Watch how you approach the topic of match fixing. You can speculate, saying "I'm not so sure about the finals, something doesn't sit right with me," but if you are going to outright accuse players of match fixing you need something more than your word.
TL takes match fixing/abuse seriously and as such there is a burden a proof when you are accusing players.
On October 23 2011 06:20 positron. wrote: Can anyone give a quick recap of MVP vs. Nestea? Why is MVP doing so badly. It must be his wrists or something.
game 1 - nestea uses the stephano build, owns game 2 - close position shattered, nestea obv all-ins, nestea wins
On October 23 2011 06:20 positron. wrote: Can anyone give a quick recap of MVP vs. Nestea? Why is MVP doing so badly. It must be his wrists or something.
Game 1: MVP played pretty bad and took a quick third while pushing with Tank Marine. NesTea clears it super cost-effectively with pure Ling. NesTea counters with Ling Infestor and MVP has bad simcity. NesTea wins.
Game 2: Close position Shattered lolol. MVP does his normal reactor Helion CC, NesTea Roach all-ins and wins.
Baah, so boring with Naniwa. He looked like a beast otherwise, thought he could have a real chanse against MVP.
That just made this tournament 90% less interesting. Nestea takes it almost for certain now. MVP doesnt look be in his right state of mind, and even if Sen somehow takes MVP is he really going to take down Nestea in ZvZ. Somehow I doubt it.
On October 23 2011 05:48 ZAiNs wrote: [quote] Naniwa and BratOK both took a game off him in group stage.
Anyone can take a game but when it comes to a BO5/7 it's 0% chance for them.
All games are bo3, the only exception is the overall final where the player coming from the lower bracket has to win 2x bo3.
winning two consecutive Bo3's against Nestea would be harder than winning a single Bo5 I think :/
I ran the numbers. Two consecutive Bo3's are actually easier to win.
Kidding me? Seriously? What numbers did you run?
Herp derp. I switched my probabilities. Anyway:
Let p be the probability of Nestea winning a given set.
Then the probability of a challenger winning a best of three is (2p+1)(1-p)^2, and the probability of the challenger winning two in a row is (2p+1)^2(1-p)^4.
The probability of the challenger winning a best of five, however, is (1+3p+6p^2)(1-p)^3.
The ratio of the former to the latter is (2p+1)^2(1-p)/(1+3p+6p^2) = (1+3p-4p^3)/(1+3p+6p^2) < 1.
what kind of jibberish is this? the probability of any player winning a set no matter bo3 or bo5 is 50% given each player is equally skilled, and in this case we have that assumption. immvp has to win two coinflips to win the series, while nestea has to win one. thus, bo5 is easier than two bo3.
To ad hominim here, you're an idiot.
Exactly. I was channeling my inner cartman, like the fuck is this shit? o_0
That's like saying I have 50% chance to score a goal from 500 miles from goal. Either I score or I don't.
I had a friend in high school that said I had a 50% chance to become president in 10 years. "You either do or you don't." Needless to say I'm a convicted murderer.
Arg. I do love Sen, but I have to admit I went "fuck" when I saw Sen had won. Really wanted a possibility of Naniwa/Nestea, even if anyone getting past MVP is unlikely. xD
Blizzcon sc2 invitational organization sucks, it's been awful we could see i think not even the half of the games. Also maps suck so badly. At least there are good players...
On October 23 2011 06:23 ThaZenith wrote: Arg. I do love Sen, but I have to admit I went "fuck" when I saw Sen had won. Really wanted a possibility of Naniwa/Nestea, even if anyone getting past MVP is unlikely. xD
Nani/Nestea already played.
We just got to watch 2 unknown zergs play a terrible ZvZ series instead. ;/
On October 23 2011 05:47 Kamais_Ookin wrote: [quote]Obviously Sen/Naniwa have 0% chance of beating Nestea in a series.
Naniwa and BratOK both took a game off him in group stage.
Anyone can take a game but when it comes to a BO5/7 it's 0% chance for them.
All games are bo3, the only exception is the overall final where the player coming from the lower bracket has to win 2x bo3.
winning two consecutive Bo3's against Nestea would be harder than winning a single Bo5 I think :/
I ran the numbers. Two consecutive Bo3's are actually easier to win.
Kidding me? Seriously? What numbers did you run?
Herp derp. I switched my probabilities. Anyway:
Let p be the probability of Nestea winning a given set.
Then the probability of a challenger winning a best of three is (2p+1)(1-p)^2, and the probability of the challenger winning two in a row is (2p+1)^2(1-p)^4.
The probability of the challenger winning a best of five, however, is (1+3p+6p^2)(1-p)^3.
The ratio of the former to the latter is (2p+1)^2(1-p)/(1+3p+6p^2) = (1+3p-4p^3)/(1+3p+6p^2) < 1.
what kind of jibberish is this? excluding psychological factors, the probability of any player winning a set no matter bo3 or bo5 is 50% given each player is equally skilled, and in this case we have that assumption. immvp has to win two coinflips to win the series, while nestea has to win one. thus, bo5 is easier than two bo3.
Funniest thing I've read all day. This is definitely how stats works, honest...
Agreed. This was the funniest probability reasoning I read in my entire math life.
On October 23 2011 06:20 positron. wrote: Can anyone give a quick recap of MVP vs. Nestea? Why is MVP doing so badly. It must be his wrists or something.
it has nothing to do with wrists or something like that just straight up bad decisions and build order lose