EPTClutch Engage - Page 5
| Forum Index > Final Edits |
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
| ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
| ||
FakeSteve[TPR]
Valhalla18444 Posts
it doesn't say "nada wins 80% of the games", it says "80% of the time nada has won the series" | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
| ||
|
FakeSteve[TPR]
Valhalla18444 Posts
Doesn't it seem even more impressive to you now? 57 series, 46 wins. | ||
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
i mean, being a clutch player counts for a lot, and it should, but overly weighting clutch performances necessarily gives too much credit to inconsistent one-hit-wonders. the term clutch has to be reserved exclusively for those at the highest caliber already. those who suck too much during the regular season to even lose in the playoffs should be duly penalized compared to those who are able to make it to the playoffs in the first place. sure, yellow might have more finals losses than say, kingdom, but no one in their right mind would ever rank yellow behind of kingdom even though kingdom was won an OSL final and yellow hasn't and given that it's at the highest caliber, that excludes all but a handful of players from consideration. and it's my opinion that at the highest level of SC, you could play fifty best of 5's between any two people and you'd probably end up with a score of 27-23 or something like that. there's pretty solid parity at the top levels of starcraft, and on any given day anyone can beat anyone. let's not read too much into isolated games, and say that because ggplay won the series over iris that ggplay is definitively and unmistakably the better player, and that he would win that series again if they replayed it. certainly i don't deny that there are some sc players that have proven themselves to be clutch. and some others that have proven themselves not to be clutch. but i'd rather not go overboard with pronouncing random players clutch because they won a proleague ACE game or something, nor overrating those that are occasionally clutch over those that are consistently the better player | ||
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
so if we believe that clutch performance is some kind of innate ability, we should look at how a player performs his first time in ODT, and how long it takes for him to qualify for OSL, and how long it takes from there for him to advance out of his group, and then how long it takes for him to win the thing. because otherwise experience (and having played on the biggest stage before) is another factor that works its way in, contaminating the stats | ||
alffla
Hong Kong20321 Posts
On August 15 2007 07:43 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: ...whereas Nada has only lost twice in MSL semifinals, and has never lost an OSL semifinal.  NVM misread~  | ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36379 Posts
On August 15 2007 11:50 GrandInquisitor wrote: hotbid, i never said anything about "i'd rather be so-and-so", i said i'd prefer someone like midas over someone like sync in terms of all-time rankings i mean, being a clutch player counts for a lot, and it should, but overly weighting clutch performances necessarily gives too much credit to inconsistent one-hit-wonders. the term clutch has to be reserved exclusively for those at the highest caliber already. those who suck too much during the regular season to even lose in the playoffs should be duly penalized compared to those who are able to make it to the playoffs in the first place. sure, yellow might have more finals losses than say, kingdom, but no one in their right mind would ever rank yellow behind of kingdom even though kingdom was won an OSL final and yellow hasn't and given that it's at the highest caliber, that excludes all but a handful of players from consideration. and it's my opinion that at the highest level of SC, you could play fifty best of 5's between any two people and you'd probably end up with a score of 27-23 or something like that. there's pretty solid parity at the top levels of starcraft, and on any given day anyone can beat anyone. let's not read too much into isolated games, and say that because ggplay won the series over iris that ggplay is definitively and unmistakably the better player, and that he would win that series again if they replayed it. we already went over the starleague 1st vs starleague 2nd argument ad nauseum so i won't repeat it here. there are simply people that demand to be champion and people that are happy with good stats. no matter how you rank yellow and kingdom or how happy you'd be to be midas rather than sync, ask progamers and alpha personalities whether they'd rather be the unquestioned #1 for a few months or be #2 their whole lives. maybe you'd be ok with that, i definitely wouldn't, and i lose a little bit of respect for anyone who would settle for "midas" in whatever competitive passion they have, whether it be on a stage as grand as the OSL or a stage as mundane as a lan with their classmates. "clutch" doesn't mean winning a starleague on a lucky streak. it means consistently elevating your gameplay when the pressure is on. this could be someone who normally never makes the starleague but when put in a pressure situation maybe takes out a good player in proleague. its not reserved for only the best of the best. here is where we disagree the most Gi. you see GGPlay and Iris play a bo5, and the results don't matter to you as much as they would if they played a bo100. But sports and history and real life don't work that way. there's NEVER a bo100, in any sport. there will always be upsets and always be people that seize the moment. there will inevitably be the 51-50 score in a bo101, and that last game at 50-50 will mean nothing to you but everything to me. who cares if GGPlay isn't "definitively" or "unmistakably" the better player? who cares that if they played again, Iris would possibly win? GGPlay is now the champion and Iris is the footnote. History is written this way. somehow you seem to think that if a player wins 3-2 on the grandest stage its somehow less valuable than some 100 game series they play on bnet. you see a 100 game series as statistically what determines the better player, but i see the final moment of the final game of the bo5 in the OSL finals as the ONLY way to determine the better player. because only in that moment does pressure really exist, and only in that moment do we see who really is superior. not in bo100s, not in statistics, ONLY in those few minutes. (side note: a bo100 automatically takes away the "practice" ability of a player. bo100s are not perfect, they boil down to raw skill and completely eliminate the hardwork/practice element of brood war players, and yes this is a huge element of professional broodwar. i doubt boxer would win very many bo100s, if any. his career was literally made on exactly the opposite of what the bo100 represents) anyway, Brood War is a conscious string of little decisions and actions. it's not just one game, one build. it's influenced by a billion little separate things, from sending a worker to mine a patch to burrowing a lurker a split second early. every game is a series of a million little actions performed by each player. and every single one of those actions are affected by pressure and the heaviness of the moment, especially in an OSL final. you see iris losing in that game 5 as "oh unlucky, if they replayed he might win" i see iris losing in that game 5 as EVERYTHING. you said it yourself, the players are so close and there's so much parity, but what separates them? the critical game5 moments are that separation. whoever wins there, whoever performs those million actions better in that pressure game, thats what separates players. you see "luck" and "parity" and i see the ultimate test of a player's worth. that game 5 between iris and ggplay tells me more about the character and skill of those two players than any number of bo100s will. it's the ONLY place where you can truly see which player is better. any real sports player or champion will tell you that. | ||
|
Hot_Bid
Braavos36379 Posts
On August 15 2007 11:57 GrandInquisitor wrote: and like, every player that can succeed on television can perform under pressure to some extent already. i'd imagine even more of a sign of a choker than a midas-type player is the person that consistently advances out of ODT to get 0-3'd every single time in group stages (though of course there's an element of luck involved in that). so if we believe that clutch performance is some kind of innate ability, we should look at how a player performs his first time in ODT, and how long it takes for him to qualify for OSL, and how long it takes from there for him to advance out of his group, and then how long it takes for him to win the thing. because otherwise experience (and having played on the biggest stage before) is another factor that works its way in, contaminating the stats nobody said clutch performance is an innate ability. its a skill that oftentimes is developed through luck and circumstance. michael jordan even said that he'd probably never have won any NBA championships if he didn't hit that first game winning shot in college at North Carolina. similarly, as i said before, i maintain that yellow would have a golden mouse right now if he won that game 5 in the coca-cola OSL against boxer. both those players were young and malleable, without full definition in their personalities or confidence yet. it's a process of development. the more clutch things you do the more clutch you become. look at bisu for an example of a player whose confidence, once growing, is reaching unstoppable levels. look at midas, an example of a player whose confidence, once shrinking, can virtually never come back. yes some people can never be clutch and some are born with the potential to be, but they need a string of events that allow them to believe and be confident in those situations. stats don't show everything. | ||
|
Hot_Bid
Braavos36379 Posts
On August 15 2007 11:31 thedeadhaji wrote: HB since you mention proleague ace games, wouldn't it be appropriate to include proleague games where it's not ace but you have to win to keep your team alive? not really sure, i suppose it would be more pressure than a normal one. but the ace match is really the pinnacle of "pressure situation," way above anything that can be reproduced. | ||
|
MoNKeYSpanKeR
United States2869 Posts
On August 14 2007 14:03 iosef wrote: nada also lost to savior. IMO, Bisu is the ultimate clutch player, even moreso than nada who's a clutch player as well as a consistent winner. ie he'll win 2 consecutive starleague finals against the strongest players of the moment in the respective mu's, but that doesn't stop him from losing to inter.calm and chrh (fuckin chrh again for emphasis) in proleague :-/. bisu has never lost or been behind in a bo5. Nice write up, i know how you feel, when i was awaiting the bisu vs stork final, i was like "Stork is a better player clearly" But Bisu just has that champion air about him, i can look at all these players and look at winnning eprcentages look at dominating statistics vs less domianting statistics (Stork had better PvP and was on fire) and i just look at bisu and all my confidence that stork would win went away, i mean he was facing [i]bisu a champion, a clutch player, when the stakes are at the highest he comes through, looking at statistics, stork should of won, but the feeling you get when you look at bisu, look at his gameplay, you just don't see him losing. still though, i think you made the best comparison, amazing article and amazing read.[/u] | ||
|
FakeSteve[TPR]
Valhalla18444 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + 46-12! Let's not forget who my other article was about  | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On August 15 2007 15:44 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: wcg spoiler inside!!!!! + Show Spoiler + 46-12! Let's not forget who my other article was about + Show Spoiler + So much hate to Sea. Anyway.. congratulations and have fun with your cheering! :-/ | ||
|
gravity
Australia1969 Posts
On August 14 2007 23:17 Matoo- wrote: Your math is wrong. Simple proof : If Nada has a 60% winning ratio against his opponent, and 79.2% in a bo3 Then his opponent has a 40% winning ratio against Nada, and should have 20.8% in a bo3 But apply your formula to the opponent (easy, just switch the 0.4 and the 0.6) : 0.4*0.4*0.6*(3 choose 2) + 0.4*0.4 = ...... 44.8% >_> that's obviously wrong. --- How to win a bo3 ? win-win, 0.6*0.6=36% win-lose-win, 0.6*0.4*0.6=14.4% lose-win-win, 0.4*0.6*0.6=14.4% Total 64.8% for bo3's (68.2% for bo5's). --- With a 60% winning ratio, Nada should have won around 65% of his bo3/bo5 series. His overall score of 80%+ is INSANE. ... BUT MIDAS IS SO AWESOME. FLY AGAIN SKT ! Yeah, I think you're right, I was pretty tired when I wrote that :p (I included win-win-lose when obviously that can't happen). At any rate it still proves nothing though because we don't know the skill of Nada or his opponents at the time he won those matches (and Nada's skill is notorious for fluctuating a lot so we can't just use the 62% overall wins). | ||
|
gravity
Australia1969 Posts
On August 15 2007 05:18 Matoo- wrote: GGplay must be quite clutch. 50% 2007 winning ratio, which sucks 52% career winning ratio, which also sucks But despite that he won an OSL. This is another example. Maybe he is "clutch", or maybe he just got lucky, or maybe he's just better now (but still scoring mediocre on average due to playing stronger opponents). | ||
|
Breavman
Sweden598 Posts
| ||
|
JensOfSweden
Cameroon1767 Posts
Boxer is somewhat of a clutch player as well, but then again the competition always wasn't all that back in the day when he dominated. We know the climate in progaming has become much harder the last few years and the skill-level is incredibly high amongst most pro-gamers. Therefor I think Nada is the most successful progamer ever and maybe the biggest "clutch" because as FakeSteve so elaborately put it NaDa has always been able to keep up with the competition and new stars on the scene and even won his third (!) OSL pretty recently. He is the definition of clutch and consistancy. | ||
|
FakeSteve[TPR]
Valhalla18444 Posts
On August 15 2007 21:35 gravity wrote: This is another example. Maybe he is "clutch", or maybe he just got lucky, or maybe he's just better now (but still scoring mediocre on average due to playing stronger opponents). GGPlay had a great run and some inspired play during the final against Iris, but he's not "clutch" at all. The guy is a zerg Casy | ||
|
mrdx
Vietnam1555 Posts
Thus Nada winning ratio in BO-x series is even higher than his average winning ratio, or in another word playing under pressure is usually his advantage much more than his opponent. | ||
| ||
