EPTVoted MC and Leenock though..
[GSL] 2012 Jan Code S RO32 D2 - Page 188
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
KingPaddy
1053 Posts
Voted MC and Leenock though.. | ||
|
KanoCoke
Japan863 Posts
I just hope that he gets to keep his spot, and that Curious doesn't lose as badly as he did last time. | ||
|
QTIP.
United States2113 Posts
| ||
|
Vul
United States685 Posts
On January 11 2012 00:54 frucisky wrote: Agreed. All that fanboy overhyping is actually making people (including myself) hoping he loses just so people stop hyping him so bad. Poor Leenock though ): so close him and MC. Yea man, it's like I can't even walk down the street anymore without someone talking to me about how good ForGG is. Unbelievable! I hope he loses all of his games too. | ||
|
Latham
9560 Posts
| ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On January 11 2012 01:04 jyLee wrote: Doesnt change the fact that ForGG still got through Code A on his FIRST attempt on pure mechanics. Yes he's hyped almost as much as Tebow but if you watch his stream you can understand where it comes from. His mechanics are on par with MVP and probably better after what I've seen on both their streams. I think if ForGG actually studied the game rather than just hone mechanics, he would be a monster. Its clear he's got the bw mindset that mechanics >>> strategy and thats not the case for sc2. I really wish people would stop using the "i watched his stream" excuse for so many players. Guess what, on stream/ladder you can get away with so much and fight a lot lower competition. It's simply not compareable. | ||
|
TaKiTaKi
Germany58 Posts
| ||
|
SeaSwift
Scotland4486 Posts
On January 11 2012 01:41 Assirra wrote: I really wish people would stop using the "i watched his stream" excuse for so many players. Guess what, on stream/ladder you can get away with so much and fight a lot lower competition. It's simply not compareable. Exactly. If people went entirely by what they saw on streams, Hero would undoubtedly be the best player in the world. He isn't. | ||
|
Alvalanker
United States253 Posts
| ||
|
SeaSwift
Scotland4486 Posts
| ||
|
babylon
8765 Posts
I even voted for him as two of those who would advance -- I chose fOrGG and Supernova since I thought MC would be hella jetlagged and Leenock's not been putting up results (though I got the initial Supernova > MC and Leenock > fOrGG right ^^; ) -- but I'm happy with the results. I swear that fOrGG sucked out all of Supernova's hype; while fOrGG has accomplished nothing noteworthy, Supernova's been doing so well lately.  EDIT: This is the only time I'll ever break Top 10 in LB, lulz. | ||
|
SeaSwift
Scotland4486 Posts
Fionn's curse again. | ||
|
Zzoram
Canada7115 Posts
| ||
|
babylon
8765 Posts
On January 11 2012 02:02 Zzoram wrote: I guess this means MC remains the undisputed #1 Protoss. He has had by far the best and most consistent results of any other Protoss, and when he's on fire his play looks great. I don't think he's ever been anything but #1, even while slumping. Like ... even when he was slumping, it was less "X is #1 now!" and more "... every other Protoss kinda sucks, including MC, but the throne's just kinda empty." I do think Oz is really good, but he doesn't have the exposure and doesn't get invited to tourneys.  | ||
|
Beren
United States514 Posts
On January 11 2012 01:57 babylon wrote: I feel vindicated now that fOrGG bombed out. That sounds horrible, but it's true. I even voted for him as two of those who would advance -- I chose fOrGG and Supernova since I thought MC would be hella jetlagged and Leenock's not been putting up results (though I got the initial Supernova > MC and Leenock > fOrGG right ^^; ) -- but I'm happy with the results. I swear that fOrGG sucked out all of Supernova's hype; while fOrGG has accomplished nothing noteworthy, Supernova's been doing so well lately. EDIT: This is the only time I'll ever break Top 10 in LB, lulz. what...huh? I'm confused... do you watch GSL? | ||
|
SeaSwift
Scotland4486 Posts
On January 11 2012 02:05 babylon wrote: I don't think he's ever been anything but #1, even while slumping. Like ... even when he was slumping, it was less "X is #1 now!" and more "... every other Protoss kinda sucks, including MC, but the throne's just kinda empty." I do think Oz is really good, but he doesn't have the exposure and doesn't get invited to tourneys. Oz has actually been to 2 MLGs and another smaller tourney, he just hasn't performed well in them so people kind of forget about him. EDIT: here. To put that into context, that's 1 less MLG than MC, and MC has both: a) been seeded yet has a 10% higher winrate (doesn't play the casuals in the Open Bracket) and b) placed highly in all 3 of them (3rd, 2nd and 6th). Oz is really good, and has played well in GSL, but I don't think he's done enough to be a competitor for MC's throne. | ||
|
Sanchonator
Australia490 Posts
On January 11 2012 02:02 SeaSwift wrote: I still find it hilarious what Fionn predicted here, and the group went completely opposite. Fionn's curse again. fionn has it figured out | ||
|
PureBalls
Austria383 Posts
On January 11 2012 02:09 SeaSwift wrote: Oz has actually been to 2 MLGs and another smaller tourney, he just hasn't performed well in them so people kind of forget about him. To put that into context, that's 1 less MLG than MC, and MC has both: a) been seeded yet has a 10% higher winrate (doesn't play the casuals in the Open Bracket) and b) placed highly in all 3 of them (3rd, 2nd and 6th). Oz is really good, and has played well in GSL, but I don't think he's done enough to be a competitor for MC's throne. I find it funny, how people cant wait for MC to slip, so they can say how he was never really good, and how he only knows how to all in all the time, and that the unproven protoss player XY is the new boss. I laugh every time MC proves them wrong. I couldnt agree with you more. Oz, or any other toss (sorry Hero!), is no match for MC. Boss so good! | ||
|
yoshi245
United States2969 Posts
| ||
|
babylon
8765 Posts
On January 11 2012 02:06 Beren wrote: what...huh? I'm confused... do you watch GSL? I mean post-last GSL.  He's been underperforming given what people are expecting of him (in AoL, for instance, coming last in his group, here he just got bounced to Code A again). I feel like he underperformed in some other showing too, but I can't remember clearly. On January 11 2012 02:09 SeaSwift wrote: Oz has actually been to 2 MLGs and another smaller tourney, he just hasn't performed well in them so people kind of forget about him. EDIT: here. To put that into context, that's 1 less MLG than MC, and MC has both: a) been seeded yet has a 10% higher winrate (doesn't play the casuals in the Open Bracket) and b) placed highly in all 3 of them (3rd, 2nd and 6th). Oz is really good, and has played well in GSL, but I don't think he's done enough to be a competitor for MC's throne. I ... don't know what you're responding to here? Objectively looking at it, Oz does have waaaaaaaaaaaay less exposure and doesn't get invited to places like HSC/IEM, while MC does. In fact, Oz just plain doesn't get invited most of the time; FXO has to send him. While Oz had bad results at Anaheim (lost to Rain and wbc), with Koreans in the OB at the later MLGs like Providence (where he lost to Leenock who eventually won the whole thing, then Keen), the OB is, IMO, much, much harder to go through if you want to place high. And he lost to Keen 2-3 in BenQ, and Keen's freaking good, man. I think being seeded into groups is actually much more of an advantage than having to play through the OB at the Korean-filled MLGs, where if you make one mistake (think Polt getting knocked out) or run into two good Koreans in the OB, you're dead. Oz could be really good -- I dunno how good, and I personally don't think he'll make it out of his group this GSL -- but we just don't see enough of him to really judge. He could also just be a shitty endurance player (like NesTea for instance). We can't know for sure. | ||
| ||
