeat, but that was because of his bo - he was simply stalling long enough to get defilers to turn the game around, and he didn't mind cutting it close because he knew his muta harrass had caused enough damage so his opponent wouldn't reach his base in time. On the other hand, he could have won in spite of his bo. His bo could have been flawed. Hwasin was actually winning. And then Hwasin makes a mistake which Savior capitalises on. A mistake that Savior did not force him into making. In poker, a player could call with a lousy hand and still win, but he won in spite of his call, not because of it. In football (soccer), the team could have 1 lousy player and win in spite of their line up, not because of it. This concept applies to all sorts of things and it's not hard to understand.
I dont see any problem with Storyteller's question. I asked it myself after watching the game too.
The comeback made me really wonder, was Savior's opening really that bad and reluctant and lacked of confidence (it looked AWKWARD to me), or did he intentionally plan it all out?
Can't wait to see Savior's next ZvT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i19.tinypic.com/87k2dz4.jpg)
