• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 09:41
CEST 15:41
KST 22:41
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
TL.net Map Contest #21: Voting6[ASL20] Ro4 Preview: Descent11Team TLMC #5: Winners Announced!3[ASL20] Ro8 Preview Pt2: Holding On9Maestros of the Game: Live Finals Preview (RO4)5
Community News
Weekly Cups (Oct 6-12): Four star herO65.0.15 Patch Balance Hotfix (2025-10-8)77Weekly Cups (Sept 29-Oct 5): MaxPax triples up3PartinG joins SteamerZone, returns to SC2 competition325.0.15 Balance Patch Notes (Live version)119
StarCraft 2
General
Revisiting the game after10 years and wow it's bad 5.0.15 Patch Balance Hotfix (2025-10-8) TL.net Map Contest #21: Voting The New Patch Killed Mech! Ladder Impersonation (only maybe)
Tourneys
Crank Gathers Season 2: SC II Pro Teams LiuLi Cup - September 2025 Tournaments SC4ALL $6,000 Open LAN in Philadelphia Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2)
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 495 Rest In Peace Mutation # 494 Unstable Environment Mutation # 493 Quick Killers Mutation # 492 Get Out More
Brood War
General
Map with fog of war removed for one player? BW caster Sayle BW General Discussion Pros React To: BarrackS + FlaSh Coaching vs SnOw After 20 seasons we have a lot of great maps
Tourneys
[ASL20] Semifinal A [ASL20] Semifinal B SC4ALL $1,500 Open Bracket LAN [Megathread] Daily Proleagues
Strategy
Relatively freeroll strategies Current Meta BW - ajfirecracker Strategy & Training Siegecraft - a new perspective
Other Games
General Games
Dawn of War IV Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread ZeroSpace Megathread Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion LiquidDota to reintegrate into TL.net
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
SPIRED by.ASL Mafia {211640} TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Men's Fashion Thread Sex and weight loss
Fan Clubs
The herO Fan Club! The Happy Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion!
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion MLB/Baseball 2023 NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
SC2 Client Relocalization [Change SC2 Language] Linksys AE2500 USB WIFI keeps disconnecting Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List Recent Gifted Posts
Blogs
Inbreeding: Why Do We Do It…
Peanutsc
From Tilt to Ragequit:The Ps…
TrAiDoS
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1918 users

Racial Distribution in Patch 1.0 - Diamond Ladder - Page 6

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
Prev 1 4 5 6 7 8 23 Next All
Backpack
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States1776 Posts
September 02 2010 00:07 GMT
#101
On September 02 2010 08:13 Cade wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 02 2010 08:01 Backpack wrote:
Popularity does not equal strength.

The fact that people have this *idea* that terran might be OP and that zerg might suck will make them play terran more. You see terran all the time at high levels simply because there are more terran than zerg. The more people cry "terran OP," the more people will switch over to it.

The top players are there because they are the best players. Not because of their race. The reason there are so many terrans at the top is because there are so many terrans overall.


Your post is completely misinformed, and while this logic might hold true for the lower ranges (where terran is actually NOT overly popular, protoss is the most popular. Your logic is actually very flawed when concerning top level players



Did you and everyone else who quoted me saying similar things miss the part where i said people switch?

When Dimaga says "well, guess i'll play terran" it causes tons of other players to think that they should too. Top level players are the most likely to think that they need to switch races so they can move up to the next level (tournaments and what not.)

I know P is the most popular race on the whole diamond ladder but i'm talking about even higher level than that. At MLG there were 3 zergs out of 64 players. Without even taking skill into account the chances of seeing a zerg in the finals are terrible. Whenever a player switches from Z to T, you have one less zerg player at the top and one more terran.

Doesn't anyone find it odd that the zerg race keeps getting progressively worse overtime when there haven't even been any balance changes? When we look at players like IdrA, we see that if you stick to Zerg and keep on practicing, you will still be able to compete with the best. You don't see IdrA switching to T.

Which leads back into the mentality people have that switching from Z to T will make them better and that confidence will quite possibly make them perform better. All the Z who are left just whine and complain and don't put their heart into it anymore while the newly recruited T players are excited to go beat noobs with the "OP" race.


***I'm not saying this is what's going on, since nobody can say for sure, but i just want to show people that balance isn't as bad as they think it is. This could be (and i think it is) just a social problem.
"You people need to just generally care a lot less about everything." -Zatic
MaestroSC
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
United States2073 Posts
September 02 2010 00:08 GMT
#102
On September 02 2010 08:52 Pekkz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 02 2010 08:41 Flipluck wrote:
Hmmm really makes you think. I wonder whats going to happen after patch 1.1, will the reaper and tank nerf really make a difference?

Hopefully more zerg throughout the diamond league by the end of September.


Only in TvT

I really dont think that the patch will make a huge difference. The bio ball will be unchanged, and a 5 sec later zealot will ruin the ZvP matchup, and maby even TvP. How will they defend a zergling rush on two player maps that are really hard to defend now. It will be standard to go 10 gate i suppose..


agreed. Their PF with turret walls and their Terran Ball are being unchanged so the ZvT matchup isnt changing at all imo.
StarDrive
Profile Joined September 2010
90 Posts
September 02 2010 00:09 GMT
#103
On September 02 2010 08:59 Grummler wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 02 2010 08:48 StarDrive wrote:
On September 02 2010 08:46 Grummler wrote:
On September 02 2010 08:21 MamiyaOtaru wrote:
I don't know how anyone can read this as anything but evidence that Terran is OP. Automatic match making keeps everyone at around %50 win ratio everywhere but the very top.


Mhm, i read that thread about why everyone HAS to be around 50% win ratio because of match making, but no one could explain me, why all races also have nearly the same average points. Maybe you can, i would like to hear your reasoning.

Also i want to point out, that the op coincidentally forgot to include the 1600+ column:

Protoss: 40%
Terran: 40%
Zerg: 20%

Oh, and there are 52 players between 1400 and 1600 (someone asked). And everyone talking about chi square and stuff is wrong, you cant do this kind of calculations for pure statistics like this, because we only have one measurement. You need more than one. What we could do is compare the different regions and calculate a chi square, standard derivation or whatever you want, but then you would have an answer to a different question (are the regions equal or not).

What we would need are those statistics for different point of times. Then we were at least able to say if terran has a significant dominance over time.


Actually we have 52 measurements for players between 1400 and 1600. It is sound to do a chi-squared test of goodness of fit to assess the fit of the observed distribution to a theoretical distribution.


What did you measure then? Because if you measure the race distribution, its only one measurement. Sure its 52 players, but only one race distribution. Sure you could count them several times, but then you would have answers to different questions, like i already said.

I mean, srsly ( i made those numbers up):
Terran: 55%
Protoss: 25%
Zerg: 20%

whats the standard deriviation? chi sqare? If anyone can tell me, i would be pretty surprised (cause you cant)

Just in case: if someone calculates the average and its variance, i will ignore him.



I'm not really sure how to address all the issues here but the misunderstandings you're having are fairly subtle and many people who don't have a super strong statistics background have them so this isn't a simple case of someone completely misunderstanding statistics.

The first thing is in your interpretation of one sample, then if we measured the height of all males in the US to compute the average height, by your argument, that would also be one sample since there is only one US. To see more samples we would have to measure another instance of the universe. You can think of this loosely as a parallel universe, although this is not rigorous by any means.

You ask for the standard deviation which is a fair question. That is an important measure of a distribution and is important to assess the normal approximation of the binomial as I did in an earlier post. However, you did not specify which distribution you want the standard deviation of.

I will not go through all the theory and methodology of performing a chi-square goodness of fit test on a distribution here. But it suffices to say that it is sound and accepted practice. You can find more information here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson's_chi-square_test

I think if you gave your object of there being only one trend a bit more thought, you'd see that it doesn't really make sense to require multiple samples of distributions (not samples from a distribution) to perform this test. In that case, what would you be doing your fit on?
Antisocialmunky
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States5912 Posts
September 02 2010 00:11 GMT
#104
I would be more interesting in win/loss statisics in each match for players in diamond. All this shows are general trends in race popularity at various points.
[゚n゚] SSSSssssssSSsss ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Marine/Raven Guide:http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=163605
Nemesis
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
Canada2568 Posts
September 02 2010 00:12 GMT
#105
On September 02 2010 08:58 EliteAzn wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 02 2010 08:52 Pekkz wrote:
On September 02 2010 08:41 Flipluck wrote:
Hmmm really makes you think. I wonder whats going to happen after patch 1.1, will the reaper and tank nerf really make a difference?

Hopefully more zerg throughout the diamond league by the end of September.


Only in TvT

I really dont think that the patch will make a huge difference. The bio ball will be unchanged, and a 5 sec later zealot will ruin the ZvP matchup, and maby even TvP. How will they defend a zergling rush on two player maps that are really hard to defend now. It will be standard to go 10 gate i suppose..


I'm kinda annoyed by this "omg I can't stop 6 pool anymore b/c of the 5 seconds" (sorry if you were refering to that, but there has been so many people QQ'ing about it). If you see a 6 pool, you WILL chrono your gate....so omg, your zealot will come out a second later...Really? (I want someone to elaborate more on this...)

I'm not really a protoss player so I'm not sure exactly on the issue so correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it is that p has to cut probes to defend against early pool because of the zealot nerf, so they have to cut probes all the time because of the threat of an early pool but if the opponent went standard they would be economically behind.
Lee Young Ho fighting! KT P are just CHINTOSSTIC.
StarDrive
Profile Joined September 2010
90 Posts
September 02 2010 00:12 GMT
#106
On September 02 2010 09:11 Antisocialmunky wrote:
I would be more interesting in win/loss statisics in each match for players in diamond. All this shows are general trends in race popularity at various points.


Players in diamond will by definition have similar win loss statistics. But the trend is clear: strong players prefer Terran.
Grummler
Profile Joined May 2010
Germany743 Posts
September 02 2010 00:12 GMT
#107
On September 02 2010 09:06 blacktoss wrote:
Grummler, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Also I like how you ninja edited your previous post. At first, you actually had measurements, and now you have only percentages, which are meaningless. Yes, good job. You still have no idea what you're talking about.

This data is exactly analagous to the following experiment:

I have a coin, I want to see if it is fair or not. I flip the coin 50 times and record the results. I get:

Heads : 35
Tails : 15

Can I make any inference about the fairness of the coin?

You say I can't. But obviously I can. I can test the hypothesis that the coin is fair. You are full of it. The exacty same reasoning tools can be applied to the data about racial distribution at the top level. Can I ask and get a statistical answer to the question "Are the racial disparities solely due to random chance?", yes.


No, you cant. Cause you totaly ignore the amount of ppl playing that race. And i "ninja edited" my post, cause the op gives us no absolut numbers like i did in my example. Just because you understood that high school math example doesnt prove anything.
workers, supply, money, workers, supply, money, workers, ...
ReplayArk
Profile Joined August 2010
Germany23 Posts
September 02 2010 00:14 GMT
#108
@EliteAzn the raw data can be found in the link I gave in my first post. It is clear how I did the numbers (except for one little thing, the 1500 is in fact 1500+ because there are only 9 above 1600). Anyhow here is the data.
NATO
Profile Joined April 2010
United States459 Posts
September 02 2010 00:14 GMT
#109
Alternative explanation: Racial differential in skill scaling:

Terran has the most mechanics that have higher skill caps, i.e., to master (get full potential) out of the Terran, it requires more skill than the other races. (Followed by toss, then zerg.)

This means that since 99.99% of people don't have the skill to reach that level, Blizzard balancing for most people leaves mostly Terrans at the top.


Solution: Make the other races more interesting by adding skill-differentiating abilities - don't just nerf and buff units. E.g., make roaches interesting again by increasing their regen and lowering their hp; Add an early game spell to zerg like toss has with sentry; make sentries do 8 dmg again.
StarDrive
Profile Joined September 2010
90 Posts
September 02 2010 00:15 GMT
#110
On September 02 2010 09:12 Grummler wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 02 2010 09:06 blacktoss wrote:
Grummler, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Also I like how you ninja edited your previous post. At first, you actually had measurements, and now you have only percentages, which are meaningless. Yes, good job. You still have no idea what you're talking about.

This data is exactly analagous to the following experiment:

I have a coin, I want to see if it is fair or not. I flip the coin 50 times and record the results. I get:

Heads : 35
Tails : 15

Can I make any inference about the fairness of the coin?

You say I can't. But obviously I can. I can test the hypothesis that the coin is fair. You are full of it. The exacty same reasoning tools can be applied to the data about racial distribution at the top level. Can I ask and get a statistical answer to the question "Are the racial disparities solely due to random chance?", yes.


No, you cant. Cause you totaly ignore the amount of ppl playing that race. And i "ninja edited" my post, cause the op gives us no absolut numbers like i did in my example. Just because you understood that high school math example doesnt prove anything.


Grummler, we can deduce the actual numbers by looking at the site ourselves, so we can perform statistical tests. I do agree that it requires more than just percentages, but it is possible as I have shown in a previous post. No need to attack other posters. Just respond to their arguments logically.
blacktoss
Profile Joined August 2010
United States121 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-09-02 00:16:18
September 02 2010 00:15 GMT
#111
On September 02 2010 09:12 Grummler wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 02 2010 09:06 blacktoss wrote:
Grummler, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Also I like how you ninja edited your previous post. At first, you actually had measurements, and now you have only percentages, which are meaningless. Yes, good job. You still have no idea what you're talking about.

This data is exactly analagous to the following experiment:

I have a coin, I want to see if it is fair or not. I flip the coin 50 times and record the results. I get:

Heads : 35
Tails : 15

Can I make any inference about the fairness of the coin?

You say I can't. But obviously I can. I can test the hypothesis that the coin is fair. You are full of it. The exacty same reasoning tools can be applied to the data about racial distribution at the top level. Can I ask and get a statistical answer to the question "Are the racial disparities solely due to random chance?", yes.


No, you cant. Cause you totaly ignore the amount of ppl playing that race. And i "ninja edited" my post, cause the op gives us no absolut numbers like i did in my example. Just because you understood that high school math example doesnt prove anything.



http://sc2ranks.com/stats/race/all/1

Right on the original post. Yes, yes they did.

And, once again. Yes you can. There are two possibilities here. Either you did not click on the most important link in this thread (the one with the actual data on it), or you do not understand statistics at all. Or both. Which is it?
RoarMan
Profile Blog Joined January 2010
Canada745 Posts
September 02 2010 00:16 GMT
#112
On September 02 2010 09:07 Backpack wrote:
***I'm not saying this is what's going on, since nobody can say for sure, but i just want to show people that balance isn't as bad as they think it is. This could be (and i think it is) just a social problem.

I'm not gonna quote the whole thing as I'm afraid it might be blown out of context, but this tidbit here is quite interesting.

It could be just a social aspect of the Sc2 community right now for players to switch from Z to T. I'm not saying that I'm a pro or anything but to me the balances are as severe as people are making them out to be, I'm having a ton of trouble with Reapers yeah but beyond that I feel I can compete with the Terran, albeit even if it feels like I'm putting more effort into my part.

What am I trying to get at? Nothing really, but it might be interesting to see wether or not players switch out of T soon after the patch JUST because of the fact that they are getting nerfed, not the fact that the nerf is effecting the race so heavily.
All the pros got dat Ichie.
ReplayArk
Profile Joined August 2010
Germany23 Posts
September 02 2010 00:18 GMT
#113
@TitleRug I did not include the 1600 intervall because I thought it would be to small since it would contain five entries. I thought about calling the last intervall 1500+ but thought it would be to much for the a post in the internet.
TitleRug
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States651 Posts
September 02 2010 00:19 GMT
#114
On September 02 2010 09:18 ReplayArk wrote:
@TitleRug I did not include the 1600 intervall because I thought it would be to small since it would contain five entries. I thought about calling the last intervall 1500+ but thought it would be to much for the a post in the internet.

Fair enough
coLCruncher fighting!
Mykill
Profile Blog Joined February 2009
Canada3402 Posts
September 02 2010 00:21 GMT
#115
LOLOL hahaha
Everybody likes the terran
[~~The Impossible Leads To Invention~~] CJ Entusman #52 The problem with internet quotations is that they are hard to verify -Abraham Lincoln c.1863
ToxNub
Profile Joined June 2010
Canada805 Posts
September 02 2010 00:21 GMT
#116
Only a basic understanding of statistics and logic is required to understand this information, and yet so many people fail. (Pretty much everyone but the "pill" guy)

1. Popularity is not identical to "overpoweredness". This is a BIG assumption. More top players prefer terran, that's true, but knowing why they do so is infinitely more informative than just the population data. If they all say "I play terran because I do better" (and we have reliable confidence they have no reason to deceive us) then sure, get up on your soapbox. But it won't be because of this graph, it will be because of the top players' reasoning. For all you know, they might say "I like challenge" (to play devil's advocate).

2. To settle the sample size debate once and for all: The top players cannot be their own population if you are trying to make a generalization about the GAME. You can make a generalization about top players or top end play, if you like. That's what samples do, they generalize. So it completely depends on what exactly you are trying to generalize. It will be too small for some generalizations, and plenty large enough for others. It's not one or the other, it depends what you are trying to argue.
StarDrive
Profile Joined September 2010
90 Posts
September 02 2010 00:24 GMT
#117
On September 02 2010 09:21 ToxNub wrote:
Only a basic understanding of statistics and logic is required to understand this information, and yet so many people fail. (Pretty much everyone but the "pill" guy)

1. Popularity is not identical to "overpoweredness". This is a BIG assumption. More top players prefer terran, that's true, but knowing why they do so is infinitely more informative than just the population data. If they all say "I play terran because I do better" (and we have reliable confidence they have no reason to deceive us) then sure, get up on your soapbox. But it won't be because of this graph, it will be because of the top players' reasoning. For all you know, they might say "I like challenge" (to play devil's advocate).

2. To settle the sample size debate once and for all: The top players cannot be their own population if you are trying to make a generalization about the GAME. You can make a generalization about top players or top end play, if you like. That's what samples do, they generalize. So it completely depends on what exactly you are trying to generalize. It will be too small for some generalizations, and plenty large enough for others. It's not one or the other, it depends what you are trying to argue.


Yes it could be that they play Terran since they like a challenge and they are so much more talented than everyone else that they can dominate even with the additional challenge. However, this explanation seems unlikely.
blacktoss
Profile Joined August 2010
United States121 Posts
September 02 2010 00:27 GMT
#118
On September 02 2010 09:21 ToxNub wrote:
Only a basic understanding of statistics and logic is required to understand this information, and yet so many people fail. (Pretty much everyone but the "pill" guy)

2. To settle the sample size debate once and for all: The top players cannot be their own population if you are trying to make a generalization about the GAME. You can make a generalization about top players or top end play, if you like. That's what samples do, they generalize. So it completely depends on what exactly you are trying to generalize. It will be too small for some generalizations, and plenty large enough for others. It's not one or the other, it depends what you are trying to argue.


I'm only going to respond to #2.

Um, the GAME [sic] is not a population. The GAME is what it is. The players of the GAME form a population. The data discussed in this thread is not talking about the population of all players. If it were, then it would be useless, because it is not a random sample. It is all diamond players. If you want to make inferences about a population from a subset of that population, you want to use random sampling.

But that is not the reasoning used here. The first line of reasoning is to ask whether there is any racial bias in the distribution of players in higher level diamond league that is not due to random chance. The answer is, without a shadow of reasonable doubt, yes. There is such a bias. The next question is "What causes this bias?"

And in this case, there can be many claims trying to explain the bias. Why is racial imbalance a good one? The claim is not that one is trying to generalize from a 'sample' (diamond population) to a 'population' (the GAME), it is one of measuring one variable with another.

The variable we have to work with is racial distribution in upper diamond league. The variable we are interested in is racial balance. When you try to infer one variable from another, the one you measure is called a proxy. This is not the same as an inference about a population from a sample. Please do not conflate the two.
ToxNub
Profile Joined June 2010
Canada805 Posts
September 02 2010 00:31 GMT
#119
On September 02 2010 09:24 StarDrive wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 02 2010 09:21 ToxNub wrote:
Only a basic understanding of statistics and logic is required to understand this information, and yet so many people fail. (Pretty much everyone but the "pill" guy)

1. Popularity is not identical to "overpoweredness". This is a BIG assumption. More top players prefer terran, that's true, but knowing why they do so is infinitely more informative than just the population data. If they all say "I play terran because I do better" (and we have reliable confidence they have no reason to deceive us) then sure, get up on your soapbox. But it won't be because of this graph, it will be because of the top players' reasoning. For all you know, they might say "I like challenge" (to play devil's advocate).

2. To settle the sample size debate once and for all: The top players cannot be their own population if you are trying to make a generalization about the GAME. You can make a generalization about top players or top end play, if you like. That's what samples do, they generalize. So it completely depends on what exactly you are trying to generalize. It will be too small for some generalizations, and plenty large enough for others. It's not one or the other, it depends what you are trying to argue.


Yes it could be that they play Terran since they like a challenge and they are so much more talented than everyone else that they can dominate even with the additional challenge. However, this explanation seems unlikely.


Sure, but this data doesn't say that. That's your opinion. That's all i'm saying.
TehForce
Profile Joined July 2010
1072 Posts
September 02 2010 00:31 GMT
#120
This data is not saying that terrans are winning more games than zerg or protoss. This data says there are just more terran players in the highest diamond leagues. Also its not that drastic of a difference then it looks like. Terran doubled while Protoss and Zerg dropped half.

This can have many reasons:
1. People switching from P/Z to T because they think they can have an advantage because terran is said to be op
2. More super high level players play T instead of P/Z because terran is said to be the most creative race
3. At the top level are mostly players with years experience of Starcraft Brood War who transitioned easily into high level Starcraft2. Now the mostly dominant race in Brood War for the last year was Terran because of Flash. People saw that and choosed mostly Terran (even if they weren't terran in Brood War) because they wanted to learn terran. What is there a better point of time to switch to terran than the start of a new game.
NesTea <3
Prev 1 4 5 6 7 8 23 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
OSC
12:00
King of the Hill #227
WardiTV618
IndyStarCraft 124
iHatsuTV 14
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Reynor 243
IndyStarCraft 124
LamboSC2 87
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 28041
Hyuk 7105
Calm 6142
Rain 3173
Flash 2236
firebathero 1263
Soma 799
EffOrt 634
Mini 548
Light 476
[ Show more ]
ZerO 461
BeSt 442
Stork 380
PianO 289
Hyun 266
Larva 252
Snow 242
hero 105
Soulkey 99
Mind 98
JYJ95
Rush 82
Pusan 79
Mong 75
Nal_rA 63
Barracks 61
Backho 56
sorry 49
Sea.KH 47
Shinee 47
zelot 36
Free 34
Killer 34
sas.Sziky 25
Aegong 20
yabsab 18
Movie 13
Terrorterran 11
SilentControl 8
scan(afreeca) 0
Dota 2
qojqva3155
XcaliburYe460
syndereN316
Counter-Strike
allub205
oskar111
Heroes of the Storm
XaKoH 62
Other Games
summit1g6884
singsing2195
olofmeister1337
B2W.Neo771
hiko536
Lowko379
DeMusliM364
crisheroes251
Sick143
Mlord122
Fuzer 118
ArmadaUGS28
Rex24
ZerO(Twitch)7
Organizations
StarCraft: Brood War
UltimateBattle 1095
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 12 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 1074
League of Legends
• TFBlade543
Upcoming Events
Wardi Open
21h 19m
CranKy Ducklings
1d 20h
Safe House 2
2 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
Safe House 2
3 days
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
6 days
The PondCast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL 2025 AUTUMN (S18)
WardiTV TLMC #15
HCC Europe

Ongoing

BSL 21 Points
ASL Season 20
C-Race Season 1
IPSL Winter 2025-26
EC S1
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025

Upcoming

SC4ALL: Brood War
BSL Season 21
BSL 21 Team A
RSL Offline Finals
RSL Revival: Season 3
Stellar Fest
SC4ALL: StarCraft II
CranK Gathers Season 2: SC II Pro Teams
eXTREMESLAND 2025
ESL Impact League Season 8
SL Budapest Major 2025
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.