|
Do people actually think I'm debating about which team is best in the world?
If there was a tournament next week, I would probably pick Secret as the odds-on-favourite as well. I think just think it's dumb to go "Congrats on your 2nd place, best team in the world!" after just losing a Major...like I said, it's just propping up your favourite team.
But I still think performance in the Major has more weight in a lineup than people are considering. After all, all of these rosters were set in stone 3 months ago, and a few weeks from now half (or more) of the scene will look entirely different. Secret had the best average performance across 3 months, OG won the tournament every team is formed to try and win, and in a little bit none of that matters because we'll be judging everyone against teams that have no record.
Assuming that the top teams don't make any roster changes of their own, of course.
|
On November 23 2015 03:01 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Do people actually think I'm debating about which team is best in the world?
If there was a tournament next week, I would probably pick Secret as the odds-on-favourite as well. I think just think it's dumb to go "Congrats on your 2nd place, best team in the world!" after just losing a Major...like I said, it's just propping up your favourite team.
But I still think performance in the Major has more weight in a lineup than people are considering. After all, all of these rosters were set in stone 3 months ago, and a few weeks from now half (or more) of the scene will look entirely different. Secret had the best average performance across 3 months, OG won the tournament every team is formed to try and win, and in a little bit none of that matters because we'll be judging everyone against teams that have no record.
Assuming that the top teams don't make any roster changes of their own, of course.
You know anywhere else I might even agree with you but unfortunately this is the Team Secret discussion thread.
|
On November 23 2015 03:07 hariooo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2015 03:01 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Do people actually think I'm debating about which team is best in the world?
If there was a tournament next week, I would probably pick Secret as the odds-on-favourite as well. I think just think it's dumb to go "Congrats on your 2nd place, best team in the world!" after just losing a Major...like I said, it's just propping up your favourite team.
But I still think performance in the Major has more weight in a lineup than people are considering. After all, all of these rosters were set in stone 3 months ago, and a few weeks from now half (or more) of the scene will look entirely different. Secret had the best average performance across 3 months, OG won the tournament every team is formed to try and win, and in a little bit none of that matters because we'll be judging everyone against teams that have no record.
Assuming that the top teams don't make any roster changes of their own, of course. You know anywhere else I might even agree with you but unfortunately this is the Team Secret discussion thread.
Well, maybe I need to start treating these sections as fan clubs instead of discussion threads...
|
On November 23 2015 03:07 hariooo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2015 03:01 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Do people actually think I'm debating about which team is best in the world?
If there was a tournament next week, I would probably pick Secret as the odds-on-favourite as well. I think just think it's dumb to go "Congrats on your 2nd place, best team in the world!" after just losing a Major...like I said, it's just propping up your favourite team.
But I still think performance in the Major has more weight in a lineup than people are considering. After all, all of these rosters were set in stone 3 months ago, and a few weeks from now half (or more) of the scene will look entirely different. Secret had the best average performance across 3 months, OG won the tournament every team is formed to try and win, and in a little bit none of that matters because we'll be judging everyone against teams that have no record.
Assuming that the top teams don't make any roster changes of their own, of course. You know anywhere else I might even agree with you but unfortunately this is the Team Secret discussion thread.
Not only that, but there was some serious discussion about whether the team needed to drop a player.
Saying "Yo, hold up, they got second and are still the best team in the world, let's chill and take the positives here" seems PRETTY FUCKING RELEVANT to me.
|
On November 23 2015 03:11 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2015 03:07 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:01 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Do people actually think I'm debating about which team is best in the world?
If there was a tournament next week, I would probably pick Secret as the odds-on-favourite as well. I think just think it's dumb to go "Congrats on your 2nd place, best team in the world!" after just losing a Major...like I said, it's just propping up your favourite team.
But I still think performance in the Major has more weight in a lineup than people are considering. After all, all of these rosters were set in stone 3 months ago, and a few weeks from now half (or more) of the scene will look entirely different. Secret had the best average performance across 3 months, OG won the tournament every team is formed to try and win, and in a little bit none of that matters because we'll be judging everyone against teams that have no record.
Assuming that the top teams don't make any roster changes of their own, of course. You know anywhere else I might even agree with you but unfortunately this is the Team Secret discussion thread. Well, maybe I need to start treating these sections as fan clubs instead of discussion threads...
You didn't realize that?
|
On November 23 2015 05:48 hariooo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2015 03:11 WolfintheSheep wrote:On November 23 2015 03:07 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:01 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Do people actually think I'm debating about which team is best in the world?
If there was a tournament next week, I would probably pick Secret as the odds-on-favourite as well. I think just think it's dumb to go "Congrats on your 2nd place, best team in the world!" after just losing a Major...like I said, it's just propping up your favourite team.
But I still think performance in the Major has more weight in a lineup than people are considering. After all, all of these rosters were set in stone 3 months ago, and a few weeks from now half (or more) of the scene will look entirely different. Secret had the best average performance across 3 months, OG won the tournament every team is formed to try and win, and in a little bit none of that matters because we'll be judging everyone against teams that have no record.
Assuming that the top teams don't make any roster changes of their own, of course. You know anywhere else I might even agree with you but unfortunately this is the Team Secret discussion thread. Well, maybe I need to start treating these sections as fan clubs instead of discussion threads... You didn't realize that? I think it was a fair discussion. In tennis no.1 player is considered to be the best not the person that last won a major. He used tennis as an analogy but now that it does seem that secret is no.1 he just calls us fanboys.
|
Vatican City State1573 Posts
if winning a major and being the best is not related , i would say secret is the best right now
|
On November 23 2015 07:49 We Are Here wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2015 05:48 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:11 WolfintheSheep wrote:On November 23 2015 03:07 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:01 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Do people actually think I'm debating about which team is best in the world?
If there was a tournament next week, I would probably pick Secret as the odds-on-favourite as well. I think just think it's dumb to go "Congrats on your 2nd place, best team in the world!" after just losing a Major...like I said, it's just propping up your favourite team.
But I still think performance in the Major has more weight in a lineup than people are considering. After all, all of these rosters were set in stone 3 months ago, and a few weeks from now half (or more) of the scene will look entirely different. Secret had the best average performance across 3 months, OG won the tournament every team is formed to try and win, and in a little bit none of that matters because we'll be judging everyone against teams that have no record.
Assuming that the top teams don't make any roster changes of their own, of course. You know anywhere else I might even agree with you but unfortunately this is the Team Secret discussion thread. Well, maybe I need to start treating these sections as fan clubs instead of discussion threads... You didn't realize that? I think it was a fair discussion. In tennis no.1 player is considered to be the best not the person that last won a major. He used tennis as an analogy but now that it does seem that secret is no.1 he just calls us fanboys.
Except not really, because in Men's tennis the No. 1 player generally is the favourite to win the Grand Slam because of the sheer consistency of the top players, but on the woman's side the No. 1 player is very frequently not the favourite.
Which, again, has nothing to do with who really is the best in the world, but arbitrarily using criteria for some weak pats on the back. Like having an Asterisk next to titles:
Secret: Best team in the world.*
OG: Winner of Frankfurt Major.**
* But never won a Major.
** But was never the best in the world.
|
Well objectively looking at it. I think it's fair to say either Secret or OG are the best ATM and by the end of the next major we will have a more conclusive answer to who is the best (unless another team that hasn't been doing well wins it). Given the thread that we are in, a lot will think secret is the best.
|
On November 23 2015 08:09 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2015 07:49 We Are Here wrote:On November 23 2015 05:48 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:11 WolfintheSheep wrote:On November 23 2015 03:07 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:01 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Do people actually think I'm debating about which team is best in the world?
If there was a tournament next week, I would probably pick Secret as the odds-on-favourite as well. I think just think it's dumb to go "Congrats on your 2nd place, best team in the world!" after just losing a Major...like I said, it's just propping up your favourite team.
But I still think performance in the Major has more weight in a lineup than people are considering. After all, all of these rosters were set in stone 3 months ago, and a few weeks from now half (or more) of the scene will look entirely different. Secret had the best average performance across 3 months, OG won the tournament every team is formed to try and win, and in a little bit none of that matters because we'll be judging everyone against teams that have no record.
Assuming that the top teams don't make any roster changes of their own, of course. You know anywhere else I might even agree with you but unfortunately this is the Team Secret discussion thread. Well, maybe I need to start treating these sections as fan clubs instead of discussion threads... You didn't realize that? I think it was a fair discussion. In tennis no.1 player is considered to be the best not the person that last won a major. He used tennis as an analogy but now that it does seem that secret is no.1 he just calls us fanboys. Except not really, because in Men's tennis the No. 1 player generally is the favourite to win the Grand Slam because of the sheer consistency of the top players, but on the woman's side the No. 1 player is very frequently not the favourite. Which, again, has nothing to do with who really is the best in the world, but arbitrarily using criteria for some weak pats on the back. Like having an Asterisk next to titles: Secret: Best team in the world.* OG: Winner of Frankfurt Major.** * But never won a Major. ** But was never the best in the world.
The problem is with the small sample size, even with the higher weights to the major, secret easily have overall performed better than og. If the sample size was larger, you could start arguing a case for og.
The small sample size makes "never won a major" misleading, because what it really means is "never won that 1 particular tournament that existed so far".
|
who cares who is the best lol. it's constantly changing who is "the best".
|
On November 23 2015 08:56 DucK- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2015 08:09 WolfintheSheep wrote:On November 23 2015 07:49 We Are Here wrote:On November 23 2015 05:48 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:11 WolfintheSheep wrote:On November 23 2015 03:07 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:01 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Do people actually think I'm debating about which team is best in the world?
If there was a tournament next week, I would probably pick Secret as the odds-on-favourite as well. I think just think it's dumb to go "Congrats on your 2nd place, best team in the world!" after just losing a Major...like I said, it's just propping up your favourite team.
But I still think performance in the Major has more weight in a lineup than people are considering. After all, all of these rosters were set in stone 3 months ago, and a few weeks from now half (or more) of the scene will look entirely different. Secret had the best average performance across 3 months, OG won the tournament every team is formed to try and win, and in a little bit none of that matters because we'll be judging everyone against teams that have no record.
Assuming that the top teams don't make any roster changes of their own, of course. You know anywhere else I might even agree with you but unfortunately this is the Team Secret discussion thread. Well, maybe I need to start treating these sections as fan clubs instead of discussion threads... You didn't realize that? I think it was a fair discussion. In tennis no.1 player is considered to be the best not the person that last won a major. He used tennis as an analogy but now that it does seem that secret is no.1 he just calls us fanboys. Except not really, because in Men's tennis the No. 1 player generally is the favourite to win the Grand Slam because of the sheer consistency of the top players, but on the woman's side the No. 1 player is very frequently not the favourite. Which, again, has nothing to do with who really is the best in the world, but arbitrarily using criteria for some weak pats on the back. Like having an Asterisk next to titles: Secret: Best team in the world.* OG: Winner of Frankfurt Major.** * But never won a Major. ** But was never the best in the world. The problem is with the small sample size, even with the higher weights to the major, secret easily have overall performed better than og. If the sample size was larger, you could start arguing a case for og. The small sample size makes "never won a major" misleading, because what it really means is "never won that 1 particular tournament that existed so far".
Yeah, but if you ask Secret and OG if they would like to swap results in the past 3 months, I know which team would say yes and which one would say no...
|
OG has a 72% winrate the past 3 months tho, it's not like they are a bunch of scrubs that lucked their way to a major victory. OG is currently one of the best teams in the world, this week they were easily the top 1 team
|
On November 23 2015 09:07 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2015 08:56 DucK- wrote:On November 23 2015 08:09 WolfintheSheep wrote:On November 23 2015 07:49 We Are Here wrote:On November 23 2015 05:48 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:11 WolfintheSheep wrote:On November 23 2015 03:07 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:01 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Do people actually think I'm debating about which team is best in the world?
If there was a tournament next week, I would probably pick Secret as the odds-on-favourite as well. I think just think it's dumb to go "Congrats on your 2nd place, best team in the world!" after just losing a Major...like I said, it's just propping up your favourite team.
But I still think performance in the Major has more weight in a lineup than people are considering. After all, all of these rosters were set in stone 3 months ago, and a few weeks from now half (or more) of the scene will look entirely different. Secret had the best average performance across 3 months, OG won the tournament every team is formed to try and win, and in a little bit none of that matters because we'll be judging everyone against teams that have no record.
Assuming that the top teams don't make any roster changes of their own, of course. You know anywhere else I might even agree with you but unfortunately this is the Team Secret discussion thread. Well, maybe I need to start treating these sections as fan clubs instead of discussion threads... You didn't realize that? I think it was a fair discussion. In tennis no.1 player is considered to be the best not the person that last won a major. He used tennis as an analogy but now that it does seem that secret is no.1 he just calls us fanboys. Except not really, because in Men's tennis the No. 1 player generally is the favourite to win the Grand Slam because of the sheer consistency of the top players, but on the woman's side the No. 1 player is very frequently not the favourite. Which, again, has nothing to do with who really is the best in the world, but arbitrarily using criteria for some weak pats on the back. Like having an Asterisk next to titles: Secret: Best team in the world.* OG: Winner of Frankfurt Major.** * But never won a Major. ** But was never the best in the world. The problem is with the small sample size, even with the higher weights to the major, secret easily have overall performed better than og. If the sample size was larger, you could start arguing a case for og. The small sample size makes "never won a major" misleading, because what it really means is "never won that 1 particular tournament that existed so far". Yeah, but if you ask Secret and OG if they would like to swap results in the past 3 months, I know which team would say yes and which one would say no...
So you're ranking them based on money earned? Well I guess EG and CDEC have them both covered.
|
On November 23 2015 11:20 hariooo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2015 09:07 WolfintheSheep wrote:On November 23 2015 08:56 DucK- wrote:On November 23 2015 08:09 WolfintheSheep wrote:On November 23 2015 07:49 We Are Here wrote:On November 23 2015 05:48 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:11 WolfintheSheep wrote:On November 23 2015 03:07 hariooo wrote:On November 23 2015 03:01 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Do people actually think I'm debating about which team is best in the world?
If there was a tournament next week, I would probably pick Secret as the odds-on-favourite as well. I think just think it's dumb to go "Congrats on your 2nd place, best team in the world!" after just losing a Major...like I said, it's just propping up your favourite team.
But I still think performance in the Major has more weight in a lineup than people are considering. After all, all of these rosters were set in stone 3 months ago, and a few weeks from now half (or more) of the scene will look entirely different. Secret had the best average performance across 3 months, OG won the tournament every team is formed to try and win, and in a little bit none of that matters because we'll be judging everyone against teams that have no record.
Assuming that the top teams don't make any roster changes of their own, of course. You know anywhere else I might even agree with you but unfortunately this is the Team Secret discussion thread. Well, maybe I need to start treating these sections as fan clubs instead of discussion threads... You didn't realize that? I think it was a fair discussion. In tennis no.1 player is considered to be the best not the person that last won a major. He used tennis as an analogy but now that it does seem that secret is no.1 he just calls us fanboys. Except not really, because in Men's tennis the No. 1 player generally is the favourite to win the Grand Slam because of the sheer consistency of the top players, but on the woman's side the No. 1 player is very frequently not the favourite. Which, again, has nothing to do with who really is the best in the world, but arbitrarily using criteria for some weak pats on the back. Like having an Asterisk next to titles: Secret: Best team in the world.* OG: Winner of Frankfurt Major.** * But never won a Major. ** But was never the best in the world. The problem is with the small sample size, even with the higher weights to the major, secret easily have overall performed better than og. If the sample size was larger, you could start arguing a case for og. The small sample size makes "never won a major" misleading, because what it really means is "never won that 1 particular tournament that existed so far". Yeah, but if you ask Secret and OG if they would like to swap results in the past 3 months, I know which team would say yes and which one would say no... So you're ranking them based on money earned? Well I guess EG and CDEC have them both covered.
Not really?
Sure, I imagine money does factor in quite a bit when it comes to player opinions.
But if you asked players like Burning, EE and Arteezy "would you trade all your current prize money for one of these big tournament wins", I'd think they'd definitely consider it. And all three of them have earned more than $500k. More than the TI1, 2, 3, DAC and Frankfurt prize pools would have given them individually.
Sure, winning all these side tournaments is nice. But when it comes to competition, a lot of these players want the big trophies.
|
We're talking about who is the best team atm, and not who is happier. It is a no brainer that every team would prefer ti or the majors.
|
On November 23 2015 12:27 DucK- wrote:
We're talking about who is the best team atm, and not who is happier. It is a no brainer that every team would prefer ti or the majors.
That sounds even more like conciliatory pats on the back...
"You're the best team in the world at the moment, congrats on second place."
|
Came in, saw a 40 post inane conversation trying to deteemine who's the "best" team in the world without defining "best", decided it's time to go. Bye.
|
You can still the overall best ranking team, despite the 2nd placing.
|
On November 23 2015 13:07 DucK- wrote:
You can still the overall best ranking team, despite the 2nd placing.
How about we say OG, Secret, and EG are the 3 best teams in the world right now with OG playing the best at the most recent tournament. Are they the better team overall? I dunno. But I think it's fair to say they are up there with Secret we will just need to see what happens with upcoming tournaments before making any blanket statements for any team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
