On November 28 2011 01:46 kafkaesque wrote: So this is not about the skill involved but about how measurable the skill is?
I think a game in which a player can win games on a clearly better player shows the game has an higher random factor
But how do you measure who the better player is? Consistency in winning? Im not arguing with you that say Federer was by far he best tennis player. But theres no "measurable" skill that you can use to define it. Some other guys serve harder, move faster etc..
If winning a lot is the only way you can define who the better player is, then of course a "better player" will win more often over a "lesser player" because thats how you defined he was better in the first place.
Well I think in a game where the outcome is 100% determined by how good you are then you best player on the planet would win every single tournament and the second best would come second every time. I think the closest you get to that than the more "skilled-based" the game can be called. Maybe I should have used the term "lowest randomness involved" rather than "skilled based"
But even in your example a person with higher "skill" can lose to someone that's just genetically superior. When i competed as a swimmer it was easy to see who had the inherent physique and technique (skill) to become great. Those who had just the strength/agility or the technique never made it. It wasn't so much about honing skills as being extremely well suited for the sport you practice.
I'm pretty sure it's like that for most physical sports.
On November 28 2011 02:07 XsebT wrote: There are so many difficult competitions... Though, this came to my mind for some reason...
I've always been less impressed with team sports.
When it comes to (essentially) non-physical games, I'd have to say bw of course.
The problem with sports like this and other judged sports is that it clearly isn't the best who always wins. It's who ever the panel of judges "thinks" is best. It's not a competition of me vs you and the last man standing wins but rather a contest of who can convince the judges that their routine was harder or more skillful. Far too often the "wrong" athlete loses because one or more of the judges decided that they don't like your outfit, personality, music choice, body shape, coach, home country, skin color, or any other reason they can think of. There is no way to have a totally impartial judge and therefore no real way to know who is "better."
I'd have to put it at 1. Tennis: the best of the best at tennis never really lose to those not as good. The top .1% (ferrer, federrer, del potro, tsonga, nadal, murray) hardly ever lose to the top 1%. This is much different from other sports where collective bad days really matter, if your shot is on its because you spent days on end perfecting it. 2. starcraft / counter strike/ quake/ SSF4: its really hard to put one on top of the other since all are completely skill based games. Though their might be an upset unlike tennis where upsets RARELY occur, all are based on the amount practiced against great players and you can't really have a lucky day, just a day where you make great decisions and all your practice comes together. Watching the dreamhack i realized that all 4 of these games are pretty similar in this regard and that is why i put them together here. While some may say that SC is much more difficult a game, i would say that may be true, but the level of play that the top of each game shares is fairly similar in that they practice A LOT, an absolute crap ton. 3. Chess: its about the same as 2, but i put it on a slightly lower level just because of how slow the reaction time is, but nonetheless its pretty much like a 2.1 on my scale.
I would put MMA like some, but their is too much variation in style and such that i can't say if its all skill and not just a training win since the guys know so many forms of martial arts. I will say that Muay Thai fighting is close to 3rd on my list because its not about taking or dealing punishment, its about knowing what to do and when to do it flawlessly. I would put track and feild, but that is more about being kenyan than anything else
On November 28 2011 02:07 XsebT wrote: There are so many difficult competitions... Though, this came to my mind for some reason... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBWwm2Wysb8
I've always been less impressed with team sports.
When it comes to (essentially) non-physical games, I'd have to say bw of course.
The problem with sports like this and other judged sports is that it clearly isn't the best who always wins. It's who ever the panel of judges "thinks" is best. It's not a competition of me vs you and the last man standing wins but rather a contest of who can convince the judges that their routine was harder or more skillful. Far too often the "wrong" athlete loses because one or more of the judges decided that they don't like your outfit, personality, music choice, body shape, coach, home country, skin color, or any other reason they can think of. There is no way to have a totally impartial judge and therefore no real way to know who is "better."
Completely agree. I was simply saying that what they do is extremely impressive.
On November 28 2011 01:44 ShineOnYou wrote: game/sport/competition
I think my number one would have to be tennis. Especially in grand slams, you almost never see a higher ranked player in the top end lose to a lower ranked player, even if its like #2 vs #3, and semi finals usually consists of the top 4 seeds. And I've seen a Elo ranking of tennis players somewhere and it had the highest peaks I had ever seen(even higher than chess) which was over 2900 for Federer.
Id have to put chess in second. But I think it is reaching its limits nowadays a game between two grandmasters ends up in a draw more often than not, and if not that then its whoever had white side that wins.
And id put Starcraft in third. Both sc2 and bw but mainly broodwar because I think random factor in sc2 is higher but I'm confident blizzard will change that in future expansions though.
Yeah because there is no random factor in real sports... lol.
On November 28 2011 03:36 solidbebe wrote: Everyone is basically just listing the games they're a fan of/ have a background in.
Pretty much.
I disagree, people can only really state about what they know, if they didn't they would get called out. Plus has anyone named something that doesn't take skill here? i haven't see tiddly winks just yet . Still people will name what they have background in because they understand the sport.
That game is so hard, there are too many mechanics and bugs and glitches; that game needs so many patches but they never seem to come. I rage so much when I play it, god... there are also a crap tonne of addicts of that game, more players than all Blizzard games combined. Very time consuming too, its hard to find time to do anything else but to play it.
Really guys? Life? life is pretty effin balanced and easy. Isnt it for like, ages 7+? oh i guess its 9+. :D
Also as far as games that require the most skill... pac man
On November 28 2011 01:44 ShineOnYou wrote: game/sport/competition
I think my number one would have to be tennis. Especially in grand slams, you almost never see a higher ranked player in the top end lose to a lower ranked player.
I've played tennis and I agree its ridiculously demanding for many reasons.... but I'm not gonna touch on those. I think a large part of what explains the phenomenon you mention is the scoring system.
Every game you have to win by two points. Every set you have to win by two games. Every match you have to win by two sets.
This results in all games/sets/matches to be extended whenever the score is first, and over longer matches the better player is more and more likely to win. You could probably replicate this effect with almost any sport if you implement some kind of system where games are drawn out when things get close: 1. Longer rounds in boxing if there is no winner. Win by at least two rounds (probably not the best example I know). 2. Must win by at least 6 points (2 field goals or a touchdown) by regulation or the game is thrown into an overtime determined by same winning margin but the kicking team must have a chance to respond with their own drive. etc, etc.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XAvnY.gif)
