|
On May 18 2019 00:04 Xain0n wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2019 23:29 The_Red_Viper wrote: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. Imagining WCS are worth half a Code S, Classic and Serral are pretty close in achievements.
that is if you only look at championships and ignore everything else.
|
On May 18 2019 00:50 Ej_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2019 00:46 Wombat_NI wrote: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?
You mean when Classic was an ex KeSpa progamer in his twenties and Serral a teenager playing three tournaments a year? If I get this right, he is saying that if Serral just had one breakout year then almost nothing the way Dear had, he'd place Classic over him.
|
On May 18 2019 00:04 Xain0n wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2019 23:29 The_Red_Viper wrote: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.
Why do you name things serral has more of? Why don't we just look at their holistic (well in this case ro8 and better, offline only, which seems reasonable?) career? You say people neglect the wcs results and say they are worth nothing, when in fact you ignore results of other players to make serral look superior.
Can we agree that we simply have to look at their body of work and weigh it up to more or less come to a reasonable conclusion?
Higher peak and better streak would already be part of this approach btw, you don't get to add the same thing twice just because you phrase it a little differently. What's next? Higher elo on aligulac, better streak vs zerg players, more interviews with smix. No, all of that is already part of the results we would look at, at best it is some trivia.
Ok let's say wcs is worth half of code s, your choice! (i'd disagree with it probably, but hey why not).
Then let's say that starleagues are about the same as blizzcon and katowice, every other tournament with top koreans is somewhere between wcs and the highest lvl. (wesg as a wcs event, it has weaker foreigners + top foreigners + 3 top koreans)
A win is worth X points, 2nd place 50%, ro4 25%, ro8 12.5% (one could argue about these values ofc, but just to make a point now).
gsl lvl: win (10pts), 2nd (5pts), ro4 (2.5pts), ro8 (1.25pts)
2nd tier: 7.5 pts, 3.75, 1.875, 0.9375
wcs lvl: 5pts, 2.5, 1.25, 0.625
For serral we get:
wcs lvl: ro8: 3 -> 3 x 0.625 = 1.875
ro4: 1 -> 1.25
2nd: 2 -> 2 x 2.5 = 5
1st: 4 -> 4 x 5 = 20
total of 28.125
2nd tier lvl: ro8: 1 -> 0.9375
ro4: 0 -> 0
2nd: 0 -> 0
1st: 1 -> 7.5
total of 8.4375
gsl lvl: ro8: 2 -> 2 x 1.25 = 2.5
ro4: 1 -> 2.5
2nd: 0 -> 0
1st: 1 -> 10
total of 15 pts
Serral gets a grand total of 51.5625 pts.
gsl lvl: win (10pts), 2nd (5pts), ro4 (2.5pts), ro8 (1.25pts)
2nd tier: 7.5 pts, 3.75, 1.875, 0.9375
wcs lvl: 5pts, 2.5, 1.25, 0.625
For classic we get:
wcs lvl: ro8: 0 -> 0
ro4: 1 -> 1.25
2nd: 0 -> 0
1st: 0 -> 0
total of 1.25 pts
2nd tier lvl: ro8: 5 -> 5 x 0.9375 = 4.6875
ro4: 2 -> 2 x 1.875 = 3.75
2nd: 0 -> 0
1st: 3 -> 3 x 7.5 = 22.5
total of 30.9375
gsl lvl tier: ro8: 3 -> 3 x 1.25 = 3.75
ro4: 6 -> 6 x 2.5 = 15
2nd: 2 -> 2 x 5 = 10
1st: 2 -> 2 x 10 = 20
total of 48.75
Classic gets a grand total of 80.9375 pts
I realize that this is just a very broad outline, but notice how basically all of these values are in favor of serral. WCS being half of the highest lvl is a very optimistic outlook, 1st place being worth way more than the others also favors serral due to him winning most things.
There are also no teamleague successes involved either, which would only push classic more.
If i made some mistake i am sorry, but i doubt it would be crucial.
|
Northern Ireland26354 Posts
On May 18 2019 00:50 Ej_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2019 00:46 Wombat_NI wrote: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?
Well yes?
Nobody counts say Maru’s years of doing basically nothing of note against him, they judge him based on his results since he matured as a top tier pro-gamer
Classic is what 27 and was an RTS progamer in the Kespa environment before he even played a single game of SC2.
How do you compare players who are at the twilight of their careers vs someone who is potentially years away from that point on longevity without the older player just winning by default.
We haven’t even largely in this thread pored over Classic’s slump periods and failures yet either, which should absolutely be done if we’re going to factor in cumulative achievements over 5 years. It can’t work in only one direction.
Now personally I don’t think that’s fair to Classic because he’s been around much longer, and thus it becomes him who basically loses by default vs Serral on a cumulative failures metric, so I’m not advocating for that either.
I’m going peak vs peak because IMO it’s the one real area of direct comparison that doesn’t immediately disqualify is he or the other, and I think Serral shades that.
|
Or you could compare people by their achievements, whatever floats one's boat.
Edit: also absolute LOL at saying that a kiddie region locked tour is worth half a Code S. What's next, EPS is 2/3 of a Blizzcon?
|
On May 18 2019 01:04 Ej_ wrote:
Or you could compare people by their achievements, whatever floats one's boat.
Edit: also absolute LOL at saying that a kiddie region locked tour is worth half a Code S. What's next, EPS is 2/3 of a Blizzcon?
Achievements per year of pro career... how about that as a metric of greatness?
|
On May 18 2019 01:00 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2019 00:50 Ej_ wrote:On May 18 2019 00:46 Wombat_NI wrote: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? Well yes? Nobody counts say Maru’s years of doing basically nothing of note against him, they judge him based on his results since he matured as a top tier pro-gamer How do you compare players who are at the twilight of their careers vs someone who is potentially years away from that point on longevity without the older player just winning by default.
What do you mean noone counts maru's years basically doing nothing? Yes that is exactly what one does when one looks simply at all the results, there simply are none in these years, that's it.
Yes the player with the better career at the point one compares these two players wins by default, ridiculous i know!
Serral might have a better career in 5 years from now, or he might not. We don't know, any evaluation based on future results is imaginary and thus useless.
|
On May 18 2019 00:57 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2019 00:04 Xain0n wrote:On May 17 2019 23:29 The_Red_Viper wrote: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. Why do you name things serral has more of? Why don't we just look at their holistic (well in this case ro8 and better, offline only, which seems reasonable?) career? You say people neglect the wcs results and say they are worth nothing, when in fact you ignore results of other players to make serral look superior. Can we agree that we simply have to look at their body of work and weigh it up to more or less come to a reasonable conclusion? Higher peak and better streak would already be part of this approach btw, you don't get to add the same thing twice just because you phrase it a little differently. What's next? Higher elo on aligulac, better streak vs zerg players, more interviews with smix. No, all of that is already part of the results we would look at, at best it is some trivia. Ok let's say wcs is worth half of code s, your choice! (i'd disagree with it probably, but hey why not). Then let's say that starleagues are about the same as blizzcon and katowice, every other tournament with top koreans is somewhere between wcs and the highest lvl. (wesg as a wcs event, it has weaker foreigners + top foreigners + 3 top koreans) A win is worth X points, 2nd place 50%, ro4 25%, ro8 12.5% (one could argue about these values ofc, but just to make a point now). gsl lvl: win 10pts , 5, 2.5, 1.25 2nd tier: 7.5 pts, 3.75, 1.875, 0.9375 wcs lvl: 5pts, 2.5, 1.25, 0.625 For serral we get:
wcs lvl: ro8: 3 -> 3 x 0.625 = 1.875 ro4: 1 -> 1.25 2nd: 2 -> 2 x 2.5 = 5 1st: 4 -> 4 x 5 = 20 total of 28.125 2nd tier lvl: ro8: 1 -> 0.9375 ro4: 0 -> 0 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 1 -> 7.5 total of 8.4375 gsl lvl: ro8: 2 -> 2 x 1.25 = 2.5 ro4: 1 -> 2.5 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 1 -> 10 total of 15 pts Serral gets a grand total of 51.5625 pts.
gsl lvl: win 10pts , 5, 2.5, 1.25 2nd tier: 7.5 pts, 3.75, 1.875, 0.9375 wcs lvl: 5pts, 2.5, 1.25, 0.625 For classic we get: wcs lvl: ro8: 0 -> 0 ro4: 1 -> 1.25 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 0 -> 0 total of 1.25 pts 2nd tier lvl: ro8: 5 -> 5 x 0.9375 = 4.6875 ro4: 2 -> 2 x 1.875 = 3.75 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 3 -> 3 x 7.5 = 22.5 total of 30.9375 gsl lvl tier: ro8: 3 -> 3 x 1.25 = 3.75 ro4: 6 -> 6 x 2.5 = 15 2nd: 2 -> 2 x 5 = 10 1st: 2 -> 2 x 10 = 20 total of 48.75 Classic gets a grand total of 80.9375 pts I realize that this is just a very broad outline, but notice how basically all of these values are in favor of serral. WCS being half of the highest lvl is a very optimistic outlook, 1st place being worth way more than the others also favors serral due to him winning most things. There are also no teamleague successes involved either, which would only push classic more. If i made some mistake i am sorry, but i doubt it would be crucial.
One could theorically have a better streak of matches without having a higher peak(tied to tournament titles).
Classic wasn't much of a Teamleague player, anyway, while Serral did very well for Finland in Nation Wars, so I'm not sure Classic would come out ahead in this regard.
At a glance I feel like you missed out something and I do not completely agree abot your rating system, but it's decent; the main difference is that I follow Liquipedia by not considering ro8 results while taking into consideration Major titles and that's big in the Classic vs Serral scenario.
|
On May 18 2019 01:04 Ej_ wrote:
Or you could compare people by their achievements, whatever floats one's boat.
Edit: also absolute LOL at saying that a kiddie region locked tour is worth half a Code S. What's next, EPS is 2/3 of a Blizzcon?
Then I ask to you as well, how could TL writers give Serral player of the year in 2018 over Maru? If you set WCS below 1/2 Code S this can't be justified.
Olimoleagues being better than WCS is the next step, and I have seen people screaming this out loud already.
|
On May 18 2019 01:25 Xain0n wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2019 00:57 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2019 00:04 Xain0n wrote:On May 17 2019 23:29 The_Red_Viper wrote: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. Why do you name things serral has more of? Why don't we just look at their holistic (well in this case ro8 and better, offline only, which seems reasonable?) career? You say people neglect the wcs results and say they are worth nothing, when in fact you ignore results of other players to make serral look superior. Can we agree that we simply have to look at their body of work and weigh it up to more or less come to a reasonable conclusion? Higher peak and better streak would already be part of this approach btw, you don't get to add the same thing twice just because you phrase it a little differently. What's next? Higher elo on aligulac, better streak vs zerg players, more interviews with smix. No, all of that is already part of the results we would look at, at best it is some trivia. Ok let's say wcs is worth half of code s, your choice! (i'd disagree with it probably, but hey why not). Then let's say that starleagues are about the same as blizzcon and katowice, every other tournament with top koreans is somewhere between wcs and the highest lvl. (wesg as a wcs event, it has weaker foreigners + top foreigners + 3 top koreans) A win is worth X points, 2nd place 50%, ro4 25%, ro8 12.5% (one could argue about these values ofc, but just to make a point now). gsl lvl: win 10pts , 5, 2.5, 1.25 2nd tier: 7.5 pts, 3.75, 1.875, 0.9375 wcs lvl: 5pts, 2.5, 1.25, 0.625 For serral we get:
wcs lvl: ro8: 3 -> 3 x 0.625 = 1.875 ro4: 1 -> 1.25 2nd: 2 -> 2 x 2.5 = 5 1st: 4 -> 4 x 5 = 20 total of 28.125 2nd tier lvl: ro8: 1 -> 0.9375 ro4: 0 -> 0 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 1 -> 7.5 total of 8.4375 gsl lvl: ro8: 2 -> 2 x 1.25 = 2.5 ro4: 1 -> 2.5 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 1 -> 10 total of 15 pts Serral gets a grand total of 51.5625 pts.
gsl lvl: win 10pts , 5, 2.5, 1.25 2nd tier: 7.5 pts, 3.75, 1.875, 0.9375 wcs lvl: 5pts, 2.5, 1.25, 0.625 For classic we get: wcs lvl: ro8: 0 -> 0 ro4: 1 -> 1.25 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 0 -> 0 total of 1.25 pts 2nd tier lvl: ro8: 5 -> 5 x 0.9375 = 4.6875 ro4: 2 -> 2 x 1.875 = 3.75 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 3 -> 3 x 7.5 = 22.5 total of 30.9375 gsl lvl tier: ro8: 3 -> 3 x 1.25 = 3.75 ro4: 6 -> 6 x 2.5 = 15 2nd: 2 -> 2 x 5 = 10 1st: 2 -> 2 x 10 = 20 total of 48.75 Classic gets a grand total of 80.9375 pts I realize that this is just a very broad outline, but notice how basically all of these values are in favor of serral. WCS being half of the highest lvl is a very optimistic outlook, 1st place being worth way more than the others also favors serral due to him winning most things. There are also no teamleague successes involved either, which would only push classic more. If i made some mistake i am sorry, but i doubt it would be crucial. One could theorically have a better streak of matches without having a higher peak(tied to tournament titles). Classic wasn't much of a Teamleague player, anyway, while Serral did very well for Finland in Nation Wars, so I'm not sure Classic would come out ahead in this regard. At a glance I feel like you missed out something and I do not completely agree abot your rating system, but it's decent; the main difference is that I follow Liquipedia by not considering ro8 results while taking into consideration Major titles and that's big in the Classic vs Serral scenario.
That is very theoretical, but that isn't even the point. The point is that all factors you can name are already part of the results we are looking at. Thus it's trivia.
Classic was a good proleague player:
Under these filters, Classic is 65–42 (60.75%) in games and 65–42 (60.75%) in matches.
I don't even agree with my rating system, i think it rates wcs too highly and puts too much emphasis on winning. Both things which help serral. I simply used it for simplicity sake and because you said wcs half of gsl, and even then serral loses out by a big margin.
|
2 pages of discussion. No new votes. Is anybody actually being influenced by our back and forth? :D
|
VOTE FOR SERRAL (Go to Page 34)!!!
Don't forget, in his unforgettable 2018 run, when Maru was knocked out of Blizzcon, Serral was favourite to win. This is unprecedented for a foreigner.
|
Canada8989 Posts
On May 18 2019 01:51 Azzur wrote:
VOTE FOR SERRAL (Go to Page 34)!!!
Don't forget, in his unforgettable 2018 run, when Maru was knocked out of Blizzcon, Serral was favourite to win. This is unprecedented for a foreigner.
You can always vote on the first page!
No need to dig around the thread to find the polls.
|
On May 18 2019 00:39 Ej_ wrote:
ITT: people are upset that a popularity contest wherein a foreign player might beat a Korean is a popularity contest.in the largest foreign StarCraft hub
Yea I don't get why people are surprised by the jingoism.
|
On May 18 2019 01:25 Xain0n wrote:
One could theorically have a better streak of matches without having a higher peak(tied to tournament titles).
Classic wasn't much of a Teamleague player, anyway, while Serral did very well for Finland in Nation Wars, so I'm not sure Classic would come out ahead in this regard.
At a glance I feel like you missed out something and I do not completely agree abot your rating system, but it's decent; the main difference is that I follow Liquipedia by not considering ro8 results while taking into consideration Major titles and that's big in the Classic vs Serral scenario.
 TFW people compare Nation Wars to Proleague.
Edit: Keen.gif
|
On May 18 2019 01:46 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2019 01:25 Xain0n wrote:On May 18 2019 00:57 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2019 00:04 Xain0n wrote:On May 17 2019 23:29 The_Red_Viper wrote: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. Why do you name things serral has more of? Why don't we just look at their holistic (well in this case ro8 and better, offline only, which seems reasonable?) career? You say people neglect the wcs results and say they are worth nothing, when in fact you ignore results of other players to make serral look superior. Can we agree that we simply have to look at their body of work and weigh it up to more or less come to a reasonable conclusion? Higher peak and better streak would already be part of this approach btw, you don't get to add the same thing twice just because you phrase it a little differently. What's next? Higher elo on aligulac, better streak vs zerg players, more interviews with smix. No, all of that is already part of the results we would look at, at best it is some trivia. Ok let's say wcs is worth half of code s, your choice! (i'd disagree with it probably, but hey why not). Then let's say that starleagues are about the same as blizzcon and katowice, every other tournament with top koreans is somewhere between wcs and the highest lvl. (wesg as a wcs event, it has weaker foreigners + top foreigners + 3 top koreans) A win is worth X points, 2nd place 50%, ro4 25%, ro8 12.5% (one could argue about these values ofc, but just to make a point now). gsl lvl: win 10pts , 5, 2.5, 1.25 2nd tier: 7.5 pts, 3.75, 1.875, 0.9375 wcs lvl: 5pts, 2.5, 1.25, 0.625 For serral we get:
wcs lvl: ro8: 3 -> 3 x 0.625 = 1.875 ro4: 1 -> 1.25 2nd: 2 -> 2 x 2.5 = 5 1st: 4 -> 4 x 5 = 20 total of 28.125 2nd tier lvl: ro8: 1 -> 0.9375 ro4: 0 -> 0 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 1 -> 7.5 total of 8.4375 gsl lvl: ro8: 2 -> 2 x 1.25 = 2.5 ro4: 1 -> 2.5 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 1 -> 10 total of 15 pts Serral gets a grand total of 51.5625 pts.
gsl lvl: win 10pts , 5, 2.5, 1.25 2nd tier: 7.5 pts, 3.75, 1.875, 0.9375 wcs lvl: 5pts, 2.5, 1.25, 0.625 For classic we get: wcs lvl: ro8: 0 -> 0 ro4: 1 -> 1.25 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 0 -> 0 total of 1.25 pts 2nd tier lvl: ro8: 5 -> 5 x 0.9375 = 4.6875 ro4: 2 -> 2 x 1.875 = 3.75 2nd: 0 -> 0 1st: 3 -> 3 x 7.5 = 22.5 total of 30.9375 gsl lvl tier: ro8: 3 -> 3 x 1.25 = 3.75 ro4: 6 -> 6 x 2.5 = 15 2nd: 2 -> 2 x 5 = 10 1st: 2 -> 2 x 10 = 20 total of 48.75 Classic gets a grand total of 80.9375 pts I realize that this is just a very broad outline, but notice how basically all of these values are in favor of serral. WCS being half of the highest lvl is a very optimistic outlook, 1st place being worth way more than the others also favors serral due to him winning most things. There are also no teamleague successes involved either, which would only push classic more. If i made some mistake i am sorry, but i doubt it would be crucial. One could theorically have a better streak of matches without having a higher peak(tied to tournament titles). Classic wasn't much of a Teamleague player, anyway, while Serral did very well for Finland in Nation Wars, so I'm not sure Classic would come out ahead in this regard. At a glance I feel like you missed out something and I do not completely agree abot your rating system, but it's decent; the main difference is that I follow Liquipedia by not considering ro8 results while taking into consideration Major titles and that's big in the Classic vs Serral scenario. That is very theoretical, but that isn't even the point. The point is that all factors you can name are already part of the results we are looking at. Thus it's trivia. Classic was a good proleague player: Show nested quote +Under these filters, Classic is 65–42 (60.75%) in games and 65–42 (60.75%) in matches. I don't even agree with my rating system, i think it rates wcs too highly and puts too much emphasis on winning. Both things which help serral. I simply used it for simplicity sake and because you said wcs half of gsl, and even then serral loses out by a big margin.
That's not true. We just are looking at results, not how they were obtained; you could win the same tournaments Serral did dropping one series per groupstages, his huge streak is a plus.
That Proleague record is good, not outstanding, he doesn't even make top 10; and of course I am not comparing Nation Wars to Proleague, I am pointing out Serral had very good results in the only team league he took part in.
You took my input then you developed it under your own criteria, if you include ro8 placements(debatable, to me) Classic is probably ahead, very much so if you don't take Major victories into consideration.
|
On May 18 2019 01:28 Xain0n wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2019 01:04 Ej_ wrote:
Or you could compare people by their achievements, whatever floats one's boat.
Edit: also absolute LOL at saying that a kiddie region locked tour is worth half a Code S. What's next, EPS is 2/3 of a Blizzcon? Then I ask to you as well, how could TL writers give Serral player of the year in 2018 over Maru? If you set WCS below 1/2 Code S this can't be justified. Olimoleagues being better than WCS is the next step, and I have seen people screaming this out loud already.
If the metric for greatness was what TL writers said, the "greatest players of all time" would be Taeja, HerO, Snute, Huk, TLO, and Haypro.
|
Northern Ireland26354 Posts
On May 18 2019 01:19 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2019 01:00 Wombat_NI wrote:On May 18 2019 00:50 Ej_ wrote:On May 18 2019 00:46 Wombat_NI wrote: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? Well yes? Nobody counts say Maru’s years of doing basically nothing of note against him, they judge him based on his results since he matured as a top tier pro-gamer How do you compare players who are at the twilight of their careers vs someone who is potentially years away from that point on longevity without the older player just winning by default. What do you mean noone counts maru's years basically doing nothing? Yes that is exactly what one does when one looks simply at all the results, there simply are none in these years, that's it. Yes the player with the better career at the point one compares these two players wins by default, ridiculous i know! Serral might have a better career in 5 years from now, or he might not. We don't know, any evaluation based on future results is imaginary and thus useless.
And judging it on past results which Serral cannot by default have due to his age and circumstances (such as not being Korean) are not somewhat useless?
And generally no players don’t judge Maru for his results at the beginning of WoL for example in most of these discussions, people also don’t tend to factor in how bad the Kespa players initially were, and IMO very reasonably in doing so.
I mean basically Serral loses basically by default to any number of GSL regulars if it’s weighted that way, probably about 25+ players. I don’t think that really feels right vs Serral’s stellar 2018, still pretty damn good 2018 thus far and some of his 2017 runs.
And if we’re doing results over 5+ years of play, then all of Classic’s failures in the Ro32 or any missed qualifications are fair game as well, which haven’t even really appeared here at all yet.
|
Northern Ireland26354 Posts
As an aside it’s a real shame for the man himself, fans and even this thread that Classic in his current shape didn’t get to Katowice, where he really could have contended.
Winning or running deep in it, plus a GSL final and winning the Super Tournament probably pushes Classic into the bracket of consensus best player in the world for a decent span of time.
Which is the real thing he lacks in having IMO, that the Mvps, Innos, Marus and a few others all have over him.
|
Being the best player in the world for half a year, and proving it again and again and again with all expectations on you, just simply exceeds Classic's incredible consistency (on a lower scale) over the past six year
It's a matter of philosophy towards greatness but it's my own personal take.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
