|
On December 13 2011 08:58 fourColo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:52 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:49 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:46 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:25 kratos-23 wrote:
Aocowns you need to shut the f**** up. stephano is the most successful foreigner and that's a fact, period. Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S ... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Actually I was kind of arguing the opposite. I think HuK is the most sucessful foreigner overall (based on wins, not cash, because if we go by cash FD is still the sixth most sucessful player of all time or something), but as of late Stephano has been the most sucessful and thus is probably the most likely to suceed in the near future. But yeah I see what you mean. (No clue on salary either, but those aren't necessarily reflective of skill/sucess. Destiny might honestly have a bigger salary than some strong foreigners like Hasu or something, just because of his exposure, not his skill) Basing on wins is tricky because Stephano has actually won a shitload of small tournaments that I've never heard of. Both probably have won a lot of small, unrecorded tournaments, show matches too etc. I would say FD has been extremely successful, but I would not say that I would expect his success to continue into the future. I guess then, HuK is the most sucessful overall, but Stephano is the best? Currently at least? (As in, if I had to pick one of them to win X tournament, it would probably be Stephano. Stephano has: 1) the largest recorded foreigner tournament winnings on sc2earnings.com 2) a lot of recent winnings #2 is important because Fruitdealer has more winnings, but they're winnings from a long time ago. If you were asked who is better, FD or Stephano back after GSL1, you would say FD because no one knew who Stephano was at that time. But recent winnings provide a stronger argument for success in the near future.
Yeah but you cannot measure on winnings alone. MLG Orlando was one of the toughest tournaments of the year, as was IPL3, yet Orlando gave 1/6 the prize that IPL3 gave.
We can't just judge on money, we have to judge on the competition. That's why I said HuK is the most sucessful overall, but as of late Stephano is easily the strongest.
|
On December 13 2011 09:01 1Eris1 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:58 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:52 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:49 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:46 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:25 kratos-23 wrote:
Aocowns you need to shut the f**** up. stephano is the most successful foreigner and that's a fact, period. Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S ... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Actually I was kind of arguing the opposite. I think HuK is the most sucessful foreigner overall (based on wins, not cash, because if we go by cash FD is still the sixth most sucessful player of all time or something), but as of late Stephano has been the most sucessful and thus is probably the most likely to suceed in the near future. But yeah I see what you mean. (No clue on salary either, but those aren't necessarily reflective of skill/sucess. Destiny might honestly have a bigger salary than some strong foreigners like Hasu or something, just because of his exposure, not his skill) Basing on wins is tricky because Stephano has actually won a shitload of small tournaments that I've never heard of. Both probably have won a lot of small, unrecorded tournaments, show matches too etc. I would say FD has been extremely successful, but I would not say that I would expect his success to continue into the future. I guess then, HuK is the most sucessful overall, but Stephano is the best? Currently at least? (As in, if I had to pick one of them to win X tournament, it would probably be Stephano. Stephano has: 1) the largest recorded foreigner tournament winnings on sc2earnings.com 2) a lot of recent winnings #2 is important because Fruitdealer has more winnings, but they're winnings from a long time ago. If you were asked who is better, FD or Stephano back after GSL1, you would say FD because no one knew who Stephano was at that time. But recent winnings provide a stronger argument for success in the near future. Yeah but you cannot measure on winnings alone. MLG Orlando was one of the toughest tournaments of the year, as was IPL3, yet Orlando gave 1/6 the prize that IPL3 gave. We can't just judge on money, we have to judge on the competition. That's why I said HuK is the most sucessful overall, but as of late Stephano is easily the strongest.
providence had far tougher competition
|
On December 13 2011 09:03 BlackGosu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 09:01 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:58 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:52 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:49 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:46 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:
[quote]
Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S
... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Actually I was kind of arguing the opposite. I think HuK is the most sucessful foreigner overall (based on wins, not cash, because if we go by cash FD is still the sixth most sucessful player of all time or something), but as of late Stephano has been the most sucessful and thus is probably the most likely to suceed in the near future. But yeah I see what you mean. (No clue on salary either, but those aren't necessarily reflective of skill/sucess. Destiny might honestly have a bigger salary than some strong foreigners like Hasu or something, just because of his exposure, not his skill) Basing on wins is tricky because Stephano has actually won a shitload of small tournaments that I've never heard of. Both probably have won a lot of small, unrecorded tournaments, show matches too etc. I would say FD has been extremely successful, but I would not say that I would expect his success to continue into the future. I guess then, HuK is the most sucessful overall, but Stephano is the best? Currently at least? (As in, if I had to pick one of them to win X tournament, it would probably be Stephano. Stephano has: 1) the largest recorded foreigner tournament winnings on sc2earnings.com 2) a lot of recent winnings #2 is important because Fruitdealer has more winnings, but they're winnings from a long time ago. If you were asked who is better, FD or Stephano back after GSL1, you would say FD because no one knew who Stephano was at that time. But recent winnings provide a stronger argument for success in the near future. Yeah but you cannot measure on winnings alone. MLG Orlando was one of the toughest tournaments of the year, as was IPL3, yet Orlando gave 1/6 the prize that IPL3 gave. We can't just judge on money, we have to judge on the competition. That's why I said HuK is the most sucessful overall, but as of late Stephano is easily the strongest. providence had far tougher competition
??? which neither HuK nor Stephano won. (Although HuK got a solid 5th). Obviously it was harder than both IPL3 and MLG Orlando, but I wasn't comparing either of them to it.
|
On December 13 2011 09:01 1Eris1 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:58 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:52 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:49 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:46 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:25 kratos-23 wrote:
Aocowns you need to shut the f**** up. stephano is the most successful foreigner and that's a fact, period. Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S ... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Actually I was kind of arguing the opposite. I think HuK is the most sucessful foreigner overall (based on wins, not cash, because if we go by cash FD is still the sixth most sucessful player of all time or something), but as of late Stephano has been the most sucessful and thus is probably the most likely to suceed in the near future. But yeah I see what you mean. (No clue on salary either, but those aren't necessarily reflective of skill/sucess. Destiny might honestly have a bigger salary than some strong foreigners like Hasu or something, just because of his exposure, not his skill) Basing on wins is tricky because Stephano has actually won a shitload of small tournaments that I've never heard of. Both probably have won a lot of small, unrecorded tournaments, show matches too etc. I would say FD has been extremely successful, but I would not say that I would expect his success to continue into the future. I guess then, HuK is the most sucessful overall, but Stephano is the best? Currently at least? (As in, if I had to pick one of them to win X tournament, it would probably be Stephano. Stephano has: 1) the largest recorded foreigner tournament winnings on sc2earnings.com 2) a lot of recent winnings #2 is important because Fruitdealer has more winnings, but they're winnings from a long time ago. If you were asked who is better, FD or Stephano back after GSL1, you would say FD because no one knew who Stephano was at that time. But recent winnings provide a stronger argument for success in the near future. Yeah but you cannot measure on winnings alone. MLG Orlando was one of the toughest tournaments of the year, as was IPL3, yet Orlando gave 1/6 the prize that IPL3 gave. We can't just judge on money, we have to judge on the competition. That's why I said HuK is the most sucessful overall, but as of late Stephano is easily the strongest.
Agreed. I don't understand how this sentiment is arguable.
|
On December 13 2011 08:55 fourColo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:48 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:25 kratos-23 wrote:
Aocowns you need to shut the f**** up. stephano is the most successful foreigner and that's a fact, period. Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S ... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Measuring how good a player is by ELO and monetary prize is the worst example. Case in-point for ELO: the top 5 power ranking shit. Look at it to the right. It's Nani, Nerchio, Stephano, Kas, SaSe. They count small tournaments that have sub-par players in them so some players ELO gets inflated. I'm not saying these guys are bad, but do you think Nerchio is better than HuK, IdrA, Stephano, Sen, the list goes on. ELO is not a measure of skill. Measuring skill is done by having two players play each other, and if you were to ask, "Do you think Nerchio would beat Stephano" I would probably say no. But the only way to get a high ELO is by winning, and the only way to get an extremly high ELO is by winning a lot. Those top five players have won a lot recently, that's what ELO is telling you and I don't disagree with either of those top 5 lists. The sticky situation arises when you want to find a dominant player to place your bets on. People say "I'll bet on stephano because he beat player X in an extremely dominant fashion". And that's fine because people should be free to choose their favorite player. But if you're going to argue that player X is more successful than player Y, you should have better arguments than "well he had a really strong showing in this tournament" or "he has some wins but not against people I consider to be good".
ELO is not a very good measurement in SC2 because there are a million different tournaments with different player pools. It works in BW because there are only OSL and MSL and they're quite standardized. Everyone tries to play in them. So if you wish to score a lot of points you will have to make a deep run in the leagues.
Tournament price money, although measurable, is a rather idiotic way of measuring success, unless you mean success in wealth. MLG and IPL is a great example as was pointed out. Moreover, if we have to go by something that can be measured, then hey, we can measure APM too, let's use that!
Yes, when we try to determine success we will have to use more complex ways than just price winnings and ELO. This makes it a hard task and some subjectivity will always be present but it is hell of a lot better way of doing it than what you're suggesting.
|
On December 13 2011 09:08 Itsmedudeman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 09:01 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:58 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:52 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:49 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:46 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:
[quote]
Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S
... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Actually I was kind of arguing the opposite. I think HuK is the most sucessful foreigner overall (based on wins, not cash, because if we go by cash FD is still the sixth most sucessful player of all time or something), but as of late Stephano has been the most sucessful and thus is probably the most likely to suceed in the near future. But yeah I see what you mean. (No clue on salary either, but those aren't necessarily reflective of skill/sucess. Destiny might honestly have a bigger salary than some strong foreigners like Hasu or something, just because of his exposure, not his skill) Basing on wins is tricky because Stephano has actually won a shitload of small tournaments that I've never heard of. Both probably have won a lot of small, unrecorded tournaments, show matches too etc. I would say FD has been extremely successful, but I would not say that I would expect his success to continue into the future. I guess then, HuK is the most sucessful overall, but Stephano is the best? Currently at least? (As in, if I had to pick one of them to win X tournament, it would probably be Stephano. Stephano has: 1) the largest recorded foreigner tournament winnings on sc2earnings.com 2) a lot of recent winnings #2 is important because Fruitdealer has more winnings, but they're winnings from a long time ago. If you were asked who is better, FD or Stephano back after GSL1, you would say FD because no one knew who Stephano was at that time. But recent winnings provide a stronger argument for success in the near future. Yeah but you cannot measure on winnings alone. MLG Orlando was one of the toughest tournaments of the year, as was IPL3, yet Orlando gave 1/6 the prize that IPL3 gave. We can't just judge on money, we have to judge on the competition. That's why I said HuK is the most sucessful overall, but as of late Stephano is easily the strongest. Agreed. I don't understand how this sentiment is arguable.
It's arguable because if you want to rank certain tournaments as more important than others you need some sort of metric or it's just your feelings getting in the way. Two really good ways are prize money and ELO and he's at or near the top of both for foreigners.
|
On December 13 2011 08:55 fourColo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:48 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:25 kratos-23 wrote:
Aocowns you need to shut the f**** up. stephano is the most successful foreigner and that's a fact, period. Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S ... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Measuring how good a player is by ELO and monetary prize is the worst example. Case in-point for ELO: the top 5 power ranking shit. Look at it to the right. It's Nani, Nerchio, Stephano, Kas, SaSe. They count small tournaments that have sub-par players in them so some players ELO gets inflated. I'm not saying these guys are bad, but do you think Nerchio is better than HuK, IdrA, Stephano, Sen, the list goes on. ELO is not a measure of skill. Measuring skill is done by having two players play each other, and if you were to ask, "Do you think Nerchio would beat Stephano" I would probably say no. But the only way to get a high ELO is by winning, and the only way to get an extremly high ELO is by winning a lot. Those top five players have won a lot recently, that's what ELO is telling you and I don't disagree with either of those top 5 lists. The sticky situation arises when you want to find a dominant player to place your bets on. People say "I'll bet on stephano because he beat player X in an extremely dominant fashion". And that's fine because people should be free to choose their favorite player. But if you're going to argue that player X is more successful than player Y, you should have better arguments than "well he had a really strong showing in this tournament" or "he has some wins but not against people I consider to be good".
but this is the entire argument on why stephano is one of the best sc2 players...are you agreeing with me that foreigners are inflated in skill on this site or do you think otherwise?
also, you believe nerchio has been a better player lately than HuK, Sen, IdrA, etc. Ok, that is actually dead wrong.
|
On December 13 2011 08:57 JohnMatrix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:49 Aocowns wrote:On December 13 2011 08:42 JohnMatrix wrote:On December 13 2011 08:41 Aocowns wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 Crushinator wrote:On December 13 2011 08:34 Aocowns wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 JohnMatrix wrote:On December 13 2011 08:20 Aocowns wrote:On December 13 2011 08:18 BlazeFury01 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:13 Aocowns wrote:
[quote]
''So, you saying Stephano's wins during the whole IPL is not legit is just plain ignorant and erroneous.'' This is what I responded to, when I asked you to stop twisting my words. Please, you said you pointed out individual quotes. Where do I say Stephano's win was not legit?
Yes, I ''HEARD'' Lucky's ZvZ was bad. You corrected me, and I accepted it. Stop fucking herp derping on that. I exagerrated with the ''legendary'' That's waht people do.
There is nothing special about beating Koreans, whose skill level is that of a low Code A player. Whether you are Korean or not doesn't matter. If he actually defeated some Code S level opponents, or some top Code A, then I would glady give credit(Read more credit than I already give him, cus I have already stated it was not bad AT ALL)
Also, why would you bring up that Lucky was in the finals earlier? Yes, he deserved it, he defeated MMA! in ZvT -.-' Another match up. But it was not Lucky we were talking about, it was Stephano. I brought up lucky because you asked "who did stephano play in a lan that was legit". Stephano has beaten Code S players. DRG is no easy opponent Those stats with Lucky. What opponents were those against? Code A players? We are talking about IPL3, not BlizzCup. [troll]Idra has beat Puma a random code B player 3-0 trolololn that show he must be supra good. yes i just have faith in the unfair code x classification and not by the caliber of players[/troll] btw TheSTC is a code S caliber too. etc. I didn't realize this was about Idra. Btw, Puma is not Code B... I never claimed StC not to be good, but imo he is not Code S caliber... He was the best player Stephano played at IPL3, and that's not particularily impressive He played Huk. When? The group stages that didn't really mean anything? Yes Like every victory by Stephano but Idras victory even the meaningless count a lot -_- But i'm sure you would use his lost vs Alive easily -_- Did I? I am avoiding using any pool play matches, as they were all kind of pointless. People were tired because they just got there, it didn't contribute to the main tourny etc. I didn't see any of them, so I am not mentioning them. Stop assuming I'd use every fucking reason to hate on him -.-' For fucks sake, I am not Edit: Why the fuck do you keep adding in Idra??!?!?! There is absolutely no reason for you to do taht, wtf -.- Because I try to convince you for god sake its lame to tell a player had a luck path or some stupid excuses who in the end can be apply to any player, even Idra because you are a hardcore fan according to your signature. I can tell to myself 'Idra was lucky vs Boxer that it was an extended serie because he would have lost if not, or 'Idra was lucky to get out of his group stage at the IEM China, he was really close to be out of the tournament' etc. etc.
And so fucking what? I don't even.... just ????? I don't give a shit whether you think it's lame that I say Stephano lucked out on the brackets, and his opponents. I don't even see how you can not agree with me? What the hell are you arguing against?
|
On December 13 2011 09:10 Squeegy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:55 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:48 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:25 kratos-23 wrote:
Aocowns you need to shut the f**** up. stephano is the most successful foreigner and that's a fact, period. Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S ... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Measuring how good a player is by ELO and monetary prize is the worst example. Case in-point for ELO: the top 5 power ranking shit. Look at it to the right. It's Nani, Nerchio, Stephano, Kas, SaSe. They count small tournaments that have sub-par players in them so some players ELO gets inflated. I'm not saying these guys are bad, but do you think Nerchio is better than HuK, IdrA, Stephano, Sen, the list goes on. ELO is not a measure of skill. Measuring skill is done by having two players play each other, and if you were to ask, "Do you think Nerchio would beat Stephano" I would probably say no. But the only way to get a high ELO is by winning, and the only way to get an extremly high ELO is by winning a lot. Those top five players have won a lot recently, that's what ELO is telling you and I don't disagree with either of those top 5 lists. The sticky situation arises when you want to find a dominant player to place your bets on. People say "I'll bet on stephano because he beat player X in an extremely dominant fashion". And that's fine because people should be free to choose their favorite player. But if you're going to argue that player X is more successful than player Y, you should have better arguments than "well he had a really strong showing in this tournament" or "he has some wins but not against people I consider to be good". ELO is not a very good measurement in SC2 because there are a million different tournaments with different player pools. It works in BW because there are only OSL and MSL and they're quite standardized. Everyone tries to play in them. So if you wish to score a lot of points you will have to make a deep run in the leagues. Tournament price money, although measurable, is a rather idiotic way of measuring success, unless you mean success in wealth. MLG and IPL is a great example as was pointed out. Moreover, if we have to go by something that can be measured, then hey, we can measure APM too, let's use that! Yes, when we try to determine success we will have to use more complex ways than just price winnings and ELO. This makes it a hard task and some subjectivity will always be present but it is hell of a lot better way of doing it than what you're suggesting.
There are other good ways:
Activity in their TL fan page
# of sponsors
Salary
# of televised wins weighted by viewership
Sure ELO isn't perfect, but what we have is: "WELL sTc is a really good player and so is MMA and Stephano roflstomped them so he must be the best foreigner, Huk doesn't count because he didn't win this or that and his competition wasn't fierce at this other tournament".
|
This thread should have been closed the instant a mod read the original thread and title, now it just devolved into shit.
|
On December 13 2011 09:11 Silidons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 08:55 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:48 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:25 kratos-23 wrote:
Aocowns you need to shut the f**** up. stephano is the most successful foreigner and that's a fact, period. Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S ... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Measuring how good a player is by ELO and monetary prize is the worst example. Case in-point for ELO: the top 5 power ranking shit. Look at it to the right. It's Nani, Nerchio, Stephano, Kas, SaSe. They count small tournaments that have sub-par players in them so some players ELO gets inflated. I'm not saying these guys are bad, but do you think Nerchio is better than HuK, IdrA, Stephano, Sen, the list goes on. ELO is not a measure of skill. Measuring skill is done by having two players play each other, and if you were to ask, "Do you think Nerchio would beat Stephano" I would probably say no. But the only way to get a high ELO is by winning, and the only way to get an extremly high ELO is by winning a lot. Those top five players have won a lot recently, that's what ELO is telling you and I don't disagree with either of those top 5 lists. The sticky situation arises when you want to find a dominant player to place your bets on. People say "I'll bet on stephano because he beat player X in an extremely dominant fashion". And that's fine because people should be free to choose their favorite player. But if you're going to argue that player X is more successful than player Y, you should have better arguments than "well he had a really strong showing in this tournament" or "he has some wins but not against people I consider to be good". but this is the entire argument on why stephano is one of the best sc2 players...are you agreeing with me that foreigners are inflated in skill on this site or do you think otherwise? also, you believe nerchio has been a better player lately than HuK, Sen, IdrA, etc. Ok, that is actually dead wrong.
I think Stephano is really good but also that there's no reason to believe that he's going to be a "top" player like MVP or Nestea. If we look at past success using numbers, we can see that he's done miraculously well compared to most foreigners and "pretty good" compared to top koreans. I won't say it's impossible though, who knows? Just that it's a little unreasonable to expect him to win everything given current data.
On December 13 2011 09:14 SafeAsCheese wrote:
This thread should have been closed the instant a mod read the original thread and title, now it just devolved into shit.
Great post! Good job!
|
On December 13 2011 09:16 fourColo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 09:11 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:55 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:48 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:25 kratos-23 wrote:
Aocowns you need to shut the f**** up. stephano is the most successful foreigner and that's a fact, period. Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S ... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Measuring how good a player is by ELO and monetary prize is the worst example. Case in-point for ELO: the top 5 power ranking shit. Look at it to the right. It's Nani, Nerchio, Stephano, Kas, SaSe. They count small tournaments that have sub-par players in them so some players ELO gets inflated. I'm not saying these guys are bad, but do you think Nerchio is better than HuK, IdrA, Stephano, Sen, the list goes on. ELO is not a measure of skill. Measuring skill is done by having two players play each other, and if you were to ask, "Do you think Nerchio would beat Stephano" I would probably say no. But the only way to get a high ELO is by winning, and the only way to get an extremly high ELO is by winning a lot. Those top five players have won a lot recently, that's what ELO is telling you and I don't disagree with either of those top 5 lists. The sticky situation arises when you want to find a dominant player to place your bets on. People say "I'll bet on stephano because he beat player X in an extremely dominant fashion". And that's fine because people should be free to choose their favorite player. But if you're going to argue that player X is more successful than player Y, you should have better arguments than "well he had a really strong showing in this tournament" or "he has some wins but not against people I consider to be good". but this is the entire argument on why stephano is one of the best sc2 players...are you agreeing with me that foreigners are inflated in skill on this site or do you think otherwise? also, you believe nerchio has been a better player lately than HuK, Sen, IdrA, etc. Ok, that is actually dead wrong. I think Stephano is really good but also that there's no reason to believe that he's going to be a "top" player like MVP or Nestea. If we look at past success using numbers, we can see that he's done miraculously well compared to most foreigners and "pretty good" compared to top koreans. I won't say it's impossible though, who knows? Just that it's a little unreasonable to expect him to win everything given current data. Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 09:14 SafeAsCheese wrote:
This thread should have been closed the instant a mod read the original thread and title, now it just devolved into shit.
Great post! Good job!
In think it was an accurate depiction of this thread
|
On December 13 2011 09:14 SafeAsCheese wrote:
This thread should have been closed the instant a mod read the original thread and title, now it just devolved into shit.
I don't think it was ever anything more than shit in the first place ~_~
Entertaining to read though
On December 13 2011 09:16 fourColo wrote:
Great post! Good job!
It's a lot better than the vast majority of the other posts on this thread lol
+ Show Spoiler +
|
I'm wondering, is it here the contest of stupidity ? Level seems really high.
|
On December 13 2011 09:10 fourColo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 09:08 Itsmedudeman wrote:On December 13 2011 09:01 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:58 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:52 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:49 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:46 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:
[quote]
They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Actually I was kind of arguing the opposite. I think HuK is the most sucessful foreigner overall (based on wins, not cash, because if we go by cash FD is still the sixth most sucessful player of all time or something), but as of late Stephano has been the most sucessful and thus is probably the most likely to suceed in the near future. But yeah I see what you mean. (No clue on salary either, but those aren't necessarily reflective of skill/sucess. Destiny might honestly have a bigger salary than some strong foreigners like Hasu or something, just because of his exposure, not his skill) Basing on wins is tricky because Stephano has actually won a shitload of small tournaments that I've never heard of. Both probably have won a lot of small, unrecorded tournaments, show matches too etc. I would say FD has been extremely successful, but I would not say that I would expect his success to continue into the future. I guess then, HuK is the most sucessful overall, but Stephano is the best? Currently at least? (As in, if I had to pick one of them to win X tournament, it would probably be Stephano. Stephano has: 1) the largest recorded foreigner tournament winnings on sc2earnings.com 2) a lot of recent winnings #2 is important because Fruitdealer has more winnings, but they're winnings from a long time ago. If you were asked who is better, FD or Stephano back after GSL1, you would say FD because no one knew who Stephano was at that time. But recent winnings provide a stronger argument for success in the near future. Yeah but you cannot measure on winnings alone. MLG Orlando was one of the toughest tournaments of the year, as was IPL3, yet Orlando gave 1/6 the prize that IPL3 gave. We can't just judge on money, we have to judge on the competition. That's why I said HuK is the most sucessful overall, but as of late Stephano is easily the strongest. Agreed. I don't understand how this sentiment is arguable. It's arguable because if you want to rank certain tournaments as more important than others you need some sort of metric or it's just your feelings getting in the way. Two really good ways are prize money and ELO and he's at or near the top of both for foreigners.
Sorry, but because of MLG prize pool, prize money is not a good way to put it. MLG Orlando could have easily been a 30k-50k tourny in 2012, and Huk ended up beating tougher competition in his major tournys. In fact, I'm pretty sure huk has beaten everyone stephano has in the major tournys before including stc and mkp. This along with the fact that Huk has been the only foreigner in code S for a while makes his achievements greater.
However, Stephano has the better ELO because he has been performing better recently, but then you'd be admitting nerchio is better than stephano.
|
On December 13 2011 09:16 fourColo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 09:11 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:55 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:48 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:25 kratos-23 wrote:
Aocowns you need to shut the f**** up. stephano is the most successful foreigner and that's a fact, period. Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S ... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Measuring how good a player is by ELO and monetary prize is the worst example. Case in-point for ELO: the top 5 power ranking shit. Look at it to the right. It's Nani, Nerchio, Stephano, Kas, SaSe. They count small tournaments that have sub-par players in them so some players ELO gets inflated. I'm not saying these guys are bad, but do you think Nerchio is better than HuK, IdrA, Stephano, Sen, the list goes on. ELO is not a measure of skill. Measuring skill is done by having two players play each other, and if you were to ask, "Do you think Nerchio would beat Stephano" I would probably say no. But the only way to get a high ELO is by winning, and the only way to get an extremly high ELO is by winning a lot. Those top five players have won a lot recently, that's what ELO is telling you and I don't disagree with either of those top 5 lists. The sticky situation arises when you want to find a dominant player to place your bets on. People say "I'll bet on stephano because he beat player X in an extremely dominant fashion". And that's fine because people should be free to choose their favorite player. But if you're going to argue that player X is more successful than player Y, you should have better arguments than "well he had a really strong showing in this tournament" or "he has some wins but not against people I consider to be good". but this is the entire argument on why stephano is one of the best sc2 players...are you agreeing with me that foreigners are inflated in skill on this site or do you think otherwise? also, you believe nerchio has been a better player lately than HuK, Sen, IdrA, etc. Ok, that is actually dead wrong. I think Stephano is really good but also that there's no reason to believe that he's going to be a "top" player like MVP or Nestea. If we look at past success using numbers, we can see that he's done miraculously well compared to most foreigners and "pretty good" compared to top koreans. I won't say it's impossible though, who knows? Just that it's a little unreasonable to expect him to win everything given current data. Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 09:14 SafeAsCheese wrote:
This thread should have been closed the instant a mod read the original thread and title, now it just devolved into shit.
Great post! Good job!
I already "contributed" to this thread before you fools turned it into a competition between best foreigners.
It's even off topic now.
|
On December 13 2011 09:20 Aocowns wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 09:16 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 09:11 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:55 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:48 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:25 kratos-23 wrote:
Aocowns you need to shut the f**** up. stephano is the most successful foreigner and that's a fact, period. Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S ... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Measuring how good a player is by ELO and monetary prize is the worst example. Case in-point for ELO: the top 5 power ranking shit. Look at it to the right. It's Nani, Nerchio, Stephano, Kas, SaSe. They count small tournaments that have sub-par players in them so some players ELO gets inflated. I'm not saying these guys are bad, but do you think Nerchio is better than HuK, IdrA, Stephano, Sen, the list goes on. ELO is not a measure of skill. Measuring skill is done by having two players play each other, and if you were to ask, "Do you think Nerchio would beat Stephano" I would probably say no. But the only way to get a high ELO is by winning, and the only way to get an extremly high ELO is by winning a lot. Those top five players have won a lot recently, that's what ELO is telling you and I don't disagree with either of those top 5 lists. The sticky situation arises when you want to find a dominant player to place your bets on. People say "I'll bet on stephano because he beat player X in an extremely dominant fashion". And that's fine because people should be free to choose their favorite player. But if you're going to argue that player X is more successful than player Y, you should have better arguments than "well he had a really strong showing in this tournament" or "he has some wins but not against people I consider to be good". but this is the entire argument on why stephano is one of the best sc2 players...are you agreeing with me that foreigners are inflated in skill on this site or do you think otherwise? also, you believe nerchio has been a better player lately than HuK, Sen, IdrA, etc. Ok, that is actually dead wrong. I think Stephano is really good but also that there's no reason to believe that he's going to be a "top" player like MVP or Nestea. If we look at past success using numbers, we can see that he's done miraculously well compared to most foreigners and "pretty good" compared to top koreans. I won't say it's impossible though, who knows? Just that it's a little unreasonable to expect him to win everything given current data. On December 13 2011 09:14 SafeAsCheese wrote:
This thread should have been closed the instant a mod read the original thread and title, now it just devolved into shit.
Great post! Good job! In think it was an accurate depiction of this thread
Indeed. A petty argument over which of two players is better based on nothing but results*, it's incredibly pointless not just because we can't objectively say who is better but also because it doesn't fucking matter.
*Seriously, fuck the 'results' mentality. The mentality that says that tournament wins are everything ever. Sure it's important but it's so annoying that everyone who doesn't have 'results' is fucking trash, and you can determine who is objectively better by their 'results'.
|
Wait why is this thread still open? It has been terrible the whole way through from start to finish and it somehow made it to page 43? What...
|
On December 13 2011 09:26 Itsmedudeman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 09:10 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 09:08 Itsmedudeman wrote:On December 13 2011 09:01 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:58 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:52 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:49 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:46 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:
[quote]
So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing?
Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop...
prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Actually I was kind of arguing the opposite. I think HuK is the most sucessful foreigner overall (based on wins, not cash, because if we go by cash FD is still the sixth most sucessful player of all time or something), but as of late Stephano has been the most sucessful and thus is probably the most likely to suceed in the near future. But yeah I see what you mean. (No clue on salary either, but those aren't necessarily reflective of skill/sucess. Destiny might honestly have a bigger salary than some strong foreigners like Hasu or something, just because of his exposure, not his skill) Basing on wins is tricky because Stephano has actually won a shitload of small tournaments that I've never heard of. Both probably have won a lot of small, unrecorded tournaments, show matches too etc. I would say FD has been extremely successful, but I would not say that I would expect his success to continue into the future. I guess then, HuK is the most sucessful overall, but Stephano is the best? Currently at least? (As in, if I had to pick one of them to win X tournament, it would probably be Stephano. Stephano has: 1) the largest recorded foreigner tournament winnings on sc2earnings.com 2) a lot of recent winnings #2 is important because Fruitdealer has more winnings, but they're winnings from a long time ago. If you were asked who is better, FD or Stephano back after GSL1, you would say FD because no one knew who Stephano was at that time. But recent winnings provide a stronger argument for success in the near future. Yeah but you cannot measure on winnings alone. MLG Orlando was one of the toughest tournaments of the year, as was IPL3, yet Orlando gave 1/6 the prize that IPL3 gave. We can't just judge on money, we have to judge on the competition. That's why I said HuK is the most sucessful overall, but as of late Stephano is easily the strongest. Agreed. I don't understand how this sentiment is arguable. It's arguable because if you want to rank certain tournaments as more important than others you need some sort of metric or it's just your feelings getting in the way. Two really good ways are prize money and ELO and he's at or near the top of both for foreigners. Sorry, but because of MLG prize pool, prize money is not a good way to put it. MLG Orlando could have easily been a 30k-50k tourny in 2012, and Huk ended up beating tougher competition in his major tournys. In fact, I'm pretty sure huk has beaten everyone stephano has in the major tournys before including stc and mkp. This along with the fact that Huk has been the only foreigner in code S for a while makes his achievements greater. However, Stephano has the better ELO because he has been performing better recently, but then you'd be admitting nerchio is better than stephano.
MLG prize is a major issue but notice that Providence, which had the highest prize money, also coincidentally had the toughest competition. MVP wasn't busting his balls to make it to every MLG probably because the money wasn't there.
If I wanted to compare Stephano and Nerchio I would look at their record against each other. TLPD says it's 6-5 games in favor of Stephano which is incredibly close.
On December 13 2011 09:26 SafeAsCheese wrote:
I already "contributed" to this thread before you fools turned it into a competition between best foreigners.
It's even off topic now.
If you don't like the thread, stop posting.
|
On December 13 2011 09:28 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 09:20 Aocowns wrote:On December 13 2011 09:16 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 09:11 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:55 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:48 Silidons wrote:On December 13 2011 08:39 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:33 1Eris1 wrote:On December 13 2011 08:30 fourColo wrote:On December 13 2011 08:28 1Eris1 wrote:
[quote]
Such flawless logic you have there. Didn't realize IPL3, IPL4 UK Qual and ESWC trumped Two MLGs, a Dreamhack, Homestory, achieveing Code S and getting a Ro.8 in Code S
... They kind of do in terms of dollars actually. So because IPL 3 gave out 6x as much as a MLG it was 6x more accomplishing? Is his IPL 3 win also more impressive than Nada's 4 (or was it 5?) consecutive Code S ro.8 runs? Because I mean those only gave out like 3k a pop... prize money=/=difficulty necessarily True, but it's also measurable. So is ELO, and by that metric Stephano is also above Huk currently. If you want to measure all time success, Huk's peak is higher than Stephanos. There's two think you're trying to compare here, 1) past success and 2) predictions of future success. You might have a point that Huk (or some other foreigner) is more likely to succeed in the future because he has more high profile televised tournament wins than Stephano. It's really hard to predict the future though. But if we're looking at past success, Stephano is more successful in terms of winnings than any other foreigner. You can't argue this without bringing up unrecorded tournament winnings that we don't know about. Another measure might be salary or sponsorship but that's information that we don't have available. Measuring how good a player is by ELO and monetary prize is the worst example. Case in-point for ELO: the top 5 power ranking shit. Look at it to the right. It's Nani, Nerchio, Stephano, Kas, SaSe. They count small tournaments that have sub-par players in them so some players ELO gets inflated. I'm not saying these guys are bad, but do you think Nerchio is better than HuK, IdrA, Stephano, Sen, the list goes on. ELO is not a measure of skill. Measuring skill is done by having two players play each other, and if you were to ask, "Do you think Nerchio would beat Stephano" I would probably say no. But the only way to get a high ELO is by winning, and the only way to get an extremly high ELO is by winning a lot. Those top five players have won a lot recently, that's what ELO is telling you and I don't disagree with either of those top 5 lists. The sticky situation arises when you want to find a dominant player to place your bets on. People say "I'll bet on stephano because he beat player X in an extremely dominant fashion". And that's fine because people should be free to choose their favorite player. But if you're going to argue that player X is more successful than player Y, you should have better arguments than "well he had a really strong showing in this tournament" or "he has some wins but not against people I consider to be good". but this is the entire argument on why stephano is one of the best sc2 players...are you agreeing with me that foreigners are inflated in skill on this site or do you think otherwise? also, you believe nerchio has been a better player lately than HuK, Sen, IdrA, etc. Ok, that is actually dead wrong. I think Stephano is really good but also that there's no reason to believe that he's going to be a "top" player like MVP or Nestea. If we look at past success using numbers, we can see that he's done miraculously well compared to most foreigners and "pretty good" compared to top koreans. I won't say it's impossible though, who knows? Just that it's a little unreasonable to expect him to win everything given current data. On December 13 2011 09:14 SafeAsCheese wrote:
This thread should have been closed the instant a mod read the original thread and title, now it just devolved into shit.
Great post! Good job! In think it was an accurate depiction of this thread Indeed. A petty argument over which of two players is better based on nothing but results*, it's incredibly pointless not just because we can't objectively say who is better but also because it doesn't fucking matter. *Seriously, fuck the 'results' mentality. The mentality that says that tournament wins are everything ever. Sure it's important but it's so annoying that everyone who doesn't have 'results' is fucking trash, and you can determine who is objectively better by their 'results'.
VOTE WITH YOUR HEART MANNN! Personally I think StarTale_Superstar is the best player ever because I want him to be! I mean do you vote for your politicians based on who you'd most want to have a beer with? Maybe based on their favorite color?
Results are everything. That's what pros should care about, tournament results, sponsorships, salaries, and having the best team. Whether some dude on the internet likes them because of one cool game where he beat the favored player shouldn't matter, I'm sorry.
If you want to talk about who's good and who isn't that's fun, but come on, you should have some reason behind it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
