- I should probably sleep before I work tonight. - There's SC2 to watch, so that overrides that. - I still have trouble bearing Wolf, so that might override that?
- I should probably sleep before I work tonight. - There's SC2 to watch, so that overrides that. - I still have trouble bearing Wolf, so that might override that?
On March 27 2017 18:57 Phredxor wrote: Ok so Youtube stream still doesn't work for me. Apparently it's like NZ wide for the last week. Fan-fucking-tastic.
I don't understand it very well, but when I open the Youtube stream in a separate window to watch it separately, it also does not work for me. But when I start it in the TL window above, it works.
On March 27 2017 18:57 Phredxor wrote: Ok so Youtube stream still doesn't work for me. Apparently it's like NZ wide for the last week. Fan-fucking-tastic.
On March 27 2017 19:54 Cricketer12 wrote: those photoshoots made maru look like some bitchy 15yr old in a K-Pop band and Stats a 30 year old man with an office job.
It's not that far off from the truth if you think about it.
On March 27 2017 19:54 Cricketer12 wrote: those photoshoots made maru look like some bitchy 15yr old in a K-Pop band and Stats a 30 year old man with an office job.
On March 27 2017 19:54 Cricketer12 wrote: those photoshoots made maru look like some bitchy 15yr old in a K-Pop band and Stats a 30 year old man with an office job.
It's not that far off from the truth if you think about it.
Not expecting that much out of Stats today.
Yup happy for Stats to just throw out some stupid cheese and see what happens.
On March 27 2017 20:00 Pandemona wrote: Can't see Stats being in any shape here to beat Maru. Maru had like 7 days to practice TvP and Stats 24 hours ago was being crowned GSL champion xD
Stats is a much better player though, so who knows.
On March 27 2017 19:50 Penev wrote: actively hunting prisms, take notice soO
soO would oblierate Zest in under 20min total. Don't compare the 2.
Two weeks ago Zest 2-0d him.
I doubt he was playin serious vs Stats former teammate. In their bo1 in Shoutcraft he was remaxing on banes off 5 bases
That's a pretty silly excuse for losing a qualifying Bo3 2 weeks before the GSL finals, especially because soO is close with Stats, so he'd already know exactly how soO plays. That and they face off against each other on ladder. That's something people never take into account. Every pro knows how other pros play.
On March 27 2017 19:50 Penev wrote: actively hunting prisms, take notice soO
soO would oblierate Zest in under 20min total. Don't compare the 2.
Two weeks ago Zest 2-0d him.
I doubt he was playin serious vs Stats former teammate. In their bo1 in Shoutcraft he was remaxing on banes off 5 bases
That's a pretty silly excuse 2 weeks in a qualifying Bo3 2 weeks before the GSL finals, especially because soO is close with Stats, so he'd already know exactly how soO plays. That and they face off against each other on ladder. That's something people never take into account. Every pro knows how other pros play.
INnoVation played only mech vs soO before their GSL group so they definitely at least try to hide it.
Maru shouldn't have attacked into Adept/Phoenix. Resonating Adepts > Marines by a long shot. But it's against his style, defensive turtle + expand is the answer but Maru only knows how to attack.
On March 27 2017 20:11 pvsnp wrote: Maru shouldn't have attacked into Adept/Phoenix. Resonating Adepts > Marines by a long shot. But it's against his style, defensive turtle + expand is the answer but Maru only knows how to attack.
He was trying to get there before glaives like Inno against Zest. Except Stats has glaives in that situation because he's Stats.
First game was Maru getting out-meta'd. Second was thrown by proxy Starport wtf. Stats played well ofc, but gotta blame Maru for those losses; he just made the wrong decisions.
Whoever is Jin Air coach is very very very bad xD someone really needs to talk to Maru as he has the tools to punish a toss who opens fast 3 base with stargate every game. With a guy who is at his best when he is just rallying units to the opponents base and fighting 24-7
On March 27 2017 20:23 Pandemona wrote: Whoever is Jin Air coach is very very very bad xD someone really needs to talk to Maru as he has the tools to punish a toss who opens fast 3 base with stargate every game. With a guy who is at his best when he is just rallying units to the opponents base and fighting 24-7
how do you punish stargate >3rd >3gate though its pretty much standard right now in pvt
On March 27 2017 20:23 Pandemona wrote: Whoever is Jin Air coach is very very very bad xD someone really needs to talk to Maru as he has the tools to punish a toss who opens fast 3 base with stargate every game. With a guy who is at his best when he is just rallying units to the opponents base and fighting 24-7
how do you punish stargate >3rd >3gate though its pretty much standard right now in pvt
You try to bunker the 3rd and pray to god the Toss doesn't look for it.
On March 27 2017 20:23 Pandemona wrote: Whoever is Jin Air coach is very very very bad xD someone really needs to talk to Maru as he has the tools to punish a toss who opens fast 3 base with stargate every game. With a guy who is at his best when he is just rallying units to the opponents base and fighting 24-7
how do you punish stargate >3rd >3gate though its pretty much standard right now in pvt
On March 27 2017 20:23 Pandemona wrote: Whoever is Jin Air coach is very very very bad xD someone really needs to talk to Maru as he has the tools to punish a toss who opens fast 3 base with stargate every game. With a guy who is at his best when he is just rallying units to the opponents base and fighting 24-7
how do you punish stargate >3rd >3gate though its pretty much standard right now in pvt
2 widow mine drop -> 2 medivac pure marine attack is really good against it. First oracle has to stay home and use energy to defend it, then hits before glaives or enough adepts are out.
At least that's what I have by far the most trouble with.
how do you punish stargate >3rd >3gate though its pretty much standard right now in pvt
Inno did a pre-Glaives timing with almost pure Marines (think he had a mine or two) against Zest last week and it worked. Dunno if non-Inno Terrans can do that though.
On March 27 2017 20:33 Ej_ wrote: Im going to call their rivalry LeeParkRok from now on and you can't stop me.
Not really much of an interesting rivalry imo
You're not a fan of the "Inno wins --> Dark crushes him --> Inno wins --> Dark crushes him" formula?
I mean that would be ok tbh. But just looking at where they meet, etc it's not really that noteworthy. The context of the matches is important i think.
Literally this. Inno just walks over and kills Dark, no contest at all.
Though they will meet again on Wednesday and I'm gonna bet Dark will be out for blood after this. Going by the Inno > Dark > Inno > Dark.......rule, Dark will take that series.
Was he? Inno did have a fast third but not on location, and if Dark defended perfectly he could have easily taken a fourth. Dark had a potential advantage imo, before he didn't.
Still I do agree that there's not much choice for Dark. Inno seems to have a slight edge over him on the whole.
With all those units he no longer had because his all-in didn't work.
Touche but the single queen + no spore didn't exactly help. The Raven would have done something regardless but Dark had enough to defend against a single uncloaked Banshee, or at least prevent it from getting 9 drones.
On March 27 2017 21:40 Penev wrote: sOs is as disgustingly bad as he's disgustingly good
I see the disgusting part and the bad part but the good part is lost on me.
I don't really understand how it's possible to miss it
Well depends on whether you think that abusing your race to the fullest is skill.
Ofc it is skill. Every player who tries to win absuses the race to some extent. Winning is the only real measurement of skill, everything else is just biased
On March 27 2017 21:40 Penev wrote: sOs is as disgustingly bad as he's disgustingly good
I see the disgusting part and the bad part but the good part is lost on me.
I don't really understand how it's possible to miss it
Well depends on whether you think that abusing your race to the fullest is skill.
Ofc it is skill. Every player who tries to win absuses the race to some extent. Winning is the only real measurement of skill, everything else is just biased
I do think that sOs abused the lack of defenders advantage and all the early game tools of Protoss more than players like Rain.
On March 27 2017 21:40 Penev wrote: sOs is as disgustingly bad as he's disgustingly good
I see the disgusting part and the bad part but the good part is lost on me.
I don't really understand how it's possible to miss it
Well depends on whether you think that abusing your race to the fullest is skill.
Ofc it is skill. Every player who tries to win absuses the race to some extent. Winning is the only real measurement of skill, everything else is just biased
I do think that sOs abused the lack of defenders advantage and all the early game tools of Protoss more than players like Rain.
Rain was terrible at protoss. Arguably the fact that he was so successful with protoss while being so terrible at protoss means that he was one of the very best starcraft players.
On March 27 2017 21:40 Penev wrote: sOs is as disgustingly bad as he's disgustingly good
I see the disgusting part and the bad part but the good part is lost on me.
I don't really understand how it's possible to miss it
Well depends on whether you think that abusing your race to the fullest is skill.
Ofc it is skill. Every player who tries to win absuses the race to some extent. Winning is the only real measurement of skill, everything else is just biased
I do think that sOs abused the lack of defenders advantage and all the early game tools of Protoss more than players like Rain.
Rain abused other things of the race then. You cannot "win" without "abusing" aspects of your race. Ofc the extent (or the perception of it) might vary though
On March 27 2017 21:40 Penev wrote: sOs is as disgustingly bad as he's disgustingly good
I see the disgusting part and the bad part but the good part is lost on me.
I don't really understand how it's possible to miss it
Well depends on whether you think that abusing your race to the fullest is skill.
Ofc it is skill. Every player who tries to win absuses the race to some extent. Winning is the only real measurement of skill, everything else is just biased
I do think that sOs abused the lack of defenders advantage and all the early game tools of Protoss more than players like Rain.
Rain was terrible at protoss. Arguably the fact that he was so successful with protoss while being so terrible at protoss means that he was one of the very best starcraft players.
Point is, I find Rains skill to be much more interesting and noteworthy and admireable. I think it requires more training and more talent.
And who knows, maybe Rain just found it too boring to flip so many coins.
On March 27 2017 21:40 Penev wrote: sOs is as disgustingly bad as he's disgustingly good
I see the disgusting part and the bad part but the good part is lost on me.
I don't really understand how it's possible to miss it
Well depends on whether you think that abusing your race to the fullest is skill.
Ofc it is skill. Every player who tries to win absuses the race to some extent. Winning is the only real measurement of skill, everything else is just biased
I do think that sOs abused the lack of defenders advantage and all the early game tools of Protoss more than players like Rain.
Rain abused other things of the race then. You cannot "win" without "abusing" aspects of your race. Ofc the extent (or the perception of it) might vary though
Using all of your tools is not abuse, in my book. I'd call "abuse" using something that is broken or should not be the way it is. Luckily Protoss got fixed in LotV. I wouldn't call playing LingBlingMuta abuse because it is very difficult to play and is on of the most fun to watch styles in the game.
All you do here is arbitrarily defining that one thing is "broken" and the other is not. I mean i personally dislike players like Has, i emotionally also think it is "wrong" that he can do what he does. That's biased though and i know it is. (so i am a hypocrit i guess) You play what gives you the biggest chance of winning the game. So you play what works. If i can make X work most of the time i will do that. If it was easy to do what sOs/Has do then every toss would simply do it.
On March 27 2017 23:03 The_Red_Viper wrote: All you do here is arbitrarily defining that one thing is "broken" and the other is not. I mean i personally dislike players like Has, i emotionally also think it is "wrong" that he can do what he does. That's biased though and i know it is. (so i am a hypocrit i guess) You play what gives you the biggest chance of winning the game. So you play what works. If i can make X work most of the time i will do that. If it was easy to do what sOs/Has do then every toss would simply do it.
KIND OF arbitrarily. Yes, I am defining stuff as "broken" but not randomly. That is somewhat biased but not entirely.
>If it was easy to do what sOs/Has do then every toss would simply do it.
I disagree. There may be other reasons not to play like that. Also in LotV it is obviously not as effective any more.
Not randomly, you have emotional reasons for it. Emotional reasons to think that playing "standard" is more valuable than playing like sOs/Has. At the end of the day something becomes standard because a majority of people play like that though. Why? Because for them it wins games on a consistent basis. I think that's all that really matters, winning games on a conistent basis. Do whatever works. And yes i am a hypocrite because i also have strogn opinions on how the game "should be played"
On March 27 2017 23:55 The_Red_Viper wrote: Not randomly, you have emotional reasons for it. Emotional reasons to think that playing "standard" is more valuable than playing like sOs/Has. At the end of the day something becomes standard because a majority of people play like that though. Why? Because for them it wins games on a consistent basis. I think that's all that really matters, winning games on a conistent basis. Do whatever works. And yes i am a hypocrite because i also have strogn opinions on how the game "should be played"
They may be emotional, but not only emotional. I have (imo) good reasons for my definitions. Like the amount of guessing involved and therefore the amount of counterplay possible, the amount of multitasking necessary. The ladder of which is imo the reason for the nearly unlimited skillcap of RTS.
If a person can't see their own biases, trying to have a meaningful conversation with them is a lost cause because they don't even understand themselves.
Notwithstanding, the amount of ridiculous tears that will be shed over the year - can't wait. Plus, shitposting is always fun especially when people take themselves way too seriously.
Still long way to go, but am curious on people's pick for top four for Premier?
On March 27 2017 23:55 The_Red_Viper wrote: Not randomly, you have emotional reasons for it. Emotional reasons to think that playing "standard" is more valuable than playing like sOs/Has. At the end of the day something becomes standard because a majority of people play like that though. Why? Because for them it wins games on a consistent basis. I think that's all that really matters, winning games on a conistent basis. Do whatever works. And yes i am a hypocrite because i also have strogn opinions on how the game "should be played"
They may be emotional, but not only emotional. I have (imo) good reasons for my definitions. Like the amount of guessing involved and therefore the amount of counterplay possible, the amount of multitasking necessary. The ladder of which is imo the reason for the nearly unlimited skillcap of RTS.
Well but the thing you mentiond are always on a spectrum right? You have to guess in starcraft because you cannot have 100% information. That's true for even basic things like where to position your units. So i think it is basically arbitrary where we put the line between acceptable "guessing" and unacceptable one. This might read like nitpicking and it probably is, but i also think there is truth to it. Especially when we consider that not any random guy could do the same, there is a reason that players like sOs are as successful as they are. He is one of the very best players, his excellence simply manifests itself differently than for say Rain. Ofc all this talk doesn't prevent me from getting mad when sOs beats someone i personally respect more. Like back when Jaedong lost to sOs, i was pretty bad i can tell you that. I don't like sOs one bit. I also think that mechanical prowess is in general more interesting to watch. At the same time i think it's really cool when TY does a new build abusing some aspect of terran. It's biased
On March 28 2017 00:23 SilentRaven wrote: If a person can't see their own biases, trying to have a meaningful conversation with them is a lost cause because they don't even understand themselves.
Notwithstanding, the amount of ridiculous tears that will be shed over the year - can't wait. Plus, shitposting is always fun especially when people take themselves way too seriously.
Still long way to go, but am curious on people's pick for top four for Premier?
Pretty much everybody is biased in certain ways. You just have to hit the right buttons and the most logical person ever will show extreme biases no matter what. That's simply human.
Top4? I guess Dark, Innovation and Stats should definitely make it. The last pick is a bit tricky. Could be almost anybody
[/QUOTE] Well but the thing you mentiond are always on a spectrum right? You have to guess in starcraft because you cannot have 100% information. That's true for even basic things like where to position your units. So i think it is basically arbitrary where we put the line between acceptable "guessing" and unacceptable one. This might read like nitpicking and it probably is, but i also think there is truth to it. Especially when we consider that not any random guy could do the same, there is a reason that players like sOs are as successful as they are. He is one of the very best players, his excellence simply manifests itself differently than for say Rain. Ofc all this talk doesn't prevent me from getting mad when sOs beats someone i personally respect more. Like back when Jaedong lost to sOs, i was pretty bad i can tell you that. I don't like sOs one bit. I also think that mechanical prowess is in general more interesting to watch. At the same time i think it's really cool when TY does a new build abusing some aspect of terran. It's biased
On March 28 2017 00:23 SilentRaven wrote: If a person can't see their own biases, trying to have a meaningful conversation with them is a lost cause because they don't even understand themselves.
Notwithstanding, the amount of ridiculous tears that will be shed over the year - can't wait. Plus, shitposting is always fun especially when people take themselves way too seriously.
Still long way to go, but am curious on people's pick for top four for Premier?
Pretty much everybody is biased in certain ways. You just have to hit the right buttons and the most logical person ever will show extreme biases no matter what. That's simply human.
Top4? I guess Dark, Innovation and Stats should definitely make it. The last pick is a bit tricky. Could be almost anybody[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I prefer tactics over mechanical prowess which makes sense considering my bias. Those are the safe picks, I keep thinking Inno won't and I feel more sure that he won't win. Ehhhh I usually go against the grain.
Well yeah safe picks for sure but that means most likely to become true Last pick is interesting though, atm solar or byul look like the most obvious picks but i can also see maru or zest making it tbh
On March 27 2017 21:40 Penev wrote: sOs is as disgustingly bad as he's disgustingly good
I see the disgusting part and the bad part but the good part is lost on me.
I don't really understand how it's possible to miss it
Well depends on whether you think that abusing your race to the fullest is skill.
Ofc it is skill. Every player who tries to win absuses the race to some extent. Winning is the only real measurement of skill, everything else is just biased
I do think that sOs abused the lack of defenders advantage and all the early game tools of Protoss more than players like Rain.
Rain was terrible at protoss. Arguably the fact that he was so successful with protoss while being so terrible at protoss means that he was one of the very best starcraft players.
Point is, I find Rains skill to be much more interesting and noteworthy and admireable. I think it requires more training and more talent.
And who knows, maybe Rain just found it too boring to flip so many coins.
Those are different ideas. You can like whichever players you want, I'm not questioning your taste. But if you're going to play a race that requires superior unpredictability and superior positioning to compensate less microable units (I know it's not exactly accurate, it's more of a schematic idea), it is objectively bad to ditch unpredictability and focus only on superior positioning.
That's like saying okay, I'm terran and I'm going to choose a strat that requires very little micro and multitask. Like, I'm sure you could do it, and I would probably enjoy it more than actual terran since I don't find that impressive. But it wouldn't make much logical sense given the characteristics of your race.
On March 27 2017 21:40 Penev wrote: sOs is as disgustingly bad as he's disgustingly good
I see the disgusting part and the bad part but the good part is lost on me.
I don't really understand how it's possible to miss it
Well depends on whether you think that abusing your race to the fullest is skill.
Ofc it is skill. Every player who tries to win absuses the race to some extent. Winning is the only real measurement of skill, everything else is just biased
I do think that sOs abused the lack of defenders advantage and all the early game tools of Protoss more than players like Rain.
Rain was terrible at protoss. Arguably the fact that he was so successful with protoss while being so terrible at protoss means that he was one of the very best starcraft players.
Point is, I find Rains skill to be much more interesting and noteworthy and admireable. I think it requires more training and more talent.
And who knows, maybe Rain just found it too boring to flip so many coins.
Those are different ideas. You can like whichever players you want, I'm not questioning your taste. But if you're going to play a race that requires superior unpredictability and superior positioning to compensate less microable units (I know it's not exactly accurate, it's more of a schematic idea), it is objectively bad to ditch unpredictability and focus only on superior positioning.
That's like saying okay, I'm terran and I'm going to choose a strat that requires very little micro and multitask. Like, I'm sure you could do it, and I would probably enjoy it more than actual terran since I don't find that impressive. But it wouldn't make much logical sense given the characteristics of your race.
did you miss when terran pros decided to break tvz in hots by going mech into air every game
Predict no particular order - solar, stats, aLive and sOs.
Solar and Stats are conservative. Pretty bold to pick two others that are currently 0-2 though, not to mention picking them over guys like ByuL, Inno, or Dark.
In fact if I had to pick somebody for last place, it would probably be aLive. He basically handed ByuL the wins, and skipping out against Patience to beat foreigners doesn't exactly trumpet his own confidence.
On March 27 2017 21:40 Penev wrote: sOs is as disgustingly bad as he's disgustingly good
I see the disgusting part and the bad part but the good part is lost on me.
I don't really understand how it's possible to miss it
Well depends on whether you think that abusing your race to the fullest is skill.
Ofc it is skill. Every player who tries to win absuses the race to some extent. Winning is the only real measurement of skill, everything else is just biased
I do think that sOs abused the lack of defenders advantage and all the early game tools of Protoss more than players like Rain.
Rain was terrible at protoss. Arguably the fact that he was so successful with protoss while being so terrible at protoss means that he was one of the very best starcraft players.
Point is, I find Rains skill to be much more interesting and noteworthy and admireable. I think it requires more training and more talent.
And who knows, maybe Rain just found it too boring to flip so many coins.
Those are different ideas. You can like whichever players you want, I'm not questioning your taste. But if you're going to play a race that requires superior unpredictability and superior positioning to compensate less microable units (I know it's not exactly accurate, it's more of a schematic idea), it is objectively bad to ditch unpredictability and focus only on superior positioning.
That's like saying okay, I'm terran and I'm going to choose a strat that requires very little micro and multitask. Like, I'm sure you could do it, and I would probably enjoy it more than actual terran since I don't find that impressive. But it wouldn't make much logical sense given the characteristics of your race.
I know. I am not saying that sOs abused Protoss because of him being a bad person or anything. I am saying that Protoss could be abused more, and that in doing that he didn't show as much skill as others when winning. Because unpredictability and multitasking are two very different skills.
Predict no particular order - solar, stats, aLive and sOs.
Solar and Stats are conservative. Pretty bold to pick two others that are currently 0-2 though, not to mention picking them over guys like ByuL, Inno, or Dark.
In fact if I had to pick somebody for last place, it would probably be aLive. He basically handed ByuL the wins, and skipping out against Patience to beat foreigners doesn't exactly trumpet his own confidence.
I have my reasons, what are your picks then?
I think aLive honoring a prior commitment is admirable and I wouldn't count getting 2-0'd in a BO3 series quite as definitive as you're making it sound.
On March 27 2017 21:40 Penev wrote: sOs is as disgustingly bad as he's disgustingly good
I see the disgusting part and the bad part but the good part is lost on me.
I don't really understand how it's possible to miss it
Well depends on whether you think that abusing your race to the fullest is skill.
Ofc it is skill. Every player who tries to win absuses the race to some extent. Winning is the only real measurement of skill, everything else is just biased
I do think that sOs abused the lack of defenders advantage and all the early game tools of Protoss more than players like Rain.
Rain was terrible at protoss. Arguably the fact that he was so successful with protoss while being so terrible at protoss means that he was one of the very best starcraft players.
Point is, I find Rains skill to be much more interesting and noteworthy and admireable. I think it requires more training and more talent.
And who knows, maybe Rain just found it too boring to flip so many coins.
Those are different ideas. You can like whichever players you want, I'm not questioning your taste. But if you're going to play a race that requires superior unpredictability and superior positioning to compensate less microable units (I know it's not exactly accurate, it's more of a schematic idea), it is objectively bad to ditch unpredictability and focus only on superior positioning.
That's like saying okay, I'm terran and I'm going to choose a strat that requires very little micro and multitask. Like, I'm sure you could do it, and I would probably enjoy it more than actual terran since I don't find that impressive. But it wouldn't make much logical sense given the characteristics of your race.
I know. I am not saying that sOs abused Protoss because of him being a bad person or anything. I am saying that Protoss could be abused more, and that in doing that he didn't show as much skill as others when winning. Because unpredictability and multitasking are two very different skills.
What you think you're saying is that he didn't show as much skill as others when winning. What you're actually saying is that you don't care about the particular skills that he showed to win. Which is fine, again, that's your prerogative.
I think aLive honoring a prior commitment is admirable and I wouldn't count getting 2-0'd in a BO3 series quite as definitive as you're making it sound.
I'd say Stats and Inno are practically guaranteed, and then two of ByuL/Solar/Dark. In no particular order then, Dark, Solar, Inno, Stats. I'm not a gambler
I put aLive in at last because he historically does much better in shorter/foreign/online tourneys, and is already off to a bad start. As I said in the LR thread, he committed the cardinal sin of TvZ in letting ByuL macro uncontested, and he did it twice. Making such a basic mistake, then giving up against Patience (somebody he had a good shot against), is not a good sign moving forward. To advance he's going to have to at least hold his own against guys like Stats or Dark and that's an uphill battle to say the least.
On March 28 2017 01:53 SilentRaven wrote: Predict no particular order - solar, stats, aLive and sOs.
From sOs' performance today, I would say the best result for him is to stay in Premier league next season, depending on how many "won game" he will lost again like set 3.
I think aLive honoring a prior commitment is admirable and I wouldn't count getting 2-0'd in a BO3 series quite as definitive as you're making it sound.
I'd say Stats and Inno are practically guaranteed, and then two of ByuL/Solar/Dark. In no particular order then, Dark, Solar, Inno, Stats. I'm not a gambler
I put aLive in at last because he historically does much better in shorter/foreign/online tourneys, and is already off to a bad start. As I said in the LR thread, he committed the cardinal sin of TvZ in letting ByuL macro uncontested, and he did it twice. Making such a basic mistake, then giving up against Patience (somebody he had a good shot against), is not a good sign moving forward. To advance he's going to have to at least hold his own against guys like Stats or Dark and that's an uphill battle to say the least.
Fair enough. If calling me a gambler is your kind way of calling me batshit crazy, I can't completely disagree. However, I think saying aLive gave up is too much. aLive is teamless, don't you think showing commitment to play in a tournament goes a long way? Especially, in light of the recent controversies with solar and byun. Plus, as far as I know aLive isn't rich, why not take easy money? It doesn't mean he's going to be less committed going forward, especially in an offline event. If you are privy to more info, do share though.
Not too long ago, Byul was baneling busting Stats in GSL and losing but he's pulling it together as of late. If I just got spanked and forfeited, I would want to have a stronger showing going forward, but I do agree with in terms of aLive's endurance.
Somewhat of an ass-pull season prediction based on what little samplings we have so far:
1. Bogus: Just based on his long history of consistency 2. Stats: Can't not put him here based on his results in 2017 so far 3. ByuL: He's only played players he should beat so far in SSL, but looks great lately 4. Maru: He'll be back 5. Solar: Looks middle of the road and off to a good start. Defending SSL champ. 6. Dark: Top 2 Zerg currently, but will be exposed as overrated this season 7. Zest: His main source of woe is PvT. PvP he's still a god and his PvZ isn't bad either. 8. Patience: Always does better than expected.. 9. aLive: Off to a bad start. He needed to beat Patience... 10. sOs: Moneybags has no time for low prize-money :p
==
On March 28 2017 08:35 juicyjames wrote: Any recommended matches?
On March 28 2017 01:53 SilentRaven wrote: Predict no particular order - solar, stats, aLive and sOs.
From sOs' performance today, I would say the best result for him is to stay in Premier league next season, depending on how many "won game" he will lost again like set 3.
Game 3 hurt. Still marrying up the tactics and execution. I still believe.
Fair enough. If calling me a gambler is your kind way of calling me batshit crazy, I can't completely disagree. However, I think saying aLive gave up is too much. aLive is teamless, don't you think showing commitment to play in a tournament goes a long way? Especially, in light of the recent controversies with solar and byun. Plus, as far as I know aLive isn't rich, why not take easy money? It doesn't mean he's going to be less committed going forward, especially in an offline event. If you are privy to more info, do share though.
Not too long ago, Byul was baneling busting Stats in GSL and losing but he's pulling it together as of late. If I just got spanked and forfeited, I would want to have a stronger showing going forward, but I do agree with in terms of aLive's endurance.
Oh, perhaps I chose my words poorly. By "giving up" I meant literally that he is on the official record as 0-2 against Patience, not anything about his mental state or decision-making process.
It looks to me that he chose money over prestige since SSL was always going to be a long shot while Ting offers a disproportionate payout relative to its difficulty. I can't fault him for that kind of reasoning, assuming that's what he thought.
The source I'm using is the SPOTV FB post, which only says that aLive agreed to the penalty of taking an 0-2 and not being paid his usual loser's fee + spectator revenue.
1. (T)Bogus: Just based on his long history of consistency 2. (P)Stats: Can't not put him here based on his results in 2017 so far 3. (Z)ByuL: He's only played players he should beat so far in SSL, but looks great lately 4. (T)Maru: He'll be back 5. (Z)Solar: Looks middle of the road and off to a good start. Defending SSL champ. 6. (Z)Dark: Top 2 Zerg currently, but will be exposed as overrated this season 7. (P)Zest: His main source of woe is PvT. PvP he's still a god and his PvZ isn't bad either. 8. (P)Patience: Always does better than expected.. 9. (T)aLive: Off to a bad start. He needed to beat Patience... 10. (P)sOs: Moneybags has no time for low prize-money :p
Not at all a bad prediction imo, your "asspull" description notwithstanding. Inno, Stats, ByuL are all safe picks. Maru I'm not so sure about given today's performance but if he can bounce back I guess. Solar looking very solid but we haven't seen his ZvT and historically it is his worst matchup. Dark went down to Inno, can't blame him (or anyone) for that and I can't see him losing to anyone else but Stats. Zest is definitely still shaky, his PvZ is decent but his PvT is awful. Patience is a wild card and has a history of killing Inno of all people. aLive I've already talked about. sOs is kinda screwed.
On March 28 2017 01:53 SilentRaven wrote: Predict no particular order - solar, stats, aLive and sOs.
From sOs' performance today, I would say the best result for him is to stay in Premier league next season, depending on how many "won game" he will lost again like set 3.
Game 3 hurt. Still marrying up the tactics and execution. I still believe.
I don't know, he is using some stupid builds on ladder when streaming and won a lot, but never use them in offline games and lost 3 matches in a row now. I really doubt he will move on to playoffs.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/players/977.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/players/1097.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/players/1850.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/players/611.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/players/1988.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/players/5308.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/players/663.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/players/4729.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/players/1101.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/players/4797.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://nerdist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/perfect.png)
