|
On April 17 2012 20:56 ShakkaFL wrote:
i just hope gom stops giving him free seeds, he's not gsl caliber
I think Gom should start seeding more Zerg players into their tournaments to balance out the race differences.
|
On April 17 2012 20:56 IshinShishi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 20:54 FidoDido wrote:On April 17 2012 20:42 Hall0wed wrote:On April 17 2012 20:38 Dodgin wrote:Well it has to be asked.. Poll: Did you enjoy the Khaltosis casting duo?Yes (263) 98% No (6) 2% 269 total votes Your vote: Did you enjoy the Khaltosis casting duo? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
Not really possible to dislike any Artosis combo. Artosis is by far the best caster out there and he constantly shows it by pairing well with EVERYONE. And yes there are also some phenomenal pro player-casters but they still cannot make everything work as well as Artosis seems to be able to. Though I do love the Incontrol and Idra combo a ton. I know i'll probably get flamed for saying this but, I actually prefer Khaldor/Artosis over Tastosis... O_O Listening to them working together today was a treat... and yes, I agree Arotosis with anyone else is generally good as well. I'm beginning to like Wolf better, just because I remembered that he is the only that notices the REALLY incredibly important stuff, that Legend seems to point out every game.
I'm interested in seeing a Artosis Wolf combo heh
I loved Artosis+Khaldor today
|
On April 17 2012 20:57 FidoDido wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 20:56 ShakkaFL wrote:
i just hope gom stops giving him free seeds, he's not gsl caliber I think Gom should start seeding more Zerg players into their tournaments to balance out the race differences.
Name a zerg to seed in to the GSL who will also sell tickets (Stephano doesn't count, he does not want to be in the GSL, and IdrA has had his chance)
|
Im so glad HuK is out, never was rly fond of his play and always thought he is so overrated
|
On April 17 2012 20:32 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 20:28 rothsbury wrote:On April 17 2012 20:25 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:23 rothsbury wrote:On April 17 2012 20:20 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:19 sc14s wrote:On April 17 2012 20:17 SilentBonjwa wrote:On April 17 2012 19:49 EmilA wrote:On April 17 2012 19:47 0ne wrote:On April 17 2012 19:44 Hider wrote:
I feel both players are kinda overrated imo. Neither is definitely not code s material. Is this bannable? Why would it be? Calling Alive overrated is not ridiculous. He puts out results but by iffy means. you my friend are a jealous hater. list of aLives recent victims MVP (previous Code S) MMA (previous Code S) PuMa (IPL qualifier) DRG (IPL qualifier) MKP (IPL) Polt (IPL) NesTea (IPL) Leenock (Iron Squid) MC (Iron Squid) surely all of those games were based on "luck" and cheesy strats. Truly an overrated player. ye ye cry more pls. ooops, guess what? fnatic 3-1 TL Have a nice day.  don't get me wrong alive is good.. but you are just another biased fanboy. Why don't people realize that against Code S and Code A players, there is nothing "iffy", A win is a win is a win. There is still luck in the game... people do have build order losses / simple micro screw up. Even against the best players not all games are true reflections of the players' skill, even in b03. The very reason longer series are better is because there is because skill does not perfectly correspond to wins. A worse player can often 2-0 a better player. So aLive got lucky in every game? I wasn't talking about the alive thing at all, just arguing that you can't say that a win is never based on luck (I guess that's what meant by nothing "iffy") just because it is against code S / code A players. Just stop trying. Some ignorant people just cant make a distinction between being really good and having good results. Alive isn't really good like MKP (*who just got owned at IPL*). He is good, of similar caliber like other good korean terrans such as Ryung, Supernova etc. But he isn't the kind of player you expect to see dominate code S. He is the kidn of player who constantly have to work to just stay in code S.
HHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHHHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHHAHHHHAHAHA
man couldnt stop laughing, that ignorance deserves an Oscar :`)
On April 17 2012 20:19 sc14s wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 20:17 SilentBonjwa wrote:On April 17 2012 19:49 EmilA wrote:On April 17 2012 19:47 0ne wrote:On April 17 2012 19:44 Hider wrote:
I feel both players are kinda overrated imo. Neither is definitely not code s material. Is this bannable? Why would it be? Calling Alive overrated is not ridiculous. He puts out results but by iffy means. you my friend are a jealous hater. list of aLives recent victims MVP (previous Code S) MMA (previous Code S) PuMa (IPL qualifier) DRG (IPL qualifier) MKP (IPL) Polt (IPL) NesTea (IPL) Leenock (Iron Squid) MC (Iron Squid) surely all of those games were based on "luck" and cheesy strats. Truly an overrated player. ye ye cry more pls. ooops, guess what? fnatic 3-1 TL Have a nice day. don't get me wrong alive is good.. but you are just another biased fanboy.
yea and what? at least someone who doesnt have a creepy fanbase full of Justin Bieber style type of nerds like MKP who listen to Emo music or K-Pop all day.
forgot mentioning his 65% winrate in 2012 against Code S players - the highest since MVP in 2011 during his dominance.
Trust me, IPL4 was no fluke, MMA better get ready at Iron Squad.
And yea in SC2, the most patient players will remain "aLive", hahaha
|
On April 17 2012 20:56 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 20:50 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:44 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:40 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:34 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:32 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:28 rothsbury wrote:On April 17 2012 20:25 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:23 rothsbury wrote:On April 17 2012 20:20 Grovbolle wrote:
[quote]
Why don't people realize that against Code S and Code A players, there is nothing "iffy", A win is a win is a win. There is still luck in the game... people do have build order losses / simple micro screw up. Even against the best players not all games are true reflections of the players' skill, even in b03. The very reason longer series are better is because there is because skill does not perfectly correspond to wins. A worse player can often 2-0 a better player. So aLive got lucky in every game? I wasn't talking about the alive thing at all, just arguing that you can't say that a win is never based on luck (I guess that's what meant by nothing "iffy") just because it is against code S / code A players. Just stop trying. Some ignorant people just cant make a distinction between being really good and having good results. Alive isn't really good like MKP. He is good, of similar caliber like other good korean terrans such as Ryung, Supernova etc. But he isn't the kind of player you expect to see dominate code S. He is the kidn of player who constantly have to work to just stay in code S. People like you kind of piss me off, what would you rather: Be "good" in your definition, or have good results? I am not saying aLive is the best T in the world, but he has good results. I do know what the difference is, like yellow in BW, he was fucking good, but never won a gold. But which is actually better? Why do you think the discussion is about what I rather want? This discussion is about being good, not about results, as results vary a lot in the short term. LEsser skilled players can often times get better results in a few tournaments even if they are 10% worse than other players. However long termish we can expect the best players to get best results. But of course if you dont play the game at a decent level your self, you can't really determine who is good/really good/mediocore, and your best bet is too look at results. Wow, what a delicate way to say that you know better than me. Even if this discussion is about being good, instead of producing results, who do you rate as the best? He who wins the most shit, or he who has more of this "skill" that everyone talks about. I can appreciate some players who are extremely good but never actually win the big finals (yellow), but in the end, those who win are the ones who win. Not those who are good. Because thats a totally different situation. Do I want to be someone who got lucky and won a million through gambling, or a hardworking man who "only" has won half a million? Its a compltetely pointless discussion, but I know that in the future we can expect the hardworking man to do better than the lucky gambler. And this is probably what you miss. There is no kind of (unexplainable) secret that has yielded Alive better results (and Ryung worse results). Its mostly due to variance (+ not having pariticapted in the right tournaments). ANd if you think there is some kind of "secret" that can explain why Ryung is doing worse than Alive, then it can be attributed to decision making/strategy/mechanicas/mentaliity that is a part of being good. So what is you point? aLive just got lucky and beat MMA, MVP, DRG, NESTEA, MC, MKP etc? Or was he good? Which is why he has gotten results? Also what you want is not the point, I believe just as much as the next guy that hard work > luck. But in a game based a lot on luck, there is bound to be some variations, however IM_MVP was pretty good for a long time, was he just lucky a long time in a row? Walking away from this discussion now.
Please take a statistic class. You dont understand how variance works.
|
|
|
On April 17 2012 21:00 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 20:57 FidoDido wrote:On April 17 2012 20:56 ShakkaFL wrote:
i just hope gom stops giving him free seeds, he's not gsl caliber I think Gom should start seeding more Zerg players into their tournaments to balance out the race differences. Name a zerg to seed in to the GSL who will also sell tickets (Stephano doesn't count, he does not want to be in the GSL, and IdrA has had his chance)
Destiny
|
Perfect Liquipedia except Huk T.T
|
On April 17 2012 20:57 FidoDido wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 20:56 ShakkaFL wrote:
i just hope gom stops giving him free seeds, he's not gsl caliber I think Gom should start seeding more Zerg players into their tournaments to balance out the race differences.
Like Idra and Sen! 
|
United Kingdom50293 Posts
On April 17 2012 21:00 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 20:57 FidoDido wrote:On April 17 2012 20:56 ShakkaFL wrote:
i just hope gom stops giving him free seeds, he's not gsl caliber I think Gom should start seeding more Zerg players into their tournaments to balance out the race differences. Name a zerg to seed in to the GSL who will also sell tickets (Stephano doesn't count, he does not want to be in the GSL, and IdrA has had his chance)
Reseed sen? He made it past the first round last season.
There's also violet.
|
On April 17 2012 21:02 0ne wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 21:00 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:57 FidoDido wrote:On April 17 2012 20:56 ShakkaFL wrote:
i just hope gom stops giving him free seeds, he's not gsl caliber I think Gom should start seeding more Zerg players into their tournaments to balance out the race differences. Name a zerg to seed in to the GSL who will also sell tickets (Stephano doesn't count, he does not want to be in the GSL, and IdrA has had his chance) Destiny
Why not Dragon as well why they're at it..
|
On April 17 2012 21:00 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 20:57 FidoDido wrote:On April 17 2012 20:56 ShakkaFL wrote:
i just hope gom stops giving him free seeds, he's not gsl caliber I think Gom should start seeding more Zerg players into their tournaments to balance out the race differences. Name a zerg to seed in to the GSL who will also sell tickets (Stephano doesn't count, he does not want to be in the GSL, and IdrA has had his chance)
Sheth
|
On April 17 2012 21:06 windsupernova wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 21:00 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:57 FidoDido wrote:On April 17 2012 20:56 ShakkaFL wrote:
i just hope gom stops giving him free seeds, he's not gsl caliber I think Gom should start seeding more Zerg players into their tournaments to balance out the race differences. Name a zerg to seed in to the GSL who will also sell tickets (Stephano doesn't count, he does not want to be in the GSL, and IdrA has had his chance) Sheth
And Ret.
|
On April 17 2012 21:00 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 20:56 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:50 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:44 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:40 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:34 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:32 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:28 rothsbury wrote:On April 17 2012 20:25 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:23 rothsbury wrote:
[quote]
There is still luck in the game... people do have build order losses / simple micro screw up. Even against the best players not all games are true reflections of the players' skill, even in b03. The very reason longer series are better is because there is because skill does not perfectly correspond to wins. A worse player can often 2-0 a better player. So aLive got lucky in every game? I wasn't talking about the alive thing at all, just arguing that you can't say that a win is never based on luck (I guess that's what meant by nothing "iffy") just because it is against code S / code A players. Just stop trying. Some ignorant people just cant make a distinction between being really good and having good results. Alive isn't really good like MKP. He is good, of similar caliber like other good korean terrans such as Ryung, Supernova etc. But he isn't the kind of player you expect to see dominate code S. He is the kidn of player who constantly have to work to just stay in code S. People like you kind of piss me off, what would you rather: Be "good" in your definition, or have good results? I am not saying aLive is the best T in the world, but he has good results. I do know what the difference is, like yellow in BW, he was fucking good, but never won a gold. But which is actually better? Why do you think the discussion is about what I rather want? This discussion is about being good, not about results, as results vary a lot in the short term. LEsser skilled players can often times get better results in a few tournaments even if they are 10% worse than other players. However long termish we can expect the best players to get best results. But of course if you dont play the game at a decent level your self, you can't really determine who is good/really good/mediocore, and your best bet is too look at results. Wow, what a delicate way to say that you know better than me. Even if this discussion is about being good, instead of producing results, who do you rate as the best? He who wins the most shit, or he who has more of this "skill" that everyone talks about. I can appreciate some players who are extremely good but never actually win the big finals (yellow), but in the end, those who win are the ones who win. Not those who are good. Because thats a totally different situation. Do I want to be someone who got lucky and won a million through gambling, or a hardworking man who "only" has won half a million? Its a compltetely pointless discussion, but I know that in the future we can expect the hardworking man to do better than the lucky gambler. And this is probably what you miss. There is no kind of (unexplainable) secret that has yielded Alive better results (and Ryung worse results). Its mostly due to variance (+ not having pariticapted in the right tournaments). ANd if you think there is some kind of "secret" that can explain why Ryung is doing worse than Alive, then it can be attributed to decision making/strategy/mechanicas/mentaliity that is a part of being good. So what is you point? aLive just got lucky and beat MMA, MVP, DRG, NESTEA, MC, MKP etc? Or was he good? Which is why he has gotten results? Also what you want is not the point, I believe just as much as the next guy that hard work > luck. But in a game based a lot on luck, there is bound to be some variations, however IM_MVP was pretty good for a long time, was he just lucky a long time in a row? Walking away from this discussion now. Please take a statistic class. You dont understand how variance works.
Ohh I waited for this, since you are Danish I am sure you will be able to understand this:
http://i.imgur.com/PeyOV.png[
NB: Videnskabsteori og metode II = Kvantitativ metode/statistik III
|
On April 17 2012 21:06 windsupernova wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 21:00 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:57 FidoDido wrote:On April 17 2012 20:56 ShakkaFL wrote:
i just hope gom stops giving him free seeds, he's not gsl caliber I think Gom should start seeding more Zerg players into their tournaments to balance out the race differences. Name a zerg to seed in to the GSL who will also sell tickets (Stephano doesn't count, he does not want to be in the GSL, and IdrA has had his chance) Sheth
When is the last time Seth had any tournament results? Even Ret would fit the bill better, and I'd say that Sen is still better than Ret.
Really, the only three non-Chinese foreigners that are GSL caliber right now are NaNiwa, Stephano and HuK, though HuK hasn't been looking all that good lately.
|
Khaldor+Artosis worked really well in my opinion. Liked much more than Tastosis. Artosis is always great but suprisingly Khaldor added some good analysis like in the last match he speculated that Huk didn't want to sack the nexus because he built several gateways + pylons on the low ground. Only problem I had was when Legend was trying to point out several times the queued upgrades on the same engineering bay and they just kept talking about double engineering bay and didnt notice . Other than that great job!
|
On April 17 2012 21:07 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 21:00 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:56 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:50 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:44 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:40 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:34 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:32 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:28 rothsbury wrote:On April 17 2012 20:25 Grovbolle wrote:
[quote]
So aLive got lucky in every game? I wasn't talking about the alive thing at all, just arguing that you can't say that a win is never based on luck (I guess that's what meant by nothing "iffy") just because it is against code S / code A players. Just stop trying. Some ignorant people just cant make a distinction between being really good and having good results. Alive isn't really good like MKP. He is good, of similar caliber like other good korean terrans such as Ryung, Supernova etc. But he isn't the kind of player you expect to see dominate code S. He is the kidn of player who constantly have to work to just stay in code S. People like you kind of piss me off, what would you rather: Be "good" in your definition, or have good results? I am not saying aLive is the best T in the world, but he has good results. I do know what the difference is, like yellow in BW, he was fucking good, but never won a gold. But which is actually better? Why do you think the discussion is about what I rather want? This discussion is about being good, not about results, as results vary a lot in the short term. LEsser skilled players can often times get better results in a few tournaments even if they are 10% worse than other players. However long termish we can expect the best players to get best results. But of course if you dont play the game at a decent level your self, you can't really determine who is good/really good/mediocore, and your best bet is too look at results. Wow, what a delicate way to say that you know better than me. Even if this discussion is about being good, instead of producing results, who do you rate as the best? He who wins the most shit, or he who has more of this "skill" that everyone talks about. I can appreciate some players who are extremely good but never actually win the big finals (yellow), but in the end, those who win are the ones who win. Not those who are good. Because thats a totally different situation. Do I want to be someone who got lucky and won a million through gambling, or a hardworking man who "only" has won half a million? Its a compltetely pointless discussion, but I know that in the future we can expect the hardworking man to do better than the lucky gambler. And this is probably what you miss. There is no kind of (unexplainable) secret that has yielded Alive better results (and Ryung worse results). Its mostly due to variance (+ not having pariticapted in the right tournaments). ANd if you think there is some kind of "secret" that can explain why Ryung is doing worse than Alive, then it can be attributed to decision making/strategy/mechanicas/mentaliity that is a part of being good. So what is you point? aLive just got lucky and beat MMA, MVP, DRG, NESTEA, MC, MKP etc? Or was he good? Which is why he has gotten results? Also what you want is not the point, I believe just as much as the next guy that hard work > luck. But in a game based a lot on luck, there is bound to be some variations, however IM_MVP was pretty good for a long time, was he just lucky a long time in a row? Walking away from this discussion now. Please take a statistic class. You dont understand how variance works. Ohh I waited for this, since you are Danish I am sure you will be able to understand this: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PeyOV.png) NB: Videnskabsteori og metode II = Kvantitativ metode/statistik III
If you need to post a picture of your university credits in order to argue on a forum you're doing something wrong.
|
On April 17 2012 21:04 Jono7272 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 21:02 0ne wrote:On April 17 2012 21:00 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:57 FidoDido wrote:On April 17 2012 20:56 ShakkaFL wrote:
i just hope gom stops giving him free seeds, he's not gsl caliber I think Gom should start seeding more Zerg players into their tournaments to balance out the race differences. Name a zerg to seed in to the GSL who will also sell tickets (Stephano doesn't count, he does not want to be in the GSL, and IdrA has had his chance) Destiny Why not Dragon as well why they're at it..
Pretty sure Dragon > Destiny 
|
On April 17 2012 21:10 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 21:07 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 21:00 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:56 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:50 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:44 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:40 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:34 Grovbolle wrote:On April 17 2012 20:32 Hider wrote:On April 17 2012 20:28 rothsbury wrote:
[quote]
I wasn't talking about the alive thing at all, just arguing that you can't say that a win is never based on luck (I guess that's what meant by nothing "iffy") just because it is against code S / code A players. Just stop trying. Some ignorant people just cant make a distinction between being really good and having good results. Alive isn't really good like MKP. He is good, of similar caliber like other good korean terrans such as Ryung, Supernova etc. But he isn't the kind of player you expect to see dominate code S. He is the kidn of player who constantly have to work to just stay in code S. People like you kind of piss me off, what would you rather: Be "good" in your definition, or have good results? I am not saying aLive is the best T in the world, but he has good results. I do know what the difference is, like yellow in BW, he was fucking good, but never won a gold. But which is actually better? Why do you think the discussion is about what I rather want? This discussion is about being good, not about results, as results vary a lot in the short term. LEsser skilled players can often times get better results in a few tournaments even if they are 10% worse than other players. However long termish we can expect the best players to get best results. But of course if you dont play the game at a decent level your self, you can't really determine who is good/really good/mediocore, and your best bet is too look at results. Wow, what a delicate way to say that you know better than me. Even if this discussion is about being good, instead of producing results, who do you rate as the best? He who wins the most shit, or he who has more of this "skill" that everyone talks about. I can appreciate some players who are extremely good but never actually win the big finals (yellow), but in the end, those who win are the ones who win. Not those who are good. Because thats a totally different situation. Do I want to be someone who got lucky and won a million through gambling, or a hardworking man who "only" has won half a million? Its a compltetely pointless discussion, but I know that in the future we can expect the hardworking man to do better than the lucky gambler. And this is probably what you miss. There is no kind of (unexplainable) secret that has yielded Alive better results (and Ryung worse results). Its mostly due to variance (+ not having pariticapted in the right tournaments). ANd if you think there is some kind of "secret" that can explain why Ryung is doing worse than Alive, then it can be attributed to decision making/strategy/mechanicas/mentaliity that is a part of being good. So what is you point? aLive just got lucky and beat MMA, MVP, DRG, NESTEA, MC, MKP etc? Or was he good? Which is why he has gotten results? Also what you want is not the point, I believe just as much as the next guy that hard work > luck. But in a game based a lot on luck, there is bound to be some variations, however IM_MVP was pretty good for a long time, was he just lucky a long time in a row? Walking away from this discussion now. Please take a statistic class. You dont understand how variance works. Ohh I waited for this, since you are Danish I am sure you will be able to understand this: NB: Videnskabsteori og metode II = Kvantitativ metode/statistik III If you need to post a picture of your university credits in order to argue on a forum you're doing something wrong.
I just hate people who assume that they know better. Him saying: "Please take a statistic class" just called for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
