• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 01:08
CEST 07:08
KST 14:08
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Maestros of the Game: Week 1/Play-in Preview5[ASL20] Ro24 Preview Pt2: Take-Off7[ASL20] Ro24 Preview Pt1: Runway132v2 & SC: Evo Complete: Weekend Double Feature4Team Liquid Map Contest #21 - Presented by Monster Energy9
Community News
Weekly Cups (Aug 18-24): herO dethrones MaxPax6Maestros of The Game—$20k event w/ live finals in Paris38Weekly Cups (Aug 11-17): MaxPax triples again!13Weekly Cups (Aug 4-10): MaxPax wins a triple6SC2's Safe House 2 - October 18 & 195
StarCraft 2
General
#2: Serral - Greatest Players of All Time #1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time Maestros of the Game: Week 1/Play-in Preview Greatest Players of All Time: 2025 Update BoxeR's Wings Episode 2 - Fan Translation
Tourneys
Maestros of The Game—$20k event w/ live finals in Paris Kirktown Chat Brawl #8 - 4.6K max Tonight LiuLi Cup - August 2025 Tournaments $5,000 WardiTV Summer Championship 2025 $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo)
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 488 What Goes Around Mutation # 487 Think Fast Mutation # 486 Watch the Skies Mutation # 485 Death from Below
Brood War
General
Post ASL20 Ro24 discussion. BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Easiest luckies way to get out of Asl groups BW General Discussion No Rain in ASL20?
Tourneys
Small VOD Thread 2.0 [ASL20] Ro24 Group F Cosmonarchy Pro Showmatches [IPSL] CSLAN Review and CSLPRO Reimagined!
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Muta micro map competition Fighting Spirit mining rates [G] Mineral Boosting
Other Games
General Games
Path of Exile General RTS Discussion Thread Mechabellum Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread YouTube Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Canadian Politics Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread High temperatures on bridge(s) Gtx660 graphics card replacement
TL Community
The Automated Ban List TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale
Blogs
hello world
radishsoup
Lemme tell you a thing o…
JoinTheRain
How Culture and Conflict Imp…
TrAiDoS
RTS Design in Hypercoven
a11
Evil Gacha Games and the…
ffswowsucks
INDEPENDIENTE LA CTM
XenOsky
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 835 users

Clutch Engage - Page 2

Forum Index > Final Edits
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next All
FakeSteve[TPR]
Profile Blog Joined July 2003
Valhalla18444 Posts
August 14 2007 06:56 GMT
#21
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:45 gravity wrote:
"80.9% of the time, Nada has won the required number of games before his opponent has."

This is actually almost exactly what you would expect from a player with a 60% game winning ratio playing against an average opponent in a Bo3 (0.6*0.6*0.4*(3 choose 2) + 0.6*0.6 = 0.792). Of course, opponents in Bo3's are generally going to be somewhat above average so this does still indicate some "clutch" ability (though on the other hand I didn't take into account Bo5's which should have an even better ratio). I guess the real story is Midas's relative failure in Bo's.


First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator
Moderatormy tatsu loops r fuckin nice
alffla
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Hong Kong20321 Posts
August 14 2007 06:59 GMT
#22
nice write up fakesteve
both really good terrans...i used to love midas for his tvp so much it was insane shit haha
Graphicssavior[gm] : What is a “yawn” rape ;; Masumune - It was the year of the pig for those fucking defilers. Chill - A clinic you say? okum: SC without Korean yelling is like porn without sex. konamix: HAPPY BIRTHDAY MOMMY!
gravity
Profile Joined March 2004
Australia1872 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-08-14 07:06:30
August 14 2007 07:02 GMT
#23
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:45 gravity wrote:
"80.9% of the time, Nada has won the required number of games before his opponent has."

This is actually almost exactly what you would expect from a player with a 60% game winning ratio playing against an average opponent in a Bo3 (0.6*0.6*0.4*(3 choose 2) + 0.6*0.6 = 0.792). Of course, opponents in Bo3's are generally going to be somewhat above average so this does still indicate some "clutch" ability (though on the other hand I didn't take into account Bo5's which should have an even better ratio). I guess the real story is Midas's relative failure in Bo's.


First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator

Still, my point was that just doing well in BoX's doesn't necessarily prove that a player is particularly strong in clutch situations rather than just being good in general. You also have to take into account that Nada's winning % would be even higher if it wasn't for long "slump" periods where he didn't reach the BO level at all. So Nada's "effective" winning % during the times he was setting his Best-of records is arguably more than 62%.

The Elo test I mentioned in my other post would be good since it would take into account both how good a player was playing at the time of a BoX (as opposed to looking at his all-time record) and how well his opponent was playing, allowing a more accurate measurement of who is truly "clutch". I wouldn't be surprised if Nada did well on that measurement too though.

I don't really think you're necessarily wrong here, I just like statistics/objective measurements for this kind of thing :p.
SoMuchBetter
Profile Blog Joined April 2003
Australia10606 Posts
August 14 2007 07:06 GMT
#24
On August 14 2007 16:02 gravity wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:45 gravity wrote:
"80.9% of the time, Nada has won the required number of games before his opponent has."

This is actually almost exactly what you would expect from a player with a 60% game winning ratio playing against an average opponent in a Bo3 (0.6*0.6*0.4*(3 choose 2) + 0.6*0.6 = 0.792). Of course, opponents in Bo3's are generally going to be somewhat above average so this does still indicate some "clutch" ability (though on the other hand I didn't take into account Bo5's which should have an even better ratio). I guess the real story is Midas's relative failure in Bo's.


First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator

Still, my point was that just doing well in BoX's doesn't necessarily prove that a player is particularly strong in clutch situations rather than just being good in general. You also have to take into account that Nada's winning % would be even higher if it wasn't for long "slump" periods where he didn't reach the BO level at all. So Nada's "effective" winning % during the times he was setting his Best-of records is arguably more than 62%.

The Elo test I mentioned in my other post would be good since it would take into account both how good a player was playing at the time of a BoX (as opposed to looking at his all-time record) and his well his opponent was playing, allowing a more accurate measurement of who is truly "clutch". I wouldn't be surprised if Nada did well on that measurement too though.

I don't really think you're necessarily wrong here, I just like statistics/objective measurements for this kind of thing :p.

you've completely missed the point of this article then. the first line of your first paragraph is addressed by steve's article
AUSSIESCUM
TeamLiquid eSTROgeneral #1 • RIP
iosef
Profile Joined June 2007
Israel194 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-08-14 07:14:14
August 14 2007 07:07 GMT
#25
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:45 gravity wrote:
"80.9% of the time, Nada has won the required number of games before his opponent has."

This is actually almost exactly what you would expect from a player with a 60% game winning ratio playing against an average opponent in a Bo3 (0.6*0.6*0.4*(3 choose 2) + 0.6*0.6 = 0.792). Of course, opponents in Bo3's are generally going to be somewhat above average so this does still indicate some "clutch" ability (though on the other hand I didn't take into account Bo5's which should have an even better ratio). I guess the real story is Midas's relative failure in Bo's.


First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator


of course you would expect a strong player to have a much better win ratio in bo series than all games, thats why series are used to decide important matches. What's impressive about nada is the way he was able to dominate for so long against so many opponents. However if you wanted to calculate 'clutch' ability statistically, you could take into account the win ratios of players he played in matches which are more important and see if he still beats the odds compared to normal games. a project for someone with a lot of patience perhaps...

edit: FWIW a win ratio of 80%+ in bo matches indicates that nada's "game win ratio" is still around 60% even when playing against the elite group that reach the quarters and semis of starleagues and therefore plays in the bo3/bo5 matches.
alffla
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Hong Kong20321 Posts
August 14 2007 07:07 GMT
#26
statisticky stuff are awesome. i just have no idea how to do them and i hate maths lolooll
Graphicssavior[gm] : What is a “yawn” rape ;; Masumune - It was the year of the pig for those fucking defilers. Chill - A clinic you say? okum: SC without Korean yelling is like porn without sex. konamix: HAPPY BIRTHDAY MOMMY!
gravity
Profile Joined March 2004
Australia1872 Posts
August 14 2007 07:10 GMT
#27
On August 14 2007 16:06 SoMuchBetter wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 16:02 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:45 gravity wrote:
"80.9% of the time, Nada has won the required number of games before his opponent has."

This is actually almost exactly what you would expect from a player with a 60% game winning ratio playing against an average opponent in a Bo3 (0.6*0.6*0.4*(3 choose 2) + 0.6*0.6 = 0.792). Of course, opponents in Bo3's are generally going to be somewhat above average so this does still indicate some "clutch" ability (though on the other hand I didn't take into account Bo5's which should have an even better ratio). I guess the real story is Midas's relative failure in Bo's.


First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator

Still, my point was that just doing well in BoX's doesn't necessarily prove that a player is particularly strong in clutch situations rather than just being good in general. You also have to take into account that Nada's winning % would be even higher if it wasn't for long "slump" periods where he didn't reach the BO level at all. So Nada's "effective" winning % during the times he was setting his Best-of records is arguably more than 62%.

The Elo test I mentioned in my other post would be good since it would take into account both how good a player was playing at the time of a BoX (as opposed to looking at his all-time record) and his well his opponent was playing, allowing a more accurate measurement of who is truly "clutch". I wouldn't be surprised if Nada did well on that measurement too though.

I don't really think you're necessarily wrong here, I just like statistics/objective measurements for this kind of thing :p.

you've completely missed the point of this article then. the first line of your first paragraph is addressed by steve's article

You've completely missed the point of my post which is not so much that the article is entirely wrong as that it doesn't have enough information to solidly prove anything.
NarutO
Profile Blog Joined December 2006
Germany18839 Posts
August 14 2007 07:12 GMT
#28
NaDa:

OSL x 3
MSL x3

Thats how it is.. ^^
CommentatorPolt | MMA | Jjakji | BoxeR | NaDa | MVP | MKP ... truly inspiring.
FakeSteve[TPR]
Profile Blog Joined July 2003
Valhalla18444 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-08-14 07:15:46
August 14 2007 07:14 GMT
#29
On August 14 2007 16:10 gravity wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 16:06 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:02 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:45 gravity wrote:
"80.9% of the time, Nada has won the required number of games before his opponent has."

This is actually almost exactly what you would expect from a player with a 60% game winning ratio playing against an average opponent in a Bo3 (0.6*0.6*0.4*(3 choose 2) + 0.6*0.6 = 0.792). Of course, opponents in Bo3's are generally going to be somewhat above average so this does still indicate some "clutch" ability (though on the other hand I didn't take into account Bo5's which should have an even better ratio). I guess the real story is Midas's relative failure in Bo's.


First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator

Still, my point was that just doing well in BoX's doesn't necessarily prove that a player is particularly strong in clutch situations rather than just being good in general. You also have to take into account that Nada's winning % would be even higher if it wasn't for long "slump" periods where he didn't reach the BO level at all. So Nada's "effective" winning % during the times he was setting his Best-of records is arguably more than 62%.

The Elo test I mentioned in my other post would be good since it would take into account both how good a player was playing at the time of a BoX (as opposed to looking at his all-time record) and his well his opponent was playing, allowing a more accurate measurement of who is truly "clutch". I wouldn't be surprised if Nada did well on that measurement too though.

I don't really think you're necessarily wrong here, I just like statistics/objective measurements for this kind of thing :p.

you've completely missed the point of this article then. the first line of your first paragraph is addressed by steve's article

You've completely missed the point of my post which is not so much that the article is entirely wrong as that it doesn't have enough information to solidly prove anything.


You think the point of the article is "nada is 46-11 in series therefore he is a clutch player"

the point of the article is midas chokes and nada is a clutch player, also look at these interesting statistics I don't think anyone can argue that Nada isn't a clutch player, given his deserving title as the most successful progamer. I didn't feel it needed proving, just solidifying through a statistic that I felt was relevant and indicative.
Moderatormy tatsu loops r fuckin nice
SoMuchBetter
Profile Blog Joined April 2003
Australia10606 Posts
August 14 2007 07:16 GMT
#30
On August 14 2007 16:10 gravity wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 16:06 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:02 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:45 gravity wrote:
"80.9% of the time, Nada has won the required number of games before his opponent has."

This is actually almost exactly what you would expect from a player with a 60% game winning ratio playing against an average opponent in a Bo3 (0.6*0.6*0.4*(3 choose 2) + 0.6*0.6 = 0.792). Of course, opponents in Bo3's are generally going to be somewhat above average so this does still indicate some "clutch" ability (though on the other hand I didn't take into account Bo5's which should have an even better ratio). I guess the real story is Midas's relative failure in Bo's.


First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator

Still, my point was that just doing well in BoX's doesn't necessarily prove that a player is particularly strong in clutch situations rather than just being good in general. You also have to take into account that Nada's winning % would be even higher if it wasn't for long "slump" periods where he didn't reach the BO level at all. So Nada's "effective" winning % during the times he was setting his Best-of records is arguably more than 62%.

The Elo test I mentioned in my other post would be good since it would take into account both how good a player was playing at the time of a BoX (as opposed to looking at his all-time record) and his well his opponent was playing, allowing a more accurate measurement of who is truly "clutch". I wouldn't be surprised if Nada did well on that measurement too though.

I don't really think you're necessarily wrong here, I just like statistics/objective measurements for this kind of thing :p.

you've completely missed the point of this article then. the first line of your first paragraph is addressed by steve's article

You've completely missed the point of my post which is not so much that the article is entirely wrong as that it doesn't have enough information to solidly prove anything.

how's this for proof?
http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/players/147_NaDa
AUSSIESCUM
TeamLiquid eSTROgeneral #1 • RIP
gravity
Profile Joined March 2004
Australia1872 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-08-14 07:18:50
August 14 2007 07:17 GMT
#31
On August 14 2007 16:14 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 16:10 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:06 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:02 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:45 gravity wrote:
"80.9% of the time, Nada has won the required number of games before his opponent has."

This is actually almost exactly what you would expect from a player with a 60% game winning ratio playing against an average opponent in a Bo3 (0.6*0.6*0.4*(3 choose 2) + 0.6*0.6 = 0.792). Of course, opponents in Bo3's are generally going to be somewhat above average so this does still indicate some "clutch" ability (though on the other hand I didn't take into account Bo5's which should have an even better ratio). I guess the real story is Midas's relative failure in Bo's.


First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator

Still, my point was that just doing well in BoX's doesn't necessarily prove that a player is particularly strong in clutch situations rather than just being good in general. You also have to take into account that Nada's winning % would be even higher if it wasn't for long "slump" periods where he didn't reach the BO level at all. So Nada's "effective" winning % during the times he was setting his Best-of records is arguably more than 62%.

The Elo test I mentioned in my other post would be good since it would take into account both how good a player was playing at the time of a BoX (as opposed to looking at his all-time record) and his well his opponent was playing, allowing a more accurate measurement of who is truly "clutch". I wouldn't be surprised if Nada did well on that measurement too though.

I don't really think you're necessarily wrong here, I just like statistics/objective measurements for this kind of thing :p.

you've completely missed the point of this article then. the first line of your first paragraph is addressed by steve's article

You've completely missed the point of my post which is not so much that the article is entirely wrong as that it doesn't have enough information to solidly prove anything.


You think the point of the article is "nada is 46-11 in series therefore he is a clutch player"

the point of the article is midas chokes and nada is a clutch player, also look at these interesting statistics I don't think anyone can argue that Nada isn't a clutch player, given his deserving title as the most successful progamer. I didn't feel it needed proving, just solidifying through a statistic that I felt was relevant and indicative.

It's perfectly possible to be a dominant player, the most successful, etc, and not be unusually "clutch", unless by clutch you just mean "not a major choker". You just have to be good enough at your peak.

Hell, if your peak strength was good enough you could actually be a mild "choker" (in terms of performing below expectation in major finals) and still be very successful/win leagues
gravity
Profile Joined March 2004
Australia1872 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-08-14 07:24:18
August 14 2007 07:21 GMT
#32
On August 14 2007 16:16 SoMuchBetter wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 16:10 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:06 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:02 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:45 gravity wrote:
"80.9% of the time, Nada has won the required number of games before his opponent has."

This is actually almost exactly what you would expect from a player with a 60% game winning ratio playing against an average opponent in a Bo3 (0.6*0.6*0.4*(3 choose 2) + 0.6*0.6 = 0.792). Of course, opponents in Bo3's are generally going to be somewhat above average so this does still indicate some "clutch" ability (though on the other hand I didn't take into account Bo5's which should have an even better ratio). I guess the real story is Midas's relative failure in Bo's.


First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator

Still, my point was that just doing well in BoX's doesn't necessarily prove that a player is particularly strong in clutch situations rather than just being good in general. You also have to take into account that Nada's winning % would be even higher if it wasn't for long "slump" periods where he didn't reach the BO level at all. So Nada's "effective" winning % during the times he was setting his Best-of records is arguably more than 62%.

The Elo test I mentioned in my other post would be good since it would take into account both how good a player was playing at the time of a BoX (as opposed to looking at his all-time record) and his well his opponent was playing, allowing a more accurate measurement of who is truly "clutch". I wouldn't be surprised if Nada did well on that measurement too though.

I don't really think you're necessarily wrong here, I just like statistics/objective measurements for this kind of thing :p.

you've completely missed the point of this article then. the first line of your first paragraph is addressed by steve's article

You've completely missed the point of my post which is not so much that the article is entirely wrong as that it doesn't have enough information to solidly prove anything.

how's this for proof?
http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/players/147_NaDa

If you think that proves that Nada is "clutch" you don't know either don't know what clutch means or you're just sticking with the very weak "not a serious choker" definition. It's actually possible (though pretty unlikely) that despite all his wins, Nada is actually a "choker" to a small extent (it's more likely that this is true if Nada's peak strength in normal games is much higher than his average, which we don't really know since we don't have Elo ratings (or equivalent) over time for players yet).

In other words, yes Nada does have a lot of wins in finals, but is that more than we would expect from a player of his (seemingly very high) peak strength? We don't have enough information to say.
FakeSteve[TPR]
Profile Blog Joined July 2003
Valhalla18444 Posts
August 14 2007 07:25 GMT
#33
On August 14 2007 16:21 gravity wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 16:16 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:10 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:06 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:02 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:45 gravity wrote:
"80.9% of the time, Nada has won the required number of games before his opponent has."

This is actually almost exactly what you would expect from a player with a 60% game winning ratio playing against an average opponent in a Bo3 (0.6*0.6*0.4*(3 choose 2) + 0.6*0.6 = 0.792). Of course, opponents in Bo3's are generally going to be somewhat above average so this does still indicate some "clutch" ability (though on the other hand I didn't take into account Bo5's which should have an even better ratio). I guess the real story is Midas's relative failure in Bo's.


First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator

Still, my point was that just doing well in BoX's doesn't necessarily prove that a player is particularly strong in clutch situations rather than just being good in general. You also have to take into account that Nada's winning % would be even higher if it wasn't for long "slump" periods where he didn't reach the BO level at all. So Nada's "effective" winning % during the times he was setting his Best-of records is arguably more than 62%.

The Elo test I mentioned in my other post would be good since it would take into account both how good a player was playing at the time of a BoX (as opposed to looking at his all-time record) and his well his opponent was playing, allowing a more accurate measurement of who is truly "clutch". I wouldn't be surprised if Nada did well on that measurement too though.

I don't really think you're necessarily wrong here, I just like statistics/objective measurements for this kind of thing :p.

you've completely missed the point of this article then. the first line of your first paragraph is addressed by steve's article

You've completely missed the point of my post which is not so much that the article is entirely wrong as that it doesn't have enough information to solidly prove anything.

how's this for proof?
http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/players/147_NaDa

If you think that proves that Nada is "clutch" you don't know either don't know what clutch means or you're just sticking with the very weak "not a serious choker" definition. It's actually possible (though pretty unlikely) that despite all his wins, Nada is actually a "choker" to a small extent (it's more likely that this would be true if Nada's peak strength in normal games is much higher than his average).


I want you to examine the win ratios of Midas and Nada. Nada's is lower, yet he has six individual titles. Midas wins a lot more throwaway, one-off games, like ProLeague and the various qualification rounds, whereas Nada finds himself in series much more often. A player will only play a series if he's top 8 in OSL or top whatever in MSL depending on their format changes. Midas having a better career games win ratio but no success in the individual leagues, versus Nada's lesser career games win ratio but six individual titles? Nada thrives on competition and plays exponentially better the farther he goes in tournaments. This is the definition of a clutch player, and why the article is about him.
Moderatormy tatsu loops r fuckin nice
SoMuchBetter
Profile Blog Joined April 2003
Australia10606 Posts
August 14 2007 07:30 GMT
#34
clutch means performing under pressure. there is no other player that fits that definition better than nada, you can't argue with that. just look at the fields of players he beats his way through in his championships. i don't even know what point you're trying to make anymore other than that you would like to have an elo rating system going on.
AUSSIESCUM
TeamLiquid eSTROgeneral #1 • RIP
YoUr_KiLLeR
Profile Blog Joined September 2004
United States3420 Posts
August 14 2007 07:47 GMT
#35
a perfect example of this is the shinhan2 OSL.

midas has a 2-1 lead vs anytime in the semifinals and in the 4th game has taken his 2nd and 3rd bases much earlier than anytime has. anytime went all 3 branches of tech, dt, robo and stargate, off of 2 bases. midas only needs to macro for a min or two and attack move and hes secured his place in the OSL final. but instead, he sits around and doesnt do much while anytime harasses him to death with reavers and eventually carriers. then in the 5th game midas crumbles, suiciding his entire FD force and dying to goons in 5 min.

nada is 2-2 with anytime in the final and uses perfectly executed, multiple vulture drops in various places in anytimes main and nat, slowly reducing his probe count and stagnating his macro. meanwhile nada continues to build up his army back home and comes with a perfectly timed push of 4 tanks and a crapload of vultures. several minutes later nada claims his 3rd OSL title.
what the fuck do you have to say for yourself now you protoss jackass can you retaliate in any way
gravity
Profile Joined March 2004
Australia1872 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-08-14 07:53:04
August 14 2007 07:51 GMT
#36
On August 14 2007 16:25 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 16:21 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:16 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:10 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:06 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:02 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:45 gravity wrote:
"80.9% of the time, Nada has won the required number of games before his opponent has."

This is actually almost exactly what you would expect from a player with a 60% game winning ratio playing against an average opponent in a Bo3 (0.6*0.6*0.4*(3 choose 2) + 0.6*0.6 = 0.792). Of course, opponents in Bo3's are generally going to be somewhat above average so this does still indicate some "clutch" ability (though on the other hand I didn't take into account Bo5's which should have an even better ratio). I guess the real story is Midas's relative failure in Bo's.


First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator

Still, my point was that just doing well in BoX's doesn't necessarily prove that a player is particularly strong in clutch situations rather than just being good in general. You also have to take into account that Nada's winning % would be even higher if it wasn't for long "slump" periods where he didn't reach the BO level at all. So Nada's "effective" winning % during the times he was setting his Best-of records is arguably more than 62%.

The Elo test I mentioned in my other post would be good since it would take into account both how good a player was playing at the time of a BoX (as opposed to looking at his all-time record) and his well his opponent was playing, allowing a more accurate measurement of who is truly "clutch". I wouldn't be surprised if Nada did well on that measurement too though.

I don't really think you're necessarily wrong here, I just like statistics/objective measurements for this kind of thing :p.

you've completely missed the point of this article then. the first line of your first paragraph is addressed by steve's article

You've completely missed the point of my post which is not so much that the article is entirely wrong as that it doesn't have enough information to solidly prove anything.

how's this for proof?
http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/players/147_NaDa

If you think that proves that Nada is "clutch" you don't know either don't know what clutch means or you're just sticking with the very weak "not a serious choker" definition. It's actually possible (though pretty unlikely) that despite all his wins, Nada is actually a "choker" to a small extent (it's more likely that this would be true if Nada's peak strength in normal games is much higher than his average).


I want you to examine the win ratios of Midas and Nada. Nada's is lower, yet he has six individual titles. Midas wins a lot more throwaway, one-off games, like ProLeague and the various qualification rounds, whereas Nada finds himself in series much more often. A player will only play a series if he's top 8 in OSL or top whatever in MSL depending on their format changes. Midas having a better career games win ratio but no success in the individual leagues, versus Nada's lesser career games win ratio but six individual titles? Nada thrives on competition and plays exponentially better the farther he goes in tournaments. This is the definition of a clutch player, and why the article is about him.

That just proves that Midas is a major choker, not that Nada is especially clutch. He could be doing exactly as expected for a player of his peak skill, which we don't know precisely (but know is very high). You can't just look at lifetime win ratios because those include slumps when the player wasn't playing as many BoXs anyway (and therefore worsening their overall % without affecting their BoX percent as much), and Nada has had more/longer slumps that Midas.
Luddite
Profile Blog Joined April 2007
United States2315 Posts
August 14 2007 07:54 GMT
#37
I'm not sure I agree with this. When a 60% win rate is considered excellent, it's hard to say whether the difference between Midas and Nada is due to Midas buckling under pressure, or whether it's simply a matter of Midas being unlucky while Nada gets lucky.
Can't believe I'm still here playing this same game
FakeSteve[TPR]
Profile Blog Joined July 2003
Valhalla18444 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-08-14 07:55:31
August 14 2007 07:54 GMT
#38
On August 14 2007 16:51 gravity wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 16:25 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:21 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:16 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:10 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:06 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:02 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:47 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
[quote]

First of all, that's not even remotely correct because the opponent has a win ratio as well, and most pros hover in the 55-60% range

The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator

Still, my point was that just doing well in BoX's doesn't necessarily prove that a player is particularly strong in clutch situations rather than just being good in general. You also have to take into account that Nada's winning % would be even higher if it wasn't for long "slump" periods where he didn't reach the BO level at all. So Nada's "effective" winning % during the times he was setting his Best-of records is arguably more than 62%.

The Elo test I mentioned in my other post would be good since it would take into account both how good a player was playing at the time of a BoX (as opposed to looking at his all-time record) and his well his opponent was playing, allowing a more accurate measurement of who is truly "clutch". I wouldn't be surprised if Nada did well on that measurement too though.

I don't really think you're necessarily wrong here, I just like statistics/objective measurements for this kind of thing :p.

you've completely missed the point of this article then. the first line of your first paragraph is addressed by steve's article

You've completely missed the point of my post which is not so much that the article is entirely wrong as that it doesn't have enough information to solidly prove anything.

how's this for proof?
http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/players/147_NaDa

If you think that proves that Nada is "clutch" you don't know either don't know what clutch means or you're just sticking with the very weak "not a serious choker" definition. It's actually possible (though pretty unlikely) that despite all his wins, Nada is actually a "choker" to a small extent (it's more likely that this would be true if Nada's peak strength in normal games is much higher than his average).


I want you to examine the win ratios of Midas and Nada. Nada's is lower, yet he has six individual titles. Midas wins a lot more throwaway, one-off games, like ProLeague and the various qualification rounds, whereas Nada finds himself in series much more often. A player will only play a series if he's top 8 in OSL or top whatever in MSL depending on their format changes. Midas having a better career games win ratio but no success in the individual leagues, versus Nada's lesser career games win ratio but six individual titles? Nada thrives on competition and plays exponentially better the farther he goes in tournaments. This is the definition of a clutch player, and why the article is about him.

That just proves that Midas is a major choker, not that Nada is especially clutch. He could be doing exactly as expected for a player of his peak skill, which we don't know precisely (but know is very high). You can't just look at lifetime win ratios because those include slumps when the player wasn't playing as many BoXs anyway (and therefore worsening their overall % without affecting their BoX percent as much), and Nada has had more/longer slumps that Midas.


You're saying we can't say Nada isn't especially clutch because we don't know his limit? His continued success over five years isn't enough because he may go into a slump sometime? I don' buy that. Nada has certainly proved himself, the hard fact is that nobody comes close to him in terms of success and by that boundary the definition is solidified.
Moderatormy tatsu loops r fuckin nice
gravity
Profile Joined March 2004
Australia1872 Posts
August 14 2007 07:55 GMT
#39
On August 14 2007 16:30 SoMuchBetter wrote:
clutch means performing under pressure. there is no other player that fits that definition better than nada, you can't argue with that. just look at the fields of players he beats his way through in his championships. i don't even know what point you're trying to make anymore other than that you would like to have an elo rating system going on.

If you perform the same in important games as you do in normal games at a given current strength, that's nothing special at all (it's exactly what you would expect, since the pressure applies equally to both players). It's only "clutch" if a player does *better* than expected in important/high pressure situations, which seems quite possible or even likely in Nada's case but is far from proven because we don't have the right evidence.
gravity
Profile Joined March 2004
Australia1872 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-08-14 07:59:23
August 14 2007 07:57 GMT
#40
On August 14 2007 16:54 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 14 2007 16:51 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:25 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:21 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:16 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:10 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:06 SoMuchBetter wrote:
On August 14 2007 16:02 gravity wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
On August 14 2007 15:53 gravity wrote:
[quote]
The average pro must be 50%, if you averaged out Nada's opponents in Bo's I doubt they would be higher than 55%. Also, you have to take into account that a player with .60 win ratio should win 90% of Bo5's against average opposition. (0.6^3 + 0.6^3*0.4*(4 choose 1) + 0.6^3*0.4^2*(5 choose 2) = 0.9072)

edit: I guess it's still impressive if other pro's don't come close. Obviously we don't really know exactly what skill his Bo opponents have been so it's hard to prove whether Nada has shown any special "clutch" ability of if it's just his high general skill shining through.


i edited my post a bunch

the math works out that's fine but its not 'what you would expect' at all, its starcraft not a calculator

Still, my point was that just doing well in BoX's doesn't necessarily prove that a player is particularly strong in clutch situations rather than just being good in general. You also have to take into account that Nada's winning % would be even higher if it wasn't for long "slump" periods where he didn't reach the BO level at all. So Nada's "effective" winning % during the times he was setting his Best-of records is arguably more than 62%.

The Elo test I mentioned in my other post would be good since it would take into account both how good a player was playing at the time of a BoX (as opposed to looking at his all-time record) and his well his opponent was playing, allowing a more accurate measurement of who is truly "clutch". I wouldn't be surprised if Nada did well on that measurement too though.

I don't really think you're necessarily wrong here, I just like statistics/objective measurements for this kind of thing :p.

you've completely missed the point of this article then. the first line of your first paragraph is addressed by steve's article

You've completely missed the point of my post which is not so much that the article is entirely wrong as that it doesn't have enough information to solidly prove anything.

how's this for proof?
http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/players/147_NaDa

If you think that proves that Nada is "clutch" you don't know either don't know what clutch means or you're just sticking with the very weak "not a serious choker" definition. It's actually possible (though pretty unlikely) that despite all his wins, Nada is actually a "choker" to a small extent (it's more likely that this would be true if Nada's peak strength in normal games is much higher than his average).


I want you to examine the win ratios of Midas and Nada. Nada's is lower, yet he has six individual titles. Midas wins a lot more throwaway, one-off games, like ProLeague and the various qualification rounds, whereas Nada finds himself in series much more often. A player will only play a series if he's top 8 in OSL or top whatever in MSL depending on their format changes. Midas having a better career games win ratio but no success in the individual leagues, versus Nada's lesser career games win ratio but six individual titles? Nada thrives on competition and plays exponentially better the farther he goes in tournaments. This is the definition of a clutch player, and why the article is about him.

That just proves that Midas is a major choker, not that Nada is especially clutch. He could be doing exactly as expected for a player of his peak skill, which we don't know precisely (but know is very high). You can't just look at lifetime win ratios because those include slumps when the player wasn't playing as many BoXs anyway (and therefore worsening their overall % without affecting their BoX percent as much), and Nada has had more/longer slumps that Midas.


You're saying we can't say Nada isn't especially clutch because we don't know his limit? His continued success over five years isn't enough because he may go into a slump sometime? I don' buy that. Nada has certainly proved himself, the hard fact is that nobody comes close to him in terms of success and by that boundary the definition is solidified.

I. AM. NOT. SAYING. THAT. NADA. IS. NOT. A. HUGE. SUCCESS. Sheesh. I'm just saying that there's no compelling evidence that he performs better than expected under high pressure conditions, which is the definition of "clutch" (simply failing to choke is not "clutch" because it's exactly what you expect - by definition the average player will perform at expectation in any match regardless of importance/pressure).

The concept of "clutch" only makes sense if it means a player performing *better* than normal under pressure - if they simply hold up under pressure to perform as well as they have been recently in normal games, that's not "clutch", it's just average (because necessarily on average people perform as expected).
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 6h 52m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nina 237
StarCraft: Brood War
Shuttle 1580
sSak 1444
Noble 43
Icarus 15
Dota 2
LuMiX0
League of Legends
JimRising 690
Super Smash Bros
amsayoshi179
Other Games
summit1g11538
WinterStarcraft482
ViBE79
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1087
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• practicex 42
• Sammyuel 28
• IndyKCrew
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• sooper7s
• intothetv
• Kozan
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• OhrlRock 0
StarCraft: Brood War
• Diggity2
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota2886
League of Legends
• Lourlo1213
• Stunt370
Upcoming Events
SC Evo League
6h 52m
Maestros of the Game
10h 52m
SHIN vs Creator
Astrea vs Lambo
Bunny vs SKillous
HeRoMaRinE vs TriGGeR
BSL Team Wars
13h 52m
Team Bonyth vs Team Sziky
BSL Team Wars
13h 52m
Team Dewalt vs Team Sziky
Afreeca Starleague
1d 4h
Soulkey vs BeSt
Snow vs Light
Monday Night Weeklies
1d 10h
Replay Cast
1d 18h
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
PiGosaur Monday
2 days
LiuLi Cup
3 days
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
3 days
The PondCast
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
Maru vs SHIN
MaNa vs MaxPax
RSL Revival
5 days
Reynor vs Astrea
Classic vs sOs
BSL Team Wars
5 days
Team Bonyth vs Team Dewalt
CranKy Ducklings
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
GuMiho vs Cham
ByuN vs TriGGeR
Cosmonarchy
6 days
TriGGeR vs YoungYakov
YoungYakov vs HonMonO
HonMonO vs TriGGeR
[BSL 2025] Weekly
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Acropolis #4 - TS1
WardiTV Summer 2025
HCC Europe

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
BSL 20 Team Wars
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 3
BSL 21 Qualifiers
ASL Season 20
CSL Season 18: Qualifier 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
Sisters' Call Cup
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025

Upcoming

CSL 2025 AUTUMN (S18)
LASL Season 20
2025 Chongqing Offline CUP
BSL Season 21
BSL 21 Team A
Chzzk MurlocKing SC1 vs SC2 Cup #2
EC S1
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
Skyesports Masters 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters Fall
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.