Thundertoss Joins Infinity Seven as Coach - Page 4
Forum Index > SC2 General |
thundertoss
United States1166 Posts
| ||
rUiNati0n
United States1155 Posts
| ||
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
KawaiiRice
United States2914 Posts
On January 18 2012 04:36 thundertoss wrote: Thanks Andre. We are now in a very select group of NA team coaches ^_^ im an NA team coach ![]() | ||
BlueBoxSC
United States582 Posts
| ||
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
however, i dont understand why teams are picking up no-name players and making them coaches. this team, and previously team legion with destructive. what exactly do coaches do that doesnt require them to be extremely good at the game? isnt crazymoving and jecho on a level fifteen floors above thundertoss? | ||
honed
Canada482 Posts
| ||
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On January 17 2012 04:29 singularity14 wrote: because even though it doesn't influence law elsewhere in the world, American amendments are the ideal the rest of the world should strive for please god, let this guy not be an american. not only does the U.S. constitution not apply to the rest of the world, but it also doesnt even apply here. the first amendment prevents the _government_ from restricting speech, it has no application to private people restricting other private people's speech. | ||
PyreSC
United States258 Posts
![]() | ||
thundertoss
United States1166 Posts
On January 18 2012 13:09 dAPhREAk wrote: ascend and thundertoss' koth top 200 is awesome. however, i dont understand why teams are picking up no-name players and making them coaches. this team, and previously team legion with destructive. what exactly do coaches do that doesnt require them to be extremely good at the game? isnt crazymoving and jecho on a level fifteen floors above thundertoss? I believe all those things are addressed in the interview. You really should read it. ^_^ | ||
thundertoss
United States1166 Posts
i'll consider you as part of our select group. I didn't say we were the only ones ^_^ you've turned kiwi/light into a fearsome team (as evidenced by the semi dramatic nastl match ; p ) | ||
Superiorwolf
United States5509 Posts
![]() | ||
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On January 18 2012 14:16 thundertoss wrote: I believe all those things are addressed in the interview. You really should read it. ^_^ i didnt intend for this to be aggressive or insulting (and i did read the interview). what i am wondering is what you have to offer to better players? i looked at your record and i dont even see that you have ever played a 1v1 game on ladder (assuming its you). most people argue that diamond and below (even masters and low gm players) should not be allowed in the strategy section, yet teams are picking up such players as coaches. what gives? http://www.sc2ranks.com/us/1118450/thundertoss i have watched koth 200 since it started and i love your contribution to the community, but the recent trend of teams picking up non-1v1 players as coaches is just disturbing to me. teams need to pick up top players as coaches or there will never be any improvement. as i write this i realize it can easily be taken as insulting, so i will just end with congratulations to you, i am glad at your success and hope you continue with the koth 200, which i love. | ||
Akta
447 Posts
On January 18 2012 14:35 dAPhREAk wrote: Because the coach doesn't necessarily have to be better at understanding strategies etc than the players. And being good at executing strategies doesn't necessarily mean you have a good understanding of strategies either, and so on.i didnt intend for this to be aggressive or insulting (and i did read the interview). what i am wondering is what you have to offer to better players? i looked at your record and i dont even see that you have ever played a 1v1 game on ladder (assuming its you). most people argue that diamond and below (even masters and low gm players) should not be allowed in the strategy section, yet teams are picking up such players as coaches. what gives? http://www.sc2ranks.com/us/1118450/thundertoss i have watched koth 200 since it started and i love your contribution to the community, but the recent trend of teams picking up non-1v1 players as coaches is just disturbing to me. teams need to pick up top players as coaches or there will never be any improvement. as i write this i realize it can easily be taken as insulting, so i will just end with congratulations to you, i am glad at your success and hope you continue with the koth 200, which i love. In reality, coaching(in any sport) tend to be based on dialog. And there is no simple formula for finding out who will be an amazing coach. | ||
thundertoss
United States1166 Posts
On January 18 2012 14:35 dAPhREAk wrote: i didnt intend for this to be aggressive or insulting (and i did read the interview). what i am wondering is what you have to offer to better players? i looked at your record and i dont even see that you have ever played a 1v1 game on ladder (assuming its you). most people argue that diamond and below (even masters and low gm players) should not be allowed in the strategy section, yet teams are picking up such players as coaches. what gives? http://www.sc2ranks.com/us/1118450/thundertoss i have watched koth 200 since it started and i love your contribution to the community, but the recent trend of teams picking up non-1v1 players as coaches is just disturbing to me. teams need to pick up top players as coaches or there will never be any improvement. as i write this i realize it can easily be taken as insulting, so i will just end with congratulations to you, i am glad at your success and hope you continue with the koth 200, which i love. I'll answer with some quick points since I get it a lot. Obviously it's a valid question since most people think that the only way to learn is to play and hence another reason why there aren't many coaches. First of all, my understanding is much higher than what my ladder ranking is going to show. That holds true for quiet a few people. Take day9 for instance who has made it known that when he had time to commit to playing he had multiple gm accounts. Now that he doesn't have time to play it would take him a while to get there. Your ability to play is you matching your mechanics with your game knowledge and decision making. The reflection of that ability is your ladder ranking/ tournament performances. However it is important to note that if you don't have much time to ladder or time to focus on laddering (aka only have free time when you're already tired or something) your rank won't really be a true rank. Without a large enough sample set (aka lots of games) its hard to say where someone really belongs. That's why someone like MC can place into platinum (homestory cup). Obviously for him he can quickly continue to win and reach a higher MMR but he's also a player first. That means he's trained his mechanics as well as his knowledge. Someone in my position has sacrificed part of that. I am not a player first. My knowledge is derived from analyzing a large sample set. Think of it as trading mechanics for broader knowledge. The other important part of this is the idea that you can't learn without playing. That's not true for this. While it is true that watching NBA games isn't going to make you good at 3 pointers or allow you to dunk it doesn't mean that someone who watches games rather than playing is a bad coach. In fact most nba coaches will just watch games, study players, and can't dunk. Obviously I can elaborate on this but the point is that you don't have to be able to dunk to coach basketball. I'm using my knowledge to help coach, not my mechanics. 2nd analogy: Before anybody becomes a surgeon, they study a long, long time from books. Books that describe where are the organs are and how they function. What medicines affect what. They can tell you where to cut for a surgery but they won't keep your hand steady. I am that book. You might make arguments like "Well I bet you can't write that book without actually doing a surgery", but that would be wrong. Yes the surgery has to be done but no one surgeon who has spent the time to be the very best (and therefore qualified to write a section) can write the entire book. To write the book you get a writer, you have him take down everything from those qualified experts, and you put it all together. The Top 200 KOTH, GSL, and the countless games I've observed, analyzed and casted, are me (the writer) putting together all the knowledge in one place (my mind/ the book). And thus, despite my lack of ladder games and therefore non gm account, I am still completely qualified to help even the very top echelon of players improve. So I guess that wasn't as short as I thought it would be but I could certainly explain more. TL:DR - I've scarified mechanics and ladder time for learning/analyzing time. I learn from watching the best. Someone like day9 still has a very strong understanding of the game even if he doesn't have time to play it at the level of his knowledge. While most sub-gm rated players would not be qualified for this position, most have not spent the time LEARNING the game that I have. Even Code-S players improve by going back and WATCHING their games with help from coaches like Cella (not code S). Obviously they can't JUST watch because SC is not chess it has a physical/mechanics component as well. ^afterthought. Think of it like chess. You don't need to move the pieces to understand/be good. SC is more because its real time and has mechanics, but as I am not a player I don't need mechanics.( you can't really teach speed anyhow...) Hope that answers your question. I know a lot of other people were probably wondering the same thing. And don't worry it's not insulting to me. There's very little way of you knowing my qualifications unless you've gotten coached by me or have talked to the players I've helped. | ||
thundertoss
United States1166 Posts
On January 18 2012 14:58 Akta wrote: Because the coach doesn't necessarily have to be better at understanding strategies etc than the players. And being good at executing strategies doesn't necessarily mean you have a good understanding of strategies either, and so on. In reality, coaching(in any sport) tend to be based on dialog. And there is no simple formula for finding out who will be an amazing coach. Obviously I was taking time to write my own response and didn't see yours. I agree with you. Luckily I am quite adept at understanding strategies. It is part of what I teach occasionally even though the more important part is understanding the logic behind strategies and helping players with that understanding such that they are able to make the correct decisions in any situation. But yes. I learn from players as much as they learn from me. Just like the current GSL players are learning from each other. | ||
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On January 18 2012 15:33 thundertoss wrote: + Show Spoiler + I'll answer with some quick points since I get it a lot. Obviously it's a valid question since most people think that the only way to learn is to play and hence another reason why there aren't many coaches. First of all, my understanding is much higher than what my ladder ranking is going to show. That holds true for quiet a few people. Take day9 for instance who has made it known that when he had time to commit to playing he had multiple gm accounts. Now that he doesn't have time to play it would take him a while to get there. Your ability to play is you matching your mechanics with your game knowledge and decision making. The reflection of that ability is your ladder ranking/ tournament performances. However it is important to note that if you don't have much time to ladder or time to focus on laddering (aka only have free time when you're already tired or something) your rank won't really be a true rank. Without a large enough sample set (aka lots of games) its hard to say where someone really belongs. That's why someone like MC can place into platinum (homestory cup). Obviously for him he can quickly continue to win and reach a higher MMR but he's also a player first. That means he's trained his mechanics as well as his knowledge. Someone in my position has sacrificed part of that. I am not a player first. My knowledge is derived from analyzing a large sample set. Think of it as trading mechanics for broader knowledge. The other important part of this is the idea that you can't learn without playing. That's not true for this. While it is true that watching NBA games isn't going to make you good at 3 pointers or allow you to dunk it doesn't mean that someone who watches games rather than playing is a bad coach. In fact most nba coaches will just watch games, study players, and can't dunk. Obviously I can elaborate on this but the point is that you don't have to be able to dunk to coach basketball. I'm using my knowledge to help coach, not my mechanics. 2nd analogy: Before anybody becomes a surgeon, they study a long, long time from books. Books that describe where are the organs are and how they function. What medicines affect what. They can tell you where to cut for a surgery but they won't keep your hand steady. I am that book. You might make arguments like "Well I bet you can't write that book without actually doing a surgery", but that would be wrong. Yes the surgery has to be done but no one surgeon who has spent the time to be the very best (and therefore qualified to write a section) can write the entire book. To write the book you get a writer, you have him take down everything from those qualified experts, and you put it all together. The Top 200 KOTH, GSL, and the countless games I've observed, analyzed and casted, are me (the writer) putting together all the knowledge in one place (my mind/ the book). And thus, despite my lack of ladder games and therefore non gm account, I am still completely qualified to help even the very top echelon of players improve. So I guess that wasn't as short as I thought it would be but I could certainly explain more. TL:DR - I've scarified mechanics and ladder time for learning/analyzing time. I learn from watching the best. Someone like day9 still has a very strong understanding of the game even if he doesn't have time to play it at the level of his knowledge. While most sub-gm rated players would not be qualified for this position, most have not spent the time LEARNING the game that I have. Even Code-S players improve by going back and WATCHING their games with help from coaches like Cella (not code S). Obviously they can't JUST watch because SC is not chess it has a physical/mechanics component as well. ^afterthought. Think of it like chess. You don't need to move the pieces to understand/be good. SC is more because its real time and has mechanics, but as I am not a player I don't need mechanics.( you can't really teach speed anyhow...) Hope that answers your question. I know a lot of other people were probably wondering the same thing. And don't worry it's not insulting to me. There's very little way of you knowing my qualifications unless you've gotten coached by me or have talked to the players I've helped. although i dont necessarily agree with all your points, you certainly have shown a lot of dedication to the scene and helping others improve. and you have also put a lot of thought into it. i hope the best for you and the team. please keep koth going. its on my second screen while i do other stuff. =) | ||
thundertoss
United States1166 Posts
On January 18 2012 15:45 dAPhREAk wrote: although i dont necessarily agree with all your points, you certainly have shown a lot of dedication to the scene and helping others improve. and you have also put a lot of thought into it. i hope the best for you and the team. please keep koth going. its on my second screen while i do other stuff. =) Well I hope the argument made some sense to you. I appreciate you watching the KOTH. I will keep it going as long as people keep playing it ^_^ ps. Even if you don't agree with all my points the really nice thing is that you don't have to take my word for it. I had multiple teams (and not small time teams, teams with players who will be competing in gsl) offering me a coaching position after hearing from their players how helpful I was at improving their play. You'll also now be able to see my abilities reflected by the improvements of iS players. | ||
NB
Netherlands12045 Posts
I would like to know how are you planning to overcome the skill differences between you and your player in order to gain their respect and listen to you. I have a hard time believe a Korean GM will ever take advice from a diamond 2v2 guy on NA. It is true that you might have casted a lot of games and has been hanging out with a lot of pros in the past but to actually talk to pros about strategy and helping them improve does require a certain level in 1v1 skill. Last time i saw you skype with Col.Minigun while he laddering, you still give him all the wrong suggestion on how to play and after minigun lose you just keep responding 'i dont know i dont know'... wish you all the best! edit: correct spellings edit2: ima leave this related blog of mine here for you to index. note the comments below http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=302455 | ||
Akta
447 Posts
On January 18 2012 16:06 NB wrote: There are many ways to earn respect. And being good at making people listen to you is another of the hundreds of things that are more important for a coach than a player. Just like being open to advice is important in all sports for players with access to advice that makes them better.personally i hope you could do a good job once you become a coach simply because you will be the first of this kind and other team will be looking at iS result in order to decided if they really need a coach or not. I would like to know how are you planning to overcome the skill differences between you and your player in order to gain their respect and listen to you. I have a hard time believe a Korean GM will ever take advice from a diamond 2v2 guy on NA. It is true that you might have casted a lot of games and has been hanging out with a lot of pros in the past but to actually talk to pros about strategy and helping them improve does require a certain level in 1v1 skill. Last time i saw you skype with Col.Minigun while he laddering, you still give him all the wrong suggestion on how to play and after minigun lose you just keep responding 'i dont know i dont know'... wish you all the best! edit: correct spellings edit2: ima leave this related blog of mine here for you to index. note the comments below http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=302455 Speaking in general of course since I don't know anything about thundertoss coaching potential | ||
| ||