|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On September 14 2020 04:13 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:11 lolfail9001 wrote:
Conclusion: muta into lurker is the worst ZvZ strat. The mutas did enough damage to be worth it imo, and the transition went okay for Serral. The upgrades are obviously the most difficult problem, but even so I think it really came down to Reynor controlling better. I don't think it's the strat that was the issue.
Mutas did enough damage, but delayed tech too far. Granted, questionable bane runbys were part of it too.
|
On September 14 2020 04:00 travis wrote:
highest skill era and it isn't even close
if you think otherwise you're dreaming
Certainly true if you focus on the non-Korean scene, which it seems you do.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On September 14 2020 04:14 Luolis wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:14 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:12 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 03:44 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 03:28 StasisField wrote:
Clem-Serral finals with Clem winning 4-3 would be amazing to see Clem winning 4-3 would be most controversial outcome (even if neither player will care about it), better not. There should be nothing controversial about it. Should be nothing outside of the fact that series score would be 3-3 without WB advantage. I'd argue that there should be more controversy if there was no WB advantage.
Playing only 1 match is considered advantage about anywhere else.
|
On September 14 2020 04:18 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:14 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:12 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 03:44 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 03:28 StasisField wrote:
Clem-Serral finals with Clem winning 4-3 would be amazing to see Clem winning 4-3 would be most controversial outcome (even if neither player will care about it), better not. There should be nothing controversial about it. Should be nothing outside of the fact that series score would be 3-3 without WB advantage. I'd argue that there should be more controversy if there was no WB advantage. Playing only 1 match is considered advantage about anywhere.
Comparing that to the advantage of being able to lose an entire series in the rest of the tournament is laughable.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On September 14 2020 04:18 Luolis wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:12 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 03:44 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 03:28 StasisField wrote:
Clem-Serral finals with Clem winning 4-3 would be amazing to see Clem winning 4-3 would be most controversial outcome (even if neither player will care about it), better not. There should be nothing controversial about it. Should be nothing outside of the fact that series score would be 3-3 without WB advantage. I'd argue that there should be more controversy if there was no WB advantage. Playing only 1 match is considered advantage about anywhere. Comparing that to the advantage of being able to lose an entire series in the rest of the tournament is laughable.
Losing an entire series is often a question of losing 1 game, cough Reynor, cough Serral.
|
On September 14 2020 04:19 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:18 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:12 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 03:44 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 03:28 StasisField wrote:
Clem-Serral finals with Clem winning 4-3 would be amazing to see Clem winning 4-3 would be most controversial outcome (even if neither player will care about it), better not. There should be nothing controversial about it. Should be nothing outside of the fact that series score would be 3-3 without WB advantage. I'd argue that there should be more controversy if there was no WB advantage. Playing only 1 match is considered advantage about anywhere. Comparing that to the advantage of being able to lose an entire series in the rest of the tournament is laughable. Losing an entire series is often a question of losing 1 game, cough Reynor, cough Serral.
Either you severely misunderstand how double elimination works or you just dont care.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On September 14 2020 04:20 Luolis wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:19 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:12 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 03:44 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 03:28 StasisField wrote:
Clem-Serral finals with Clem winning 4-3 would be amazing to see Clem winning 4-3 would be most controversial outcome (even if neither player will care about it), better not. There should be nothing controversial about it. Should be nothing outside of the fact that series score would be 3-3 without WB advantage. I'd argue that there should be more controversy if there was no WB advantage. Playing only 1 match is considered advantage about anywhere. Comparing that to the advantage of being able to lose an entire series in the rest of the tournament is laughable. Losing an entire series is often a question of losing 1 game, cough Reynor, cough Serral. Either you severely misunderstand how double elimination works or you just dont care.
Oh, i perfectly understand. I am just stating facts, both Reynor and Serral are in lower bracket over losing a single game in a series of 5.
|
On September 14 2020 04:19 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:18 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:12 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 03:44 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 03:28 StasisField wrote:
Clem-Serral finals with Clem winning 4-3 would be amazing to see Clem winning 4-3 would be most controversial outcome (even if neither player will care about it), better not. There should be nothing controversial about it. Should be nothing outside of the fact that series score would be 3-3 without WB advantage. I'd argue that there should be more controversy if there was no WB advantage. Playing only 1 match is considered advantage about anywhere. Comparing that to the advantage of being able to lose an entire series in the rest of the tournament is laughable. Losing an entire series is often a question of losing 1 game, cough Reynor, cough Serral.
That just shows a lack of understanding of statistics. A one map advantage in a bo7 is obviously worth less than losing a series. Honestly a two map advantage in a bo9 would be fairer mathematically (or have two series like HSC XX did), but obviously people would complain about the entertainment value.
|
On September 14 2020 04:21 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:20 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:19 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:12 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 03:44 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 03:28 StasisField wrote:
Clem-Serral finals with Clem winning 4-3 would be amazing to see Clem winning 4-3 would be most controversial outcome (even if neither player will care about it), better not. There should be nothing controversial about it. Should be nothing outside of the fact that series score would be 3-3 without WB advantage. I'd argue that there should be more controversy if there was no WB advantage. Playing only 1 match is considered advantage about anywhere. Comparing that to the advantage of being able to lose an entire series in the rest of the tournament is laughable. Losing an entire series is often a question of losing 1 game, cough Reynor, cough Serral. Either you severely misunderstand how double elimination works or you just dont care. Oh, i perfectly understand. I am just stating facts, both Reynor and Serral are in lower bracket over losing a single game in a series.
Yep, but they're not out of the tournament even though they lost one series. It would be unfair for Clem in the finals to not have atleast a one map advantage after making it to the finals from upper bracket.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On September 14 2020 04:23 Luolis wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:21 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:20 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:19 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:12 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 03:44 lolfail9001 wrote:
[quote]
Clem winning 4-3 would be most controversial outcome (even if neither player will care about it), better not. There should be nothing controversial about it. Should be nothing outside of the fact that series score would be 3-3 without WB advantage. I'd argue that there should be more controversy if there was no WB advantage. Playing only 1 match is considered advantage about anywhere. Comparing that to the advantage of being able to lose an entire series in the rest of the tournament is laughable. Losing an entire series is often a question of losing 1 game, cough Reynor, cough Serral. Either you severely misunderstand how double elimination works or you just dont care. Oh, i perfectly understand. I am just stating facts, both Reynor and Serral are in lower bracket over losing a single game in a series. Yep, but they're not out of the tournament even though they lost one series. It would be unfair for Clem in the finals to not have atleast a one map advantage after making it to the finals from upper bracket.
As i said, elsewhere not having to play 2 matches in a day is considered an advantage of it's own. But i guess SC2 is a bit too fast for that argument to convince most people. For the record, for a proper weekender that has to fit more than 2 matches in a day, proper WB advantage is not something i consider controversial at all.
|
On September 14 2020 04:25 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:23 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:21 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:20 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:19 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:12 Luolis wrote:
[quote]
There should be nothing controversial about it. Should be nothing outside of the fact that series score would be 3-3 without WB advantage. I'd argue that there should be more controversy if there was no WB advantage. Playing only 1 match is considered advantage about anywhere. Comparing that to the advantage of being able to lose an entire series in the rest of the tournament is laughable. Losing an entire series is often a question of losing 1 game, cough Reynor, cough Serral. Either you severely misunderstand how double elimination works or you just dont care. Oh, i perfectly understand. I am just stating facts, both Reynor and Serral are in lower bracket over losing a single game in a series. Yep, but they're not out of the tournament even though they lost one series. It would be unfair for Clem in the finals to not have atleast a one map advantage after making it to the finals from upper bracket. As i said, elsewhere not having to play 2 matches in a day is considered an advantage of it's own.
I believe that anyone who thinks that is advantage enough is an idiot.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On September 14 2020 04:26 Luolis wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:23 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:21 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:20 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:19 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 lolfail9001 wrote:
[quote]
Should be nothing outside of the fact that series score would be 3-3 without WB advantage. I'd argue that there should be more controversy if there was no WB advantage. Playing only 1 match is considered advantage about anywhere. Comparing that to the advantage of being able to lose an entire series in the rest of the tournament is laughable. Losing an entire series is often a question of losing 1 game, cough Reynor, cough Serral. Either you severely misunderstand how double elimination works or you just dont care. Oh, i perfectly understand. I am just stating facts, both Reynor and Serral are in lower bracket over losing a single game in a series. Yep, but they're not out of the tournament even though they lost one series. It would be unfair for Clem in the finals to not have atleast a one map advantage after making it to the finals from upper bracket. As i said, elsewhere not having to play 2 matches in a day is considered an advantage of it's own. I believe that anyone who thinks that is advantage enough is an idiot.
It is very much an advantage in games where 1 game can go for an hour and more (and thus 2 matches can take up an entire day by themselves). And i have seen enough examples where plain fatigue led to mistakes so big, i am firmly convinced having only to play 1 match is advantage in itself.
|
Certainly highest level ZvZ ever. These two are insane.
|
On September 14 2020 04:27 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2020 04:26 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:23 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:21 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:20 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:19 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 Luolis wrote:On September 14 2020 04:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 14 2020 04:14 Luolis wrote:
[quote]
I'd argue that there should be more controversy if there was no WB advantage. Playing only 1 match is considered advantage about anywhere. Comparing that to the advantage of being able to lose an entire series in the rest of the tournament is laughable. Losing an entire series is often a question of losing 1 game, cough Reynor, cough Serral. Either you severely misunderstand how double elimination works or you just dont care. Oh, i perfectly understand. I am just stating facts, both Reynor and Serral are in lower bracket over losing a single game in a series. Yep, but they're not out of the tournament even though they lost one series. It would be unfair for Clem in the finals to not have atleast a one map advantage after making it to the finals from upper bracket. As i said, elsewhere not having to play 2 matches in a day is considered an advantage of it's own. I believe that anyone who thinks that is advantage enough is an idiot. It is very much an advantage in games where 1 game can go for an hour and more (and thus 2 matches can take up an entire day by themselves).
It's somewhat of an advantage but compared to being able to lose a series is way more of an advantage than that.
|
I don't like the 1 map advantage personally. Ideally you'd have the person coming from the loser's bracket have to win 2 bo5 in a row (so the upper bracket person has the same 1 match to lose), but if that's too long the bo5 followed by bo3 format is also good.
|
These matches between those two are insanely good. Just by watching the games you clearly see they are on another level then the rest of the bunch. Absolutely incredible.
|
|
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
While i was arguing in LR, i did not notice. Did Serral just roach-corruptor Reynor in game 3?
|
On September 14 2020 04:28 Malinor wrote:
These matches between those two are insanely good. Just by watching the games you clearly see they are on another level then the rest of the bunch. Absolutely incredible.
Makes it all the more impressive that Clem won! I think Reynor and Serral could be the top two players on the planet
|
On September 14 2020 04:28 dysenterymd wrote:
I don't like the 1 map advantage personally. Ideally you'd have the person coming from the loser's bracket have to win 2 bo5 in a row (so the upper bracket person has the same 1 match to lose), but if that's too long the bo5 followed by bo3 format is also good.
That's obviously "fairest", but it's also viewed (and probably correctly viewed) by organizers as not as good for viewership, since you don't always end up with the epic standalone grand finals (especially when it all ends in the first series).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
