|
On May 09 2010 22:54 sLiniss wrote:
Wow, I wasn't able to watch, but DANGGG who is this Slush guy? I want to see his replays! Glad to see a Zerg at the top!
+ Show Spoiler +he 4-0'ed CL in KotBH series(after CL 4 week win streak) and came 0-2 behind White-Ra but ended up winning 5-2 in a bo9 showmatch
If TL are gonna start hating on him from now on will loose alot of faith in TL community, hope the storm will blow over soon
|
please, let me watch those replays
|
makes u wonder if people are this cut throat about winning a 300 dollar tourney, why wouldn't they just listen to the stream to gain an additional advantage. I know some of the good mannered players wouldn't, but what about ones that aren't.
|
wow slush's play was really dominant, his roach use was sick.
|
On May 09 2010 17:08 BluApex wrote:
ask and you shall recieve:
[url blocked]
It was from the artosis post earlier, same file he uploaded.
i'm sad i was not around to see this tourny. sadly its such a huge pickle. I dont think anyone else in artosis' position would have acted any differently. That game was his. sounds like TL has to many opinions on their ref staff :X . this should have been a clearer decision. oh well, mistakes are always made. Props for TL for coming out and making a statement. i am sure Artosis ( once cooled off ) will ( and should ) do something similar.
|
On May 09 2010 18:48 KwarK wrote:
It's not that refs didn't understand the situation in that game, it's the external factors such as Slush saying he thought he had a chance and the fact that it was Artosis who disconnected which impacted their decision. A lot of debate went into the decision. Upon being informed of the decision Artosis' response was to insult all the refs claiming they were all too stupid or bad to understand how over it was. He refused to listen when it was explained that they were simply unwilling to reward a disconnect for any reason unless the other player conceeded. Artosis isn't obliged to agree with that call but he is obliged to follow it. His refusal to even listen to what the refs were saying and instead just keep calling everyone idiots delayed the tournament considerably and that is unacceptable. The refs agreed Artosis had the game won but the externalities were judged to take priority.
Good that some people remain sensible.
And after all its like in soccer/football or most other sports-games: Its the referees decision.
|
can some link VODs or something , since i missed streams ? thanks
|
ustream.com/channel/djWHEAT
|
I hate to be the noobie responding to everything, and personally I don't feel strongly one way or the other, but I do think the right decision was made. And the mature thing to do is to go along with the referees and get back to the game, not getting hung up and whining about the past. It's the same in any real sport. A call is a call, the ref has the final word and if you think it's a bad call, so what? Get back in the game and make it right by winning despite the setback.
It's not like they awarded Slush a free win due to his opponent disconnecting, which could quite conceivably have been the rule.
The whole reason for playing more than 1 game is to determine the better overall player in a series of matches, and then send the better player on to the next round.
If one player is only good for 3 games and the other lasts 4 or more, how can you say the first player is better? Especially when their focus is so fragile that they play badly in a neutral rematch and lose to a rush.
On May 09 2010 10:02 disco wrote:
And ofcourse the mental setback by having to regame a win doesn't mean anything.
If you get so setback by having to replay a win, how does that mean someone is the better player? Because they can win when the conditions are perfect? But even if they blow up and get angry and play badly after that, they're still a better player? How so?
On May 09 2010 10:05 Azarkon wrote:
That's not true on many levels. Besides the mental state, regaming a game you won basically means the opponent just got a free lesson in your build and play. This could potentially make it easy for him to "counter" you the next game.
And why didn't you learn from HIS play and possibly adapt your strategy to a more effective one? Or anticipate the counter to your original strat and plan for it.
I don't get why you should get a free pass just because you could win once, but can't adapt your strategy to your opponent when he counters. How is that good play? SC is all about countering your opponent better than he counters you, if you can't do that more than once, do you deserve to win?
|
Congrats to the winner.
I've always known you are an awesome player
good job
|
Not sure how Artosis bitching would have held up the tournament lol. Obviously he would disagree with the decision. If the decision was made the tournament could have continued no matter how much Artosis objected.
|
|
|
After seeing the replay, I think Artosis basically had the game, but if the refs decided in favor of slush, let it be...
Artosis was the winner of this match, IMO.
I understand the reasons why he was complaining so much and I agree with him.
Slush is not a bad zerg at all, it's quite the opposite in fact, so TL-I have not lost it's brilliantism.
Thank you TL for this wonderful tournament.
Can't wait for the other reps! :D
|
are all the vods up? i cant figure out where the heck all the vods are. the nevake playlists are all jumbled up from the previous TLI vods and the new TLI vods being incomplete from what I can see. i couldn't find artosis vs day9 anywhere.. djwheats ustream videos have zillions of videos from all sorts of games as well. is there any single page to find the complete vods from THIS TLI?
|
Replays pl0x. VOD is cool but replay is much better :o
|
On May 10 2010 04:49 fant0m wrote:I hate to be the noobie responding to everything, and personally I don't feel strongly one way or the other, but I do think the right decision was made. And the mature thing to do is to go along with the referees and get back to the game, not getting hung up and whining about the past. It's the same in any real sport. A call is a call, the ref has the final word and if you think it's a bad call, so what? Get back in the game and make it right by winning despite the setback. It's not like they awarded Slush a free win due to his opponent disconnecting, which could quite conceivably have been the rule. The whole reason for playing more than 1 game is to determine the better overall player in a series of matches, and then send the better player on to the next round. If one player is only good for 3 games and the other lasts 4 or more, how can you say the first player is better? Especially when their focus is so fragile that they play badly in a neutral rematch and lose to a rush. Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 10:02 disco wrote:
And ofcourse the mental setback by having to regame a win doesn't mean anything. If you get so setback by having to replay a win, how does that mean someone is the better player? Because they can win when the conditions are perfect? But even if they blow up and get angry and play badly after that, they're still a better player? How so? Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 10:05 Azarkon wrote:
That's not true on many levels. Besides the mental state, regaming a game you won basically means the opponent just got a free lesson in your build and play. This could potentially make it easy for him to "counter" you the next game. And why didn't you learn from HIS play and possibly adapt your strategy to a more effective one? Or anticipate the counter to your original strat and plan for it. I don't get why you should get a free pass just because you could win once, but can't adapt your strategy to your opponent when he counters. How is that good play? SC is all about countering your opponent better than he counters you, if you can't do that more than once, do you deserve to win?
Because some strategies only work the first time you use them. Imagine if LzGamer knew about the rock blinking trick that Nony used against him in the TL vs. EG match, beforehand. Would it still have worked against him? I doubt it.
The winning player typically loses significantly more in a rematch for the simple reason that he exposes his winning strategy, whereas the losing player only exposes a strategy that does not work.
In this particular case, I guess Artosis's argument would be that he exposed a critical piece of information to Slush during the game he won: his strength in macro play. Consequently, he predicted that Slush would likely cheese him the next game with one of two strategies (hidden spire or speedlings). Lo and behold, Slush did cheese, but used a 9-pool instead of the two Artosis predicted.
|
Please post replays before the next patch!
|
It was a 10 pool to baneling. 9 pool is just wrong.
|
Any info on the final viewer statistics? You said it was probably bugged and split up and would take a day or two for the statistics to update.
Also, post them *.SC2Replay files! Much better than VODs, so much less to download.
|
How long can it take to zip some replays? =D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
