EPT[GSL] Super Tourney Finals - Page 280
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
Greem
730 Posts
| ||
|
Al Bundy
7257 Posts
Anyway my liquibet is DEAD now. | ||
|
xAPOCALYPSEx
1418 Posts
haha i love this guy Seriously awesome play by him. MMA got massacred. Really hoping to see him to well in the upcoming GSLs, with MKP and Polt as well as a few others, I think Prime has a pretty good shot at GSTL this month, provided they all improve even a fraction of what Polt's improved. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
Anyways, I have yet to watch the MMA vs Polt games, but from the looks of the polls, I might wait until the write-up occurs. However, it seems that the entire DRG vs sC series was epic. Definitely watching those VODs. It seems that close finals are hard to come by these days. Fantasy vs Stork. Great vs Hydra. Flash vs ZerO. Most of the GSL finals except for Nestea vs MKP. I really await the once-in-a-blue-moon epic finals that we all deserve. | ||
|
jonathan1
United States395 Posts
| ||
|
MrCon
France29748 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=234766 | ||
CosmicSpiral
United States15275 Posts
On June 19 2011 09:51 jonathan1 wrote: i don't think these games showed that polt is better player but i am surprised at MMA's inability to adapt between games. He won, therefore he played better. And his record since Season 2 suggests that he's being playing better than MMA over that time period too. | ||
|
Clog
United States950 Posts
On June 19 2011 10:19 CosmicSpiral wrote: He won, therefore he played better. I really hate when people say this | ||
|
spybreak
United States684 Posts
On June 19 2011 09:51 jonathan1 wrote: i don't think these games showed that polt is better player but i am surprised at MMA's inability to adapt between games. LMAO, what more do you want? Ok I guess to be safe he is better at TvT that day .... You mentioned MMA's inability to adapt and yet you think he is the better player? I think for some people whatever Polt does, he will always be remembered for what he was on Seasons 1 and 2. | ||
|
bittman
Australia8759 Posts
Why? What game in the history of starcraft has the player who played better lost? Polt played better. Is Polt a better player than MMA? I honestly cannot say yay or nay because I don't think MMA played that well. Thus, using powers of deduction: Polt played better. | ||
|
The KY
United Kingdom6252 Posts
On June 19 2011 10:32 bittman wrote: Why? What game in the history of starcraft has the player who played better lost? Polt played better. Is Polt a better player than MMA? I honestly cannot say yay or nay because I don't think MMA played that well. Thus, using powers of deduction: Polt played better. I can simplify this; it was a fucking mirror match up. There is no possible excuse; you win, you played better. | ||
|
darthfoley
United States8003 Posts
On June 19 2011 10:41 The KY wrote: I can simplify this; it was a fucking mirror match up. There is no possible excuse; you win, you played better. a build order win isn't playing better. | ||
|
WindCalibur
Canada938 Posts
So you prepare builds after studying your opponent and then executing it almost flawlessly and completely dismantling your opponent =/= skill? | ||
|
darthfoley
United States8003 Posts
On June 19 2011 10:48 WindCalibur wrote: So you prepare builds after studying your opponent and then executing it almost flawlessly and completely dismantling your opponent =/= skill? i'm just saying in general. in a mirror matchup i can be the better player but lose to a build that specifically counters the one i'm trying, intentionally or not. | ||
|
BlackGosu
Canada1046 Posts
On June 19 2011 10:51 darthfoley wrote: i'm just saying in general. in a mirror matchup i can be the better player but lose to a build that specifically counters the one i'm trying, intentionally or not. sure that may be true, but 4-0 is pretty convincing | ||
|
rysecake
United States2632 Posts
On June 19 2011 10:51 darthfoley wrote: i'm just saying in general. in a mirror matchup i can be the better player but lose to a build that specifically counters the one i'm trying, intentionally or not. You're either a polt hater or an mma fanboy or both. Sure I guess you could say game 1 was somewhat a bo win. What about game 2? Where polt just outmacroed, outmicroed, out played mma? | ||
|
bittman
Australia8759 Posts
On June 19 2011 10:51 darthfoley wrote: i'm just saying in general. in a mirror matchup i can be the better player but lose to a build that specifically counters the one i'm trying, intentionally or not. The whole series wasn't game 1. And though it was a build order win, it was a pre-determined build order win, and Polt doesn't get enough credit for that. But yeah, still 4-0. It's not like MMA played better, and Polt won because he made marauders. Even in game 1, Polt may have blind countered MMA, but MMA blind teched. If anything, MMA's build was amazingly risky, and Polt, like a good player should, made him pay for it. | ||
|
Quakie
Norway725 Posts
| ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
On June 19 2011 11:08 bittman wrote: The whole series wasn't game 1. And though it was a build order win, it was a pre-determined build order win, and Polt doesn't get enough credit for that. But yeah, still 4-0. It's not like MMA played better, and Polt won because he made marauders. Even in game 1, Polt may have blind countered MMA, but MMA blind teched. If anything, MMA's build was amazingly risky, and Polt, like a good player should, made him pay for it. If I understand correctly, MarineKing deserves some of the credit for helping Polt come up with the MMA-counter build. On June 19 2011 11:12 Quakie wrote: Can anyone direct me to that TL-post where they reviewed every participant of this tourney? Want to see what was written about Polt, especially. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=225392 21.  PoltFor a long time, Polt didn’t get much acclaim, and for good reason. Although he qualified for all 3 Open seasons, he never made a deep run. He qualified for the first Code S on the strength of those open seasons, but fell in the up-down matches and had to fight his way through the Wild Card matches to stay in Code S. Since then, he’s come on stronger. His real success hasn’t been in GSL, but in the SK Champions Trophy series. Go check out his TLPD page and ogle all the stellar players he’s defeated on his way to 2 tournament wins. There’s also the fact that, like NaDa, he is studying at university while playing StarCraft. And for Polt, it’s not just any university, but Seoul National University, the best in Korea. | ||
|
Clog
United States950 Posts
On June 19 2011 10:32 bittman wrote: Why? What game in the history of starcraft has the player who played better lost? Polt played better. Is Polt a better player than MMA? I honestly cannot say yay or nay because I don't think MMA played that well. Thus, using powers of deduction: Polt played better. I didn't say MMA played better. It's just a bit of a fallacy to assume the player who won played better (it's usually the case though). I just don't get why it's so hard for some people to say "Hey, you know, even though Player A ended up winning this game, he did this and this that was actually pretty bad and could have lost him the game if he wasn't ahead" or "Hey, you know, even though Player B ended up losing this game, his strategy would have looked brilliant if his opponent was playing a bit more standard". Anyone can be like "Well he won. Guess he was better." For sake of argument - Hypothetical Situation + Show Spoiler + Let's say Player A is playing against Player B in a Bo3. Let's also assume that by analyzing each player's play, we can rate their skill displayed, or equivalently "how well the player played" with a simple system from 1-10, such that a 10 indicates the player played brilliantly, and a 1 indicates he played like crap. Let's also assume that the number is indisputable, and that the player with the higher number (aka the better play in the given game) will always win. Game 1 - Player A gets a 10. Player B gets a 9. Player A is victorious. Game 2 - Player A gets a 1. Player B gets a 9. Player B is victorious. Game 3 - Player A gets a 10. Player B gets a 9. Player A is victorious. Player A averages a rating of 7 per game, whereas Player B averages a 9 per game. Player B has played "better" in this series than his opponent. However, Player A still takes the series. Now, it's not like that happens a lot, or that we can actually fulfill those assumptions that easily, but you can see why I don't like that people assume he's better just because he won the series. I'd rather people say Polt is better because of his great preparation in his build order choices against MMA that handled most situations very well, as well as his constant aggression and control that was able to keep MMA on his heels and off a 3rd base in game 2. See? Same conclusion. Just a more meaningful way of getting to it, I guess. I just don't like tallying up wins for players and deciding from that. "Wow MVP and MC lost in the Ro64 in this tournament? They must suck! They didn't win! Clearly TheBestfOu is a far superior player for winning more games." | ||
| ||
