GSTL May Teams - no IM - Page 40

On May 16 2011 16:22 lololol wrote:


As you can easily see in the OP, the snapshot used for the team ranking has fOu with 4 code A players and 1 in code S.

On May 16 2011 18:17 Dakkas wrote:
I need to rephrase what I said because everyone has taken it wrong, I'm not saying IM is a bad team. This is wrong because I still believe them to be the best team overall and I'll still take them over any other team, even Slayers. That said however they have 3 excellent players but they don't have an assortment of players to back those guys up.

Seed and Yongwha are undoubtedly good players but until they start shifting their weight in Code A and S, they'll simply be another Leenock. Underachievers. If you look at the people they beat in the last two Team Leagues, it was mainly the mid level players from oGs and ZeNex who are hardly that great of a team before. Of course it's not fair for me to not give them a chance before they even got into Code A but doing well simply in Team leagues doesn't matter in the long run. Ace and Squirtle faded out in the GSL after doing well in the TL, at least Alicia, MMA and Ryung are doing well for Slayers.

oGs has MC, Nada and a bunch of their many other strong terran players to pick from. In hindsight, I guess ST are in a similar position to IM though Bomber's current form makes him look invincible against anyone, maybe MC or Nestea could beat him. TSL has FD, Sangho, Tester, Cliiiiiiiiiiide and now aLive who are all extremely good. Sure some of them have been overrated but they're all worthy code S players. Prime is pretty overrated though, relying almost purely on HongUn and MKP entirely and maybe Check and Maka who both are Code A at best.

I just checked the roster and I believe IM also has the smallest player roster of all the teams. I guess saying they're team is shallow isn't fair to IM however having my point still remains, having 3 players in A/S isn't enough to make your overall team extremely strong. Being reliant on few players isn't something a team wants to do

On May 16 2011 15:02 Quarz wrote:


lol, to have 3 very good players is a shallow line-up... I dont know what to say.

On May 16 2011 19:52 Za7oX wrote:


Me either.

A lot of stupid people keep saying the best SC2 team have a shallow line up......

On May 16 2011 20:10 Dakkas wrote:
A few things here, first part in regards to the system Gom uses. Stating the system they use is 'wrong' is flat out, well, wrong itself. It's only a partial solution for team selection (seeding is also needed for finalists). I do agree that waiting until the end of GSL was better but hindsight is always 20/20 vision.

On May 17 2011 03:35 Wren wrote:

No, the implementation of their system is, quite plainly, wrong. The team league happens after individual league finals, is announced after individual league finals, and uses information from before the individual league.

None, absolutely none, of this outrage happens if teams are ranked with the most current information.

On May 17 2011 10:01 Dimagus wrote:
Only after the qualifiers do we know who the 32 Code A players are. So then there's the question which season do you count the points of those Code A players for?

On May 17 2011 10:01 Dimagus wrote:
Tournaments are not finalized weeks or months in advance because of scheduling and possible conflicting events (like MLG Columbus).

On May 10 2011 14:16 ReachTheSky wrote:


Top teams get decided by results. Surely you can't be considered a top team if you don't have the current results to back it up. The other teams that are ahead of IM have proven, by showing results, that they are indeed a top team. I do agree that IM is a very good team, but if they aren't proving it consistantly then where is the credibility?

On May 17 2011 10:13 Wren wrote:
My preferred solution is to use cumulative GSL point totals of all players on a team, but that's not the question you asked.

I'd much rather only have 16 players give their teams the points from code A. In your system, it'd be option 2.5 - The current GSL (32 code S, 16 code A).

It's ridiculous that fOu has credit for 4 of their code B players, IM has credit for none of theirs.

On May 17 2011 10:13 Wren wrote:
This isn't really correct (team leagues have always been the week after the code S finals, they're held during the week and don't interfere with anything, until this week GSL didn't schedule around anybody), and just helps my point anyway, so, thanks.

It is unfortunate team IM will not be participating in GSTL. What do you feel about your team’s exclusion in the third GSTL?

This question requires a delicate answer. I am very sad that IM won’t be able to participate in the GSTL. However we don’t have any complaint about it. The rules are stated clearly and as players and coaches, we must abide by the rules. I personally feel responsible for the exclusion of IM in the GSTL as I could have raised my team’s points by qualifying for a Code A, a goal that I failed this season. Most of my teammates including my coach firmly believed that I would qualify for Code A, but I repeatedly failed them. I am genuinely sorry. I will try my very best to qualify for the next season. This is the third GSTL. I personally pray that Startale will win this one. However, I hope that IM wins the rest of the future GSTLs. Please watch us win all the upcoming GSTLs and cheer for us continuously!

On May 17 2011 13:30 Dimagus wrote:

"In [my] system"? There is no "my system" that's simply the way the GSTL is currently setup. I was pointing out how crazy it would be if they changed when the points were calculated (past/future versus present). People are acting like there's some kind of flaw or ambiguity with the setup but the math is simple and the structure makes perfect sense.

It's nice that people love the IM team and want to see them compete, but let's not kid ourselves there wouldn't have been so many complaints if it was MVP or ZeNEX in IM's situation. Everyone that is generating this alleged controversy for IM and trying to get the GSL to bend over backwards and do a system change would be telling their proponents to "Do better and qualify for Code A/S" (That's the nice version of Learn 2 Play).

Say they do make a system change and end up doing cumulative points. Months down the road a new great team that forms will spark another generated controversy about how the system favors the older teams over recent performance. But really the only adaption the team league should need to make down the road is increasing the number of GSTL participants as more teams are formed.



Why are you assuming I was talking only about the team league as far as scheduling? Potential conflicts and schedule changes have already occurred multiple times. Examples include planning around MLG, the Up & Down matches before the 1.3.3 patch, the World Championship season, start time adjustments for airing on Korean Cable TV, rescheduling during Blizzcon, and removing the breaks between Code A/S matches (they further changed this by having A and S on separate days).