On January 23 2012 05:24 InternalSync wrote: Such a cold crowd in Kiev, kind of disappointing that he got no cheers. Sure last game was cheesy, but the other 3 were great, he deserved some respect from the crowd. At least he gets my respect, MMA fighting!
Well, Dimaga is the local player. Not just the foreigner, but a Ukranian as well, crowd wanted Dimaga to win.
You can still give the winner some creds and not be immature and soar losers about it. And even if you don't feel like it or want to you can do it anyways just to show good manner. Even pretend if you have to.
The fact that the games were awful didn't help very much. MMA deserved to win, but the matches weren't pretty in any way. It's pretty hard to feel excited (or even pretend to be excited) when the games are as disappointing as they were.
The games were not awful, it all depended on how you looked at it.
Game 1: MMA expects Dimaga to go for mutas, so he hits at pre-spire timing. However, Dimaga was busy making lings instead of droning and overrruns the initial force. Dimaga continues to mass ling/bling, and when MMA moves out, he gets overrun again. Basically Dimaga's unorthodox play hard-countered MMA's build.
Game 2: MMA's hellions and banshees force Dimaga to be on the defense while MMA gets greedy and has 4 orbitals. By losing most of his drones at his 3rd base, as well as some banelings and lings he had made early instead of lings, Dimaga was unable to deal with the mech push. Once again, MMA shows the power of macro Terran: If a zerg lets MMA build up an economy, the game soon reaches a point where victory for the zerg is near impossible short of MMA falling asleep.
Game 3: MMA's reaper expand did a ridiculous amount of damage. Once again, MMA grabs a quick third and gets economically greedy. He prevents Dimaga from attacking him by attacking with hellions and marauders. He later keeps Dimaga occupied by skillfully managed drops. By this point, MMA is 50 supply ahead and 4 bases against a 3 base, lair-tech zerg. Game over for Dimaga
Game 4: MMA notices that Dimaga has always gone for hatch first, late pool. Proxy 2 rax. Wins IEM.
The series showcased MMA's incredible macro style of TvZ, as well as his ability to utilize effective cheese to quickly end a game. If one were only to look at game 4, yes, it would look like a terrible series. But MMA is no BitbyBit. He knew he had a 1 game safety net, where even if the 2 rax failed, he would still have a game left, and noticed how Dimaga opened very greedy. Now that is strategy.
I don't say that MMA did anything wrong. Most good players would have done the same tbh, but that's the point: a player relied on a greedy strategy and got crushed 3 games in a row. The reaper game was especially bad as you could see how Dimaga was falling apart under the pressure. It's not the strategies that bothered me, but the one-sidedness of the games. Seeing somebody go down like that isn't pretty to watch (but that's only my opinion), and it's surely not what you'd expect of the final set of the tournament. The only reason why somebody could see those as "good" games were if you'd only focus on the employed strategies and the flawless execution on MMA's side. But otherwise, you can't disagree that the finals didn't deliver great games.
On January 23 2012 05:24 InternalSync wrote: Such a cold crowd in Kiev, kind of disappointing that he got no cheers. Sure last game was cheesy, but the other 3 were great, he deserved some respect from the crowd. At least he gets my respect, MMA fighting!
Well, Dimaga is the local player. Not just the foreigner, but a Ukranian as well, crowd wanted Dimaga to win.
You can still give the winner some creds and not be immature and soar losers about it. And even if you don't feel like it or want to you can do it anyways just to show good manner. Even pretend if you have to.
The fact that the games were awful didn't help very much. MMA deserved to win, but the matches weren't pretty in any way. It's pretty hard to feel excited (or even pretend to be excited) when the games are as disappointing as they were.
The games were not awful, it all depended on how you looked at it.
Game 1: MMA expects Dimaga to go for mutas, so he hits at pre-spire timing. However, Dimaga was busy making lings instead of droning and overrruns the initial force. Dimaga continues to mass ling/bling, and when MMA moves out, he gets overrun again. Basically Dimaga's unorthodox play hard-countered MMA's build.
Game 2: MMA's hellions and banshees force Dimaga to be on the defense while MMA gets greedy and has 4 orbitals. By losing most of his drones at his 3rd base, as well as some banelings and lings he had made early instead of lings, Dimaga was unable to deal with the mech push. Once again, MMA shows the power of macro Terran: If a zerg lets MMA build up an economy, the game soon reaches a point where victory for the zerg is near impossible short of MMA falling asleep.
Game 3: MMA's reaper expand did a ridiculous amount of damage. Once again, MMA grabs a quick third and gets economically greedy. He prevents Dimaga from attacking him by attacking with hellions and marauders. He later keeps Dimaga occupied by skillfully managed drops. By this point, MMA is 50 supply ahead and 4 bases against a 3 base, lair-tech zerg. Game over for Dimaga
Game 4: MMA notices that Dimaga has always gone for hatch first, late pool. Proxy 2 rax. Wins IEM.
The series showcased MMA's incredible macro style of TvZ, as well as his ability to utilize effective cheese to quickly end a game. If one were only to look at game 4, yes, it would look like a terrible series. But MMA is no BitbyBit. He knew he had a 1 game safety net, where even if the 2 rax failed, he would still have a game left, and noticed how Dimaga opened very greedy. Now that is strategy.
I don't say that MMA did anything wrong. Most good players would have done the same tbh, but that's the point: a player relied on a greedy strategy and got crushed 3 games in a row. The reaper game was especially bad as you could see how Dimaga was falling apart under the pressure. It's not the strategies that bothered me, but the one-sidedness of the games. Seeing somebody go down like that isn't pretty to watch (but that's only my opinion), and it's surely not what you'd expect of the final set of the tournament. The only reason why somebody could see those as "good" games were if you'd only focus on the employed strategies and the flawless execution on MMA's side. But otherwise, you can't disagree that the finals didn't deliver great games.
What are you trying to prove ?
It doesnt matter, they both tried their best and the best man won.
EPT
