|
Canada8988 Posts
On May 17 2019 19:21 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2019 19:00 Harris1st wrote:It's okay guys. Both of them will lose to Inno next round  Not sure if Nakajin is doing the placement poll. If he is, then whoever wins might be matched with someone closer in greatness (again), and we can have this discussion about Serral/Classic vs. Solar, Dark/herO or Polt... ;D
Well in any case we know that after that we'll finaly have an objective metric, discution on this will stop and harmony will comeback forever in the TL thread.
|
Northern Ireland23745 Posts
On May 17 2019 16:17 deacon.frost wrote:
If Serral was Korean Classic would be winning without a question, but since he's foregienr Classic is losing, really? Imagine Rogue v Classic(and Rogue has 2 big titles, Serral has just 1 big title), it wouldn't be even a question.
I’d still possibly go for Rogue on the peak vs consistency basis, although Rogue has consistently done poorly relative to his level in GSL which Serral hasn’t. I can’t really compare Classic and Serral on Korean Starleagues they both don’t compete in, whereas Rogue I can and Classic comes out favourably.
I rate Blizzcon over a GSL though, and I rate being the best player in the world at any stage over a single GSL. Multiple GSLs becomes a different story.
Otherwise your jjakjis and Roros of the world automatically end up winning vs players who I imagine most of us consider unequivocally great but who lack a GSL
|
On May 17 2019 19:00 Harris1st wrote:It's okay guys. Both of them will lose to Inno next round
If Serral fanboys vote him over Classic they will vote for him against Inno too.
At this point the votes have just turned into a popularity contest.
|
Northern Ireland23745 Posts
I mean I imagine plenty would vote for Dark over Serral, and he’s definitely a great player based on certain rationales, but Serral has knocked him out of GSL vs the World, Blizzcon and the last WESG.
Dark has a consistent body of work in the GSL like Classic does, but Serral doesn’t play in that, so I’d consider the head to head and I think it’s the only reasonable thing to consider in that hypothetical matchup.
I mean it’s obviously fantastical, but hypothetically if at Brood War’s peak a foreigner somehow actually won a WCG I don’t think people would be saying they had to move to Korea and play in Starleagues to prove themselves all over again.
And again it’s really stretching things that you can directly compare but WCS standard now is way, way higher than GSLs were for quite some period of time on a level of play metric, they’re not equivalent to a modern won but winning 4 pretty high standard tournaments in a row is still a pretty good achievement.
|
On May 17 2019 07:50 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2019 05:30 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 17 2019 04:16 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On May 17 2019 00:57 Yonnua wrote:On May 17 2019 00:49 Acrofales wrote:On May 17 2019 00:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 17 2019 00:31 Wombat_NI wrote:On May 16 2019 23:47 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 16 2019 22:54 Wombat_NI wrote:On May 16 2019 22:17 The_Red_Viper wrote:
[quote]
If you try to argue that serral is already a top 10 contender with the results he has at this point? Yeah I'll go with the former.
That only makes sense if you think that WCS is incredibly close to tournaments where top koreans can compete, which is ridiculous. No WCS isn't worthless either, one should try to weigh it reasonably though.
By far most of serral's success comes from WCS tournaments.
If we only look at tournaments with korean competition (i hope one doesn't have to explain why that takes priority? It was done over and over again) we get these results:
Ro8: Katowice 2017, IEM PyeongChang, Katowice 2019
ro4: Katowice 2018, 3rd WESG 2017
2nd: WESG 2018
1st: GSL vs the world 2018, blizzcon 2018
Which is a nice résumé, but let's look at classic now.
ro8: IEM cologne 2014,IEM taipei 2015, Kespa cup s2 2015, gsl s3 2015, ssl s1 2016, gsl st2 2017, gsl s1 2018, gsl vs the world 2018
ro4: kespa cup 2014, blizzcon 2014, blizzcon 2015, ssl s2 2016, WESG 2017 4th, gsl s2 2017, ssl s2 2017 3rd, gsl st1 2018, gsl s2 2018
2nd: Katowice 2018, gsl s1 2019
1st: gsl s2 2014, ssl s2 2015, iem Shenzhen 2015, gsl st2 2018, gsl st1 2019
The difference is huge, now if you want to make a case that the wcs results serral got can make up the difference, go for it.
On May 16 2019 22:17 The_Red_Viper wrote:
[quote]
If you try to argue that serral is already a top 10 contender with the results he has at this point? Yeah I'll go with the former.
That only makes sense if you think that WCS is incredibly close to tournaments where top koreans can compete, which is ridiculous. No WCS isn't worthless either, one should try to weigh it reasonably though.
By far most of serral's success comes from WCS tournaments.
If we only look at tournaments with korean competition (i hope one doesn't have to explain why that takes priority? It was done over and over again) we get these results:
Ro8: Katowice 2017, IEM PyeongChang, Katowice 2019
ro4: Katowice 2018, 3rd WESG 2017
2nd: WESG 2018
1st: GSL vs the world 2018, blizzcon 2018
Which is a nice résumé, but let's look at classic now.
ro8: IEM cologne 2014,IEM taipei 2015, Kespa cup s2 2015, gsl s3 2015, ssl s1 2016, gsl st2 2017, gsl s1 2018, gsl vs the world 2018
ro4: kespa cup 2014, blizzcon 2014, blizzcon 2015, ssl s2 2016, WESG 2017 4th, gsl s2 2017, ssl s2 2017 3rd, gsl st1 2018, gsl s2 2018
2nd: Katowice 2018, gsl s1 2019
1st: gsl s2 2014, ssl s2 2015, iem Shenzhen 2015, gsl st2 2018, gsl st1 2019
The difference is huge, now if you want to make a case that the wcs results serral got can make up the difference, go for it.
The difference is also 3 years, which is kind of a big deal, and hard to catch up on, or directly compare anyway. Just less tournaments all round makes it harder to judge players, we don’t have the additional SSL anymore, or more international tournaments, or Proleague either. Annoying as a fan of the game but also annoying for discussing legacies haha I think the weighing is that it was 4 in a row and also came in a streak of another two tournaments including the biggest singular one there is. Despite the crushing heartbreak I imagine it gave the guy I’d still rate soO’s Kong streak as more impressive than folks who got singular GSLs and fell off. It’s his peak form and peak achievements that I rate Serral more on, but his consistency the tier beneath that is also pretty crazy. In every GSL season there is usually a top tier player or two who goes out in the Ro32, and almost always this necessitates losing to a player who isn’t on your level in at least one of your matches. In other eSports never mind ye olde regular sports this is less commonplace, it’s only really impressive to me in something like SC2 to be that consistent at a lower level. Serral was playing in 2012 already, it might not have been full time which is something to remember and consider, but he was playing in tournaments still. Now if we neglect that and say he had less time, ok but why does that matter? This is the goat discussion, the greatest of all time. You don't become the greatest of all time by having a nice streak (dominance), you become the greatest of all time by being on the top of the playing field for a very long time, simply because you have to surpass players who came before you and already did that as well. Success/results matter, not what if scenarios which happen in your mind. Serral isn't even close to classic's success, partly because he can't be at this point (if we really neglect his career prior to say 2017), but that's just how it is. Maybe he'll be able to change that in the years to come. Right now voting for serral is ludicrous under any rational pov. By your personal criteria of greatness, which isn’t necessarily everyone’s. I use my metrics I do I suppose because I’m a big sports nut and it comes from there. I weight peaks more highly than longevity, if the peaks are similar I’ll factor in longevity to break a tie. Maybe it’s not the metric to use for SC, I apply it for sports because avoiding serious injury and being lucky in that regard is often the difference between burning brightly for a short period and falling from the top relatively quickly. But even with SC injuries and military service come in as a factor. I mean hypothetically if Serral posts similar results to Classic for the next five years, Classic decides not to return to SC and do something else with his life, then Serral will end up having more results because he’s played longer at the top of the game, which is just the reverse of now How can you justify this though? Usually competitors play for a similar amount of time in their respective fields and thus comparing them based on their actual results and merits makes a lot of sense. Imagine a football player coming out of nowhere, having the greatest year in football history, winning the WC, winning championsleague, winning national championship with his club, scoring the most goals and assists but then over the next 10 years he is mediocre. Is he the greatest of all time? I'd say almost noone would make that case, it is that ridiculous to weigh that peak so much more than constant greatness. Why are clustered results worth more than the same results over a longer period of time? Or even worth more than better results over a longer period of time. I don't think you can justify it. Sounds like Ronaldinho to me. And there are people who legitimately think he is the greatest player ever (I don't). As for the tennis: Classic isn't Federer. Innovation *might* be Federer. Classic is more like Andy Murray as someone said above. And Serral isn't really a Don Budge, but if that's who you're going for? Yes, sure. Don Budge is definitely a greater player than Andy Murray. E: just to be clear, I don't think Serral is the GOAT. I just think he's greater than Classic. Poster above is saying that greatness is about peak and streak, not about overall longevity. Federer has better longevity than Budge, but less peak/streak. If the poster's logic is going to hold, they need to believe that Federer is worse than Budge. But they won't believe that, because their opinion isn't based on that logic, it's based on Serral's nationality. Your analogy is rubbish. Classic has more longevity than Serral. And Federer has more longevity than Budge. But the similarities ends there. There are many players that have more longevity than Budge who could be substituted into this analogy instead of Federer, some of which are greater than Budge and some of which are not as great. And Starcraft has never had a player as dominant as Federer was over tennis, and even if you had to pick one it wouldn't be Classic. I have no idea about tennis other than a very casual perspective, but imagine a player who wins all of the grand slams in one year and then basically does nothing compared to a player who won one grand slam per year over like 8 years. Who is greater. The guy with 4 titles but heavily clustered, or the guy with 8 spread out. In my mind it is clear, but apparently many people disagree. Which is an interesting question but not one that’s really that applicable to Serral yet Let’s say Serral’s 2018 happened in 2015, and he’s done nothing since. If that were the case I’d vote for Classic. as it is he hasn’t yet to do so, even his falloff from 2018 to 2019, the 2019 results are still pretty good You might actually disagree with me that peak Serral > Stats but it’s ky rationale on it. It’s a 51-49 kind of split though it’s not super heavy on either side.
This analogy is about a player who has a more impressive body of work over a longer time period vs another player with a lesser body of work but all of that success happened in a short time frame.
What you are doing is giving serral the benefit of the doubt in basically saying that he will keep on doing well in the future. I am not saying he won't, but that he didn't yet (obviously).
I still don't understand how people can ever come to the conclusion that serral > classic, classic's body of work and thus career is simply superior.
On May 16 2019 22:17 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2019 21:49 Xain0n wrote:On May 16 2019 21:23 Charoisaur wrote:
You could split Classic's achievements in half and he'd still be way ahead of Serral.
The fact that people here are even arguing in favor of Serral jusr shows how ridicolously deluded his fanboys are.
Let's be honest - his main achievement is "being a foreigner". Without that the poll would be as one-sided as the Leenock - INnoVation poll. The good old dilemma: are Serral fanboys deluded or korean elitists embarassingly biased? If you try to argue that serral is already a top 10 contender with the results he has at this point? Yeah I'll go with the former. That only makes sense if you think that WCS is incredibly close to tournaments where top koreans can compete, which is ridiculous. No WCS isn't worthless either, one should try to weigh it reasonably though. By far most of serral's success comes from WCS tournaments. If we only look at tournaments with korean competition (i hope one doesn't have to explain why that takes priority? It was done over and over again) we get these results: Ro8: Katowice 2017, IEM PyeongChang, Katowice 2019 ro4: Katowice 2018, 3rd WESG 2017 2nd: WESG 2018 1st: GSL vs the world 2018, blizzcon 2018 Which is a nice résumé, but let's look at classic now. ro8: IEM cologne 2014,IEM taipei 2015, Kespa cup s2 2015, gsl s3 2015, ssl s1 2016, gsl st2 2017, gsl s1 2018, gsl vs the world 2018 ro4: kespa cup 2014, blizzcon 2014, blizzcon 2015, ssl s2 2016, WESG 2017 4th, gsl s2 2017, ssl s2 2017 3rd, gsl st1 2018, gsl s2 2018 2nd: Katowice 2018, gsl s1 2019 1st: gsl s2 2014, ssl s2 2015, iem Shenzhen 2015, gsl st2 2018, gsl st1 2019 The difference is huge, now if you want to make a case that the wcs results serral got can make up the difference, go for it.
If we add another metric like teamleague success (which should be part of it), then classic did decently well in PL while serral has no results whatsoever.
So i am asking anyone who has serral > classic again, can this apparent gap in results really be closed by the wcs events serral did well in? If not what else makes serral close that gap? The "potential" which only exists in your mind at this moment? His streak (which is already part of the results we see here btw)? I don't like the argument of nationality, but yeah in this case it seems to be true.
|
On May 17 2019 21:15 Wombat_NI wrote:
I mean it’s obviously fantastical, but hypothetically if at Brood War’s peak a foreigner somehow actually won a WCG I don’t think people would be saying they had to move to Korea and play in Starleagues to prove themselves all over again.
This is the most ridiculous statement in the thread: that's exactly what would happen.
Fisheye came within 1 game in 2003, Androide took out a Korean pro in 2005 and made it to the finals, Pj took out Savior and made it to the finals. If any of their series had ended slightly differently and they had won the finals, it wouldn't mean anything. They wouldn't be even remotely close to consideration for the Greatest of All Time, and if they were compared to any player with an OSL or MSL win, or even a B-lister of the time, there wouldn't be any competition.
|
Northern Ireland23745 Posts
On May 17 2019 21:10 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2019 19:00 Harris1st wrote:It's okay guys. Both of them will lose to Inno next round If Serral fanboys vote him over Classic they will vote for him against Inno too. At this point the votes have just turned into a popularity contest.
What fanboys? I think most of the people who at least posted here, not necessarily those that all voted in Serral vs Classic had pretty decent rationales for how they voted that came down to how they weighted certain things.
Via my own weighting that I’ve laid out in the thread Inno wins this one easily, his peak level is comparable if not even higher and he’s also won more, over a longer period. As well as recently beating Serral in a tournament final.
I don’t think it’s fair to put it down to blind fanboyism at all.l, as I said myself it was a 51-49 kind of decision for me.
He’s won the biggest tournament in the game, and apparently (was posted here and was news to me) has the best winning match streak vs Koreans in the game’s history.
There’s little more he can do, outside of go go GSL in future and be called a failure if he doesn’t win the first one he enters by the other side of the fanboy coin. I’d personally love to see another contender over in the best SC2 tournament there is, but I don’t think it’s a prerequisite for him to win this matchup.
If being consistently good in the GSL is the weighting then Serral immediately loses any head to head vs guys who’ve been playing in Korean Starleagues for 5+ years immediately, by default. He’ll lose to Dark for example, despite knocking him out of 3 tournaments in the 2018/19 span.
I’ll take Serral fanboyism because at least it’s fingers-in-the-ears and he won Blizzcon end of discussion rationales. Korean elitists the yardsticks continually shift between level of play, or cumulative achievement, or prestige whenever it suits an argument.
So he needs to play GSL because it’s the highest level of play, but when my ultimate decision over Classic is that I think Serral’s peak level of play is higher, then it’s something else.
SuperTournament > GSL vs the World, for some reason, despite the latter having a bigger purse and also the added motivation of Korean pride in stopping the foreigners winning, which is absolutely a thing Korean progamers mention themselves. Which could be a tournament almost specifically designed to give us more Serral vs the best of GSL games to o off and one whose existence I like, despite some flaws IMO in how the spots are filled.
|
Northern Ireland23745 Posts
On May 17 2019 21:38 Yonnua wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2019 21:15 Wombat_NI wrote:
I mean it’s obviously fantastical, but hypothetically if at Brood War’s peak a foreigner somehow actually won a WCG I don’t think people would be saying they had to move to Korea and play in Starleagues to prove themselves all over again.
This is the most ridiculous statement in the thread: that's exactly what would happen. Fisheye came within 1 game in 2003, Androide took out a Korean pro in 2005 and made it to the finals, Pj took out Savior and made it to the finals. If any of their series had ended slightly differently and they had won the finals, it wouldn't mean anything. They wouldn't be even remotely close to consideration for the Greatest of All Time, and if they were compared to any player with an OSL or MSL win, or even a B-lister of the time, there wouldn't be any competition.
Peak level of top-end play, also I’m referring to the WVGs where Korea had multiple entrants.
And we’re not arguing greatest of all time yet, we’re on Serral vs Classic specifically. I’m on record as saying Serral being one of the absolute GOATs is really premature at this stage and it’s stupid to say it is.
Yeah a dumb hypothetical, although it illustrates the stark differences between BW and SC2 pretty well, especially the chasm between the foreign and Korean scenes that has considerably closed. Theoretical foreign WCG winner is immediately recruited into a Kespa team if they want it, because Starleagues and Proleague are the only game in town in terms of prestige and money and level of play.
Which isn’t the case in the SC2 scene or tournament structure, you don’t need to do it to become a full time pro gamer and pay your bills, and you don’t need to do it to be at a level to beat Korea’s best consistently.
|
For me, this is really simple. To be the greatest of all time you must be, for at least a short period of time, the consensus best player in the world. Regardless of how short that period of time is.
Some players that have hit that:
Maru, Innovation, MVP, Life, Rogue, Zest, Dear.
For a few months after Blizzcon Serral was considered the best player in the world, and I don't recall Classic ever achieving this status.
|
On May 17 2019 21:41 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2019 21:10 Charoisaur wrote:On May 17 2019 19:00 Harris1st wrote:It's okay guys. Both of them will lose to Inno next round If Serral fanboys vote him over Classic they will vote for him against Inno too. At this point the votes have just turned into a popularity contest. What fanboys? I think most of the people who at least posted here, not necessarily those that all voted in Serral vs Classic had pretty decent rationales for how they voted that came down to how they weighted certain things. Via my own weighting that I’ve laid out in the thread Inno wins this one easily, his peak level is comparable if not even higher and he’s also won more, over a longer period. As well as recently beating Serral in a tournament final. I don’t think it’s fair to put it down to blind fanboyism at all.l, as I said myself it was a 51-49 kind of decision for me. He’s won the biggest tournament in the game, and apparently (was posted here and was news to me) has the best winning match streak vs Koreans in the game’s history. There’s little more he can do, outside of go go GSL in future and be called a failure if he doesn’t win the first one he enters by the other side of the fanboy coin. I’d personally love to see another contender over in the best SC2 tournament there is, but I don’t think it’s a prerequisite for him to win this matchup. If being consistently good in the GSL is the weighting then Serral immediately loses any head to head vs guys who’ve been playing in Korean Starleagues for 5+ years immediately, by default. He’ll lose to Dark for example, despite knocking him out of 3 tournaments in the 2018/19 span. I’ll take Serral fanboyism because at least it’s fingers-in-the-ears and he won Blizzcon end of discussion rationales. Korean elitists the yardsticks continually shift between level of play, or cumulative achievement, or prestige whenever it suits an argument. So he needs to play GSL because it’s the highest level of play, but when my ultimate decision over Classic is that I think Serral’s peak level of play is higher, then it’s something else. SuperTournament > GSL vs the World, for some reason, despite the latter having a bigger purse and also the added motivation of Korean pride in stopping the foreigners winning, which is absolutely a thing Korean progamers mention themselves. Which could be a tournament almost specifically designed to give us more Serral vs the best of GSL games to o off and one whose existence I like, despite some flaws IMO in how the spots are filled.
The_Red Viper has laid it down pretty well.
Classic has objectively better achievements in his career and I haven't heard a "decent rationale" that makes it seem reasonable to vote for Serral.
|
On May 17 2019 23:20 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2019 21:41 Wombat_NI wrote:On May 17 2019 21:10 Charoisaur wrote:On May 17 2019 19:00 Harris1st wrote:It's okay guys. Both of them will lose to Inno next round If Serral fanboys vote him over Classic they will vote for him against Inno too. At this point the votes have just turned into a popularity contest. What fanboys? I think most of the people who at least posted here, not necessarily those that all voted in Serral vs Classic had pretty decent rationales for how they voted that came down to how they weighted certain things. Via my own weighting that I’ve laid out in the thread Inno wins this one easily, his peak level is comparable if not even higher and he’s also won more, over a longer period. As well as recently beating Serral in a tournament final. I don’t think it’s fair to put it down to blind fanboyism at all.l, as I said myself it was a 51-49 kind of decision for me. He’s won the biggest tournament in the game, and apparently (was posted here and was news to me) has the best winning match streak vs Koreans in the game’s history. There’s little more he can do, outside of go go GSL in future and be called a failure if he doesn’t win the first one he enters by the other side of the fanboy coin. I’d personally love to see another contender over in the best SC2 tournament there is, but I don’t think it’s a prerequisite for him to win this matchup. If being consistently good in the GSL is the weighting then Serral immediately loses any head to head vs guys who’ve been playing in Korean Starleagues for 5+ years immediately, by default. He’ll lose to Dark for example, despite knocking him out of 3 tournaments in the 2018/19 span. I’ll take Serral fanboyism because at least it’s fingers-in-the-ears and he won Blizzcon end of discussion rationales. Korean elitists the yardsticks continually shift between level of play, or cumulative achievement, or prestige whenever it suits an argument. So he needs to play GSL because it’s the highest level of play, but when my ultimate decision over Classic is that I think Serral’s peak level of play is higher, then it’s something else. SuperTournament > GSL vs the World, for some reason, despite the latter having a bigger purse and also the added motivation of Korean pride in stopping the foreigners winning, which is absolutely a thing Korean progamers mention themselves. Which could be a tournament almost specifically designed to give us more Serral vs the best of GSL games to o off and one whose existence I like, despite some flaws IMO in how the spots are filled. The_Red Viper has laid it down pretty well. Classic has objectively better achievements in his career and I haven't heard a "decent rationale" that makes it seem reasonable to vote for Serral.
WCS victories being worth more than zero, but you cannot accept this; pointless to argue, then.
|
On May 17 2019 23:24 Xain0n wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2019 23:20 Charoisaur wrote:On May 17 2019 21:41 Wombat_NI wrote:On May 17 2019 21:10 Charoisaur wrote:On May 17 2019 19:00 Harris1st wrote:It's okay guys. Both of them will lose to Inno next round If Serral fanboys vote him over Classic they will vote for him against Inno too. At this point the votes have just turned into a popularity contest. What fanboys? I think most of the people who at least posted here, not necessarily those that all voted in Serral vs Classic had pretty decent rationales for how they voted that came down to how they weighted certain things. Via my own weighting that I’ve laid out in the thread Inno wins this one easily, his peak level is comparable if not even higher and he’s also won more, over a longer period. As well as recently beating Serral in a tournament final. I don’t think it’s fair to put it down to blind fanboyism at all.l, as I said myself it was a 51-49 kind of decision for me. He’s won the biggest tournament in the game, and apparently (was posted here and was news to me) has the best winning match streak vs Koreans in the game’s history. There’s little more he can do, outside of go go GSL in future and be called a failure if he doesn’t win the first one he enters by the other side of the fanboy coin. I’d personally love to see another contender over in the best SC2 tournament there is, but I don’t think it’s a prerequisite for him to win this matchup. If being consistently good in the GSL is the weighting then Serral immediately loses any head to head vs guys who’ve been playing in Korean Starleagues for 5+ years immediately, by default. He’ll lose to Dark for example, despite knocking him out of 3 tournaments in the 2018/19 span. I’ll take Serral fanboyism because at least it’s fingers-in-the-ears and he won Blizzcon end of discussion rationales. Korean elitists the yardsticks continually shift between level of play, or cumulative achievement, or prestige whenever it suits an argument. So he needs to play GSL because it’s the highest level of play, but when my ultimate decision over Classic is that I think Serral’s peak level of play is higher, then it’s something else. SuperTournament > GSL vs the World, for some reason, despite the latter having a bigger purse and also the added motivation of Korean pride in stopping the foreigners winning, which is absolutely a thing Korean progamers mention themselves. Which could be a tournament almost specifically designed to give us more Serral vs the best of GSL games to o off and one whose existence I like, despite some flaws IMO in how the spots are filled. The_Red Viper has laid it down pretty well. Classic has objectively better achievements in his career and I haven't heard a "decent rationale" that makes it seem reasonable to vote for Serral. WCS victories being worth more than zero, but you cannot accept this; pointless to argue, then.
You still didn't get the point of not lining them up there huh? I never said they are worth zero, nor did i imply it. I actually did the opposite, i asked you to argue the case that the wcs events are enough to close the gap. So far nothing, i am not surprised by it either because it would most likely be a hilariously bad argument.
Ignoring a losing battle is not a bad strategy though, i'll give you that.
|
On May 17 2019 23:29 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2019 23:24 Xain0n wrote:On May 17 2019 23:20 Charoisaur wrote:On May 17 2019 21:41 Wombat_NI wrote:On May 17 2019 21:10 Charoisaur wrote:On May 17 2019 19:00 Harris1st wrote:It's okay guys. Both of them will lose to Inno next round If Serral fanboys vote him over Classic they will vote for him against Inno too. At this point the votes have just turned into a popularity contest. What fanboys? I think most of the people who at least posted here, not necessarily those that all voted in Serral vs Classic had pretty decent rationales for how they voted that came down to how they weighted certain things. Via my own weighting that I’ve laid out in the thread Inno wins this one easily, his peak level is comparable if not even higher and he’s also won more, over a longer period. As well as recently beating Serral in a tournament final. I don’t think it’s fair to put it down to blind fanboyism at all.l, as I said myself it was a 51-49 kind of decision for me. He’s won the biggest tournament in the game, and apparently (was posted here and was news to me) has the best winning match streak vs Koreans in the game’s history. There’s little more he can do, outside of go go GSL in future and be called a failure if he doesn’t win the first one he enters by the other side of the fanboy coin. I’d personally love to see another contender over in the best SC2 tournament there is, but I don’t think it’s a prerequisite for him to win this matchup. If being consistently good in the GSL is the weighting then Serral immediately loses any head to head vs guys who’ve been playing in Korean Starleagues for 5+ years immediately, by default. He’ll lose to Dark for example, despite knocking him out of 3 tournaments in the 2018/19 span. I’ll take Serral fanboyism because at least it’s fingers-in-the-ears and he won Blizzcon end of discussion rationales. Korean elitists the yardsticks continually shift between level of play, or cumulative achievement, or prestige whenever it suits an argument. So he needs to play GSL because it’s the highest level of play, but when my ultimate decision over Classic is that I think Serral’s peak level of play is higher, then it’s something else. SuperTournament > GSL vs the World, for some reason, despite the latter having a bigger purse and also the added motivation of Korean pride in stopping the foreigners winning, which is absolutely a thing Korean progamers mention themselves. Which could be a tournament almost specifically designed to give us more Serral vs the best of GSL games to o off and one whose existence I like, despite some flaws IMO in how the spots are filled. The_Red Viper has laid it down pretty well. Classic has objectively better achievements in his career and I haven't heard a "decent rationale" that makes it seem reasonable to vote for Serral. WCS victories being worth more than zero, but you cannot accept this; pointless to argue, then. You still didn't get the point of not lining them up there huh? I never said they are worth zero, nor did i imply it. I actually did the opposite, i asked you to argue the case that the wcs events are enough to close the gap. So far nothing, i am not surprised by it either because it would most likely be a hilariously bad argument. Ignoring a losing battle is not a bad strategy though, i'll give you that.
Serral has more Premier titles, more Major victories(notably HSC), a higher peak, a better streak and, unlike Classic, he was the uncontested best player in the world for a certain period; he obviously could not play in Proleague but it's not like Classic was outstanding in that regard.
On his side, Classic has more placements in prestigious Premier tournaments and the fact he played against harder opponents on average; how precisely harder Classic's opponents were is in fact the key of this discussion, but that's hard set objective criteria in order to find this out.
Imagining WCS are worth half a Code S, Classic and Serral are pretty close in achievements.
|
Imagining WCS are worth half a Code S, Classic and Serral are pretty close in achievements.
They definitely aren't worth half a Code S: beating Maru once is much better than beating Showtime twice; beating Maru, soO, TY, Dark, and sOs is much better than beating Denver, Jonsnow, Namshar, Lambo, and Reynor twice.
It's much easier to beat lots of lower-skill players than it is to beat one higher-skill player, so the value of tournaments increases exponentially with the skill of the players competing.
|
First SC2 bonjwa but who only covers a year versus amazingly consistent and strong Classic but who never had the amount of tournament wins to really compensate for how good he's been over a long period of time.
I'm going with Serral
I think 4 WCS wins are probably around a single GSL win, although made slightly more impressive by the sheer dominance and length of time of domination.
|
On May 18 2019 00:09 Yonnua wrote:Show nested quote +
Imagining WCS are worth half a Code S, Classic and Serral are pretty close in achievements.
They definitely aren't worth half a Code S: beating Maru once is much better than beating Showtime twice; beating Maru, soO, TY, Dark, and sOs is much better than beating Denver, Jonsnow, Namshar, Lambo, and Reynor twice. It's much easier to beat lots of lower-skill players than it is to beat one higher-skill player, so the value of tournaments increases exponentially with the skill of the players competing.
That's your opinion, I think the opposite. How do we set this?
We could try to objectively determine how hard and worth a victory is by going the average rating of the players in a certain tournament(we could use Aligulac but its rating inflates over time so that #1 has gone up like 1000 points in eight years,it would be hard to compare Code S in 2013 with Code S in 2019, for example; it's ok to compare WCS and Code S in 2018, on the other hand) and of the players actually had to face(one could have a someway easy path in a super stacked tournament).
Then, how do you value prizes? Assuming the same pool, a significantly higher prized tournament is to me more valuable; prestige is even harder to take into consideration…
|
Also definitely Rogue > Classic as well. A GSL ST, Blizzcon and an IEM Global Championship win right after each other? That peak is insane. Combined with extremely strong play since like 2016 or 2017 or so? Yeah definitely.
Actually Rogue> Classic is way easier than Serral >Classic.
Probably Rogue > Serral though
|
ITT: people are upset that a popularity contest is a popularity contest.
|
Northern Ireland23745 Posts
On May 18 2019 00:09 Yonnua wrote:Show nested quote +
Imagining WCS are worth half a Code S, Classic and Serral are pretty close in achievements.
They definitely aren't worth half a Code S: beating Maru once is much better than beating Showtime twice; beating Maru, soO, TY, Dark, and sOs is much better than beating Denver, Jonsnow, Namshar, Lambo, and Reynor twice. It's much easier to beat lots of lower-skill players than it is to beat one higher-skill player, so the value of tournaments increases exponentially with the skill of the players competing.
If Serral hadn’t won other tournaments against the best Koreans and people are arguing based solely on his WXS wins then absolutely Classic wins hands down.
People aren’t arguing that, at all, so it’s not really a good counter argument.
If Serral had a different span and people are totting up his achievements vs Classic’s it’s different. The general consensus is that it’s the combination of winning all he did in the same run + beating top Koreans across that whole run + winning Blizzcon + having a span of being the best player in the world (probably, if not then top 2) and having a really really high level of overall skill.
I would narrowly put Rogue ahead of Classic on basically the exact same rationale as I do Serral, and both times it’s a narrow thing for me.
It tends to be how people weight things in other sports. A guy who is a top 10 player for 10 years usually is considered lower in the greatness stakes than a guy who was number 1 in the world for a period.
I think it’s a perfectly reasonable rationale to have, especially when areas of direct comparison can’t really be made.
If Serral had a hot year, but had been competing in the GSL for 5 years and consistently failing I’d put Classic ahead of him, because Serral would have failed over a period where the two can directly be compared.
|
On May 18 2019 00:46 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2019 00:09 Yonnua wrote:
Imagining WCS are worth half a Code S, Classic and Serral are pretty close in achievements.
They definitely aren't worth half a Code S: beating Maru once is much better than beating Showtime twice; beating Maru, soO, TY, Dark, and sOs is much better than beating Denver, Jonsnow, Namshar, Lambo, and Reynor twice. It's much easier to beat lots of lower-skill players than it is to beat one higher-skill player, so the value of tournaments increases exponentially with the skill of the players competing. If Serral had a hot year, but had been competing in the GSL for 5 years and consistently failing I’d put Classic ahead of him, because Serral would have failed over a period where the two can directly be compared.
You do realize that Classic was winning a GSL when Serral was an up and comer close to a nobody, right? And you're saying they can't be compared, because while Classic was a household name in Code S, Serral was busy being a tier 3 foreigner?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
