|
On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:On July 03 2012 19:18 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:43 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 18:40 Assirra wrote:
[quote]
It does not matter what you care about...a graph without consistency is not a graph at all.
What you want is raw stats, not a graph. Ok lets have consistent graph showing nothing, let it be. Also to clarify: its ok to add new tournamet - proleague to graph but not ok to add new TSL/OSL qualifiers with better players and much more games? Well if that is the case why not just remove international graphics completely? I mean, its clearly all about the better players so. You cannot adjust the rules as you see fit, cause then this whole graph would be worthless. This is about tournaments, not qualifiers, doesn't matter how good the qualifiers are. Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did.
Huh? Let me explain to you what he meant:
first guy claims:
On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:On July 03 2012 19:18 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:43 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 18:40 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:34 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 18:18 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:09 keglu wrote:
[quote]
Or we can start now so for once we can have singifcant amount of data to jugde anything (500 games instead of 100). Who cares about previous data, you can't draw any conlusion on winrates changing over 10-20% each month.
Also TSL, OSL qualifiers werent played before, MLG im not sure.
And neither can you change the rules of something in the middle of series, your whole series is broken that way. Who knows what would have happened if the code A qualifiers for instance always got counted. It's kinda silly that people want to include qualifiers that were never included just to proof their point. Again i dont care about series, i care about current state of the game and having reliable data. Till know i never took Korean graph seriously because of sample size so let it be. We have chance to have reliable graph in future if we add all this data. It does not matter what you care about...a graph without consistency is not a graph at all. What you want is raw stats, not a graph. Ok lets have consistent graph showing nothing, let it be. Also to clarify: its ok to add new tournamet - proleague to graph but not ok to add new TSL/OSL qualifiers with better players and much more games? Well if that is the case why not just remove international graphics completely? I mean, its clearly all about the better players so. You cannot adjust the rules as you see fit, cause then this whole graph would be worthless. This is about tournaments, not qualifiers, doesn't matter how good the qualifiers are. Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal.
and then you start raging:
On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:On July 03 2012 19:18 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:43 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 18:40 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:34 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 18:18 Assirra wrote:
[quote]
And neither can you change the rules of something in the middle of series, your whole series is broken that way.
Who knows what would have happened if the code A qualifiers for instance always got counted.
It's kinda silly that people want to include qualifiers that were never included just to proof their point. Again i dont care about series, i care about current state of the game and having reliable data. Till know i never took Korean graph seriously because of sample size so let it be. We have chance to have reliable graph in future if we add all this data. It does not matter what you care about...a graph without consistency is not a graph at all. What you want is raw stats, not a graph. Ok lets have consistent graph showing nothing, let it be. Also to clarify: its ok to add new tournamet - proleague to graph but not ok to add new TSL/OSL qualifiers with better players and much more games? Well if that is the case why not just remove international graphics completely? I mean, its clearly all about the better players so. You cannot adjust the rules as you see fit, cause then this whole graph would be worthless. This is about tournaments, not qualifiers, doesn't matter how good the qualifiers are. Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments.
and then a third guy posts the official requirements of the code A qualifiers:
On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:On July 03 2012 19:18 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:43 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 18:40 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:34 keglu wrote:
[quote]
Again i dont care about series, i care about current state of the game and having reliable data. Till know i never took Korean graph seriously because of sample size so let it be. We have chance to have reliable graph in future if we add all this data.
It does not matter what you care about...a graph without consistency is not a graph at all. What you want is raw stats, not a graph. Ok lets have consistent graph showing nothing, let it be. Also to clarify: its ok to add new tournamet - proleague to graph but not ok to add new TSL/OSL qualifiers with better players and much more games? Well if that is the case why not just remove international graphics completely? I mean, its clearly all about the better players so. You cannot adjust the rules as you see fit, cause then this whole graph would be worthless. This is about tournaments, not qualifiers, doesn't matter how good the qualifiers are. Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV
|
On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:On July 03 2012 19:18 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:43 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 18:40 Assirra wrote:
[quote]
It does not matter what you care about...a graph without consistency is not a graph at all.
What you want is raw stats, not a graph. Ok lets have consistent graph showing nothing, let it be. Also to clarify: its ok to add new tournamet - proleague to graph but not ok to add new TSL/OSL qualifiers with better players and much more games? Well if that is the case why not just remove international graphics completely? I mean, its clearly all about the better players so. You cannot adjust the rules as you see fit, cause then this whole graph would be worthless. This is about tournaments, not qualifiers, doesn't matter how good the qualifiers are. Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did.
There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them.
You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers.
|
On July 03 2012 23:55 Jebediah wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:On July 03 2012 19:18 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:43 keglu wrote:
[quote]
Ok lets have consistent graph showing nothing, let it be.
Also to clarify: its ok to add new tournamet - proleague to graph but not ok to add new TSL/OSL qualifiers with better players and much more games?
Well if that is the case why not just remove international graphics completely? I mean, its clearly all about the better players so. You cannot adjust the rules as you see fit, cause then this whole graph would be worthless. This is about tournaments, not qualifiers, doesn't matter how good the qualifiers are. Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them. You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers.
How is requirements for entering a qualifier related to TLPD june statistics ?
The last few pages are full of this shit.
It has no relevance to this thread at all.
|
I dont get why some people belive code s,a,b consists of godly koreans. In reality skill wise its the same. i've personally beat forgg(ex S)[and im just random eu casual that plays like 1day of the week] and if u watch their streams u'll see they lose a lot.[when playing eu ladder or some daily inet cups]
|
On July 04 2012 00:07 Powerstrike wrote:
I dont get why some people belive code s,a,b consists of godly koreans. In reality skill wise its the same. i've personally beat forgg(ex S) and if u watch their streams u'll see they lose a lot.
ladder != tournament play. Ladder is practicing new builds, learning new meta, and testing endurance. Tournament is mind game and throwing everything you got. Just because you beat forgg on ladder after he played for 10 hours straight or trying new B/O does not mean you'll even take a game off of him in a tournament settings
what you're implying just don't hold up to results. If it did we'd be looking at more foreigners in GSL right now
|
On July 03 2012 23:54 JustPassingBy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:On July 03 2012 19:18 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:43 keglu wrote:
[quote]
Ok lets have consistent graph showing nothing, let it be.
Also to clarify: its ok to add new tournamet - proleague to graph but not ok to add new TSL/OSL qualifiers with better players and much more games?
Well if that is the case why not just remove international graphics completely? I mean, its clearly all about the better players so. You cannot adjust the rules as you see fit, cause then this whole graph would be worthless. This is about tournaments, not qualifiers, doesn't matter how good the qualifiers are. Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. Huh? Let me explain to you what he meant: first guy claims: Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:On July 03 2012 19:18 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:43 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 18:40 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:34 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 18:18 Assirra wrote:
[quote]
And neither can you change the rules of something in the middle of series, your whole series is broken that way.
Who knows what would have happened if the code A qualifiers for instance always got counted.
It's kinda silly that people want to include qualifiers that were never included just to proof their point. Again i dont care about series, i care about current state of the game and having reliable data. Till know i never took Korean graph seriously because of sample size so let it be. We have chance to have reliable graph in future if we add all this data. It does not matter what you care about...a graph without consistency is not a graph at all. What you want is raw stats, not a graph. Ok lets have consistent graph showing nothing, let it be. Also to clarify: its ok to add new tournamet - proleague to graph but not ok to add new TSL/OSL qualifiers with better players and much more games? Well if that is the case why not just remove international graphics completely? I mean, its clearly all about the better players so. You cannot adjust the rules as you see fit, cause then this whole graph would be worthless. This is about tournaments, not qualifiers, doesn't matter how good the qualifiers are. Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. and then you start raging: Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:On July 03 2012 19:18 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:43 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 18:40 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:34 keglu wrote:
[quote]
Again i dont care about series, i care about current state of the game and having reliable data. Till know i never took Korean graph seriously because of sample size so let it be. We have chance to have reliable graph in future if we add all this data.
It does not matter what you care about...a graph without consistency is not a graph at all. What you want is raw stats, not a graph. Ok lets have consistent graph showing nothing, let it be. Also to clarify: its ok to add new tournamet - proleague to graph but not ok to add new TSL/OSL qualifiers with better players and much more games? Well if that is the case why not just remove international graphics completely? I mean, its clearly all about the better players so. You cannot adjust the rules as you see fit, cause then this whole graph would be worthless. This is about tournaments, not qualifiers, doesn't matter how good the qualifiers are. Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. and then a third guy posts the official requirements of the code A qualifiers: Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:On July 03 2012 19:18 Assirra wrote:On July 03 2012 18:43 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 18:40 Assirra wrote:
[quote]
It does not matter what you care about...a graph without consistency is not a graph at all.
What you want is raw stats, not a graph. Ok lets have consistent graph showing nothing, let it be. Also to clarify: its ok to add new tournamet - proleague to graph but not ok to add new TSL/OSL qualifiers with better players and much more games? Well if that is the case why not just remove international graphics completely? I mean, its clearly all about the better players so. You cannot adjust the rules as you see fit, cause then this whole graph would be worthless. This is about tournaments, not qualifiers, doesn't matter how good the qualifiers are. Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV
Let me explain what you missed, he is trying to devalue the tournament by mentioning irrelevant shit, GSL could allow dogs for all I care, we do not have weak players playing, look into the preliminaries brackets, tons of known players being eliminated in the first rounds, those requirements are meaningless in the grand scheme of things and I still want confirmation on this because if I was a bronzie living in korea I'd want to play some games vs progamers, I'm sure other people think alike, why do we have none?Even if we had, exclude the matches between players below mid masters, search for the ranks in sc2 ranks, I'm in favor of searching for every match between top koreans in every tournament, I'm sure it will represent the current state much better than a graph based on 100 games.
|
Seems that allthough it's a rather small sample size – the game is fairly balanced based solely on these numbers.
However, terrans seem to be really dominant in the TvP matchup. I found this surprising based on the shere amount of complaints from terran players lately.
|
On July 04 2012 00:00 one-one-one wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 23:55 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:On July 03 2012 19:18 Assirra wrote:
[quote]
Well if that is the case why not just remove international graphics completely?
I mean, its clearly all about the better players so.
You cannot adjust the rules as you see fit, cause then this whole graph would be worthless.
This is about tournaments, not qualifiers, doesn't matter how good the qualifiers are. Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them. You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers. How is requirements for entering a qualifier related to TLPD june statistics ? The last few pages are full of this shit. It has no relevance to this thread at all.
Because if you include qualifier stats, you are including stats from the possible equivalent of low-level ladder games. If the qualifier stats consist partially of just random players against actual pros, or random players against other random players, why the fuck would you ever include them in pro statistics?
That is of course based on the assumption that non-pros do turn up regularly. But that should answer your question about why it is relevant.
|
On July 04 2012 00:30 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 00:00 one-one-one wrote:On July 03 2012 23:55 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:
[quote]
Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them. You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers. How is requirements for entering a qualifier related to TLPD june statistics ? The last few pages are full of this shit. It has no relevance to this thread at all. Because if you include qualifier stats, you are including stats from the possible equivalent of low-level ladder games. If the qualifier stats consist partially of just random players against actual pros, or random players against other random players, why the fuck would you ever include them in pro statistics? That is of course based on the assumption that non-pros do turn up regularly. But that should answer your question about why it is relevant.
Yeah, but those games were not included in the TLPD statistics. And that is a fact.
The rest is just you people trying to argue each other to death which games that should have been included and which shouldn't. It is a pointless discussion.
|
On July 04 2012 00:30 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 00:00 one-one-one wrote:On July 03 2012 23:55 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:
[quote]
Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them. You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers. How is requirements for entering a qualifier related to TLPD june statistics ? The last few pages are full of this shit. It has no relevance to this thread at all. Because if you include qualifier stats, you are including stats from the possible equivalent of low-level ladder games. If the qualifier stats consist partially of just random players against actual pros, or random players against other random players, why the fuck would you ever include them in pro statistics? That is of course based on the assumption that non-pros do turn up regularly. But that should answer your question about why it is relevant.
Weed them out then, only games between players in pro teams above mid masters, besides, it's not like using the MLG showmatches is any better than random ladder matches.
|
On July 04 2012 00:30 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 00:00 one-one-one wrote:On July 03 2012 23:55 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:
[quote]
Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them. You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers. How is requirements for entering a qualifier related to TLPD june statistics ? The last few pages are full of this shit. It has no relevance to this thread at all. Because if you include qualifier stats, you are including stats from the possible equivalent of low-level ladder games. If the qualifier stats consist partially of just random players against actual pros, or random players against other random players, why the fuck would you ever include them in pro statistics? That is of course based on the assumption that non-pros do turn up regularly. But that should answer your question about why it is relevant.
How is this different from say, MLG where anyone can sign up for the Open Bracket?
|
On July 04 2012 00:30 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 00:00 one-one-one wrote:On July 03 2012 23:55 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 20:59 MrSalamandra wrote:
[quote]
Those qualifiers are tournaments. yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you. Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them. You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers. How is requirements for entering a qualifier related to TLPD june statistics ? The last few pages are full of this shit. It has no relevance to this thread at all. Because if you include qualifier stats, you are including stats from the possible equivalent of low-level ladder games. If the qualifier stats consist partially of just random players against actual pros, or random players against other random players, why the fuck would you ever include them in pro statistics? That is of course based on the assumption that non-pros do turn up regularly. But that should answer your question about why it is relevant.
You can just count exclude amateur or teamless players just like the op though.
Or you can start counting from ro16, ro8 like ESV. TLPD only count ESV ro8 and up because as long as you have a team, you can sign up and people don't show up all the time. There's week that the number of Terran sign up is more than Protoss and Zerg combined, and people don't even show up after that.
|
If a lab rat has been getting free food for 20 months by pushing a button and getting a mild shock, don't be surprised if the rat persists in getting shocked for 2 months after the free food has been cut off.
|
On July 04 2012 00:44 shockaslim wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 00:30 SeaSwift wrote:On July 04 2012 00:00 one-one-one wrote:On July 03 2012 23:55 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:
[quote]
yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you.
Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them. You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers. How is requirements for entering a qualifier related to TLPD june statistics ? The last few pages are full of this shit. It has no relevance to this thread at all. Because if you include qualifier stats, you are including stats from the possible equivalent of low-level ladder games. If the qualifier stats consist partially of just random players against actual pros, or random players against other random players, why the fuck would you ever include them in pro statistics? That is of course based on the assumption that non-pros do turn up regularly. But that should answer your question about why it is relevant. How is this different from say, MLG where anyone can sign up for the Open Bracket?
That is a good questions. I think it depends on what you want to the data to represent or the information you are intrested in. If you are only looking for data on professional players, playing in important matches, then removing the open bracket wouldn't be a bad idea. It might give you a good snap shot of how each race was doing based at that moment.
The graphs we are looking at in this specific thread are attemtping to show the win rates over the span of a year. It makes sense for them only to take the same data, from the same sources every month to get a picture of how the match ups changed over the course of a year. Adding in qualifiers would taint the data for that specific month. They want to keep the amount of data consistent over the 12 month period, or as consistent as possible(clearly, nothing is perfect)
This does not mean you can't make a different graph with that data included. In fact, it may be more intresting to look at both sets against each other and try to figure out why they are different. Why did so many terrans get mauled by zergs in the TSL4 qualifier? Are they the same terrans that did ok in the main touranments? If they are different, what did the terrans that did well against zergs do differently? If they are the same players, WFT happened in the TSL4 qualifier? Was it the maps?
Arguing about if the data should be included or not doesn't really do anything. Trying to figure out why it is different is more interesting and people are far more liking to find something useful.
|
On July 04 2012 00:44 shockaslim wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 00:30 SeaSwift wrote:On July 04 2012 00:00 one-one-one wrote:On July 03 2012 23:55 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:On July 03 2012 21:14 emc wrote:
[quote]
yes, a tournament to a much larger tournament where every player is a super star. The qualifiers is weeding out the bad players from the good, if we haven't counted qualifiers in the past, why should we now? The qualifiers are like College football, everyone is pretty good but there is only 1 or 2 people on each football team who could be NFL potential, but in the major tournament, everyone is a super star. Qualifiers shouldn't be counted because there is too large of a skill gap, a qualifier could consist of bronze to GM players for all we know. Make your own graph if you feel so bad about it, instead of letting other people do everything for you.
Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow... Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them. You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers. How is requirements for entering a qualifier related to TLPD june statistics ? The last few pages are full of this shit. It has no relevance to this thread at all. Because if you include qualifier stats, you are including stats from the possible equivalent of low-level ladder games. If the qualifier stats consist partially of just random players against actual pros, or random players against other random players, why the fuck would you ever include them in pro statistics? That is of course based on the assumption that non-pros do turn up regularly. But that should answer your question about why it is relevant. How is this different from say, MLG where anyone can sign up for the Open Bracket?
MLG takes place in ONLY 3 days, Code A qualifiers take over a week, maybe 2. Then the actual tournament of GSL for instance, takes several months, so players can know weeks in advance who they play and study them. If both players have an equal chance at studying each other, then surely GSL is the hardest possible tournament because of the amount of preparation, not even mentioning the caliber of players which we all know are fantastic.
My point is, MLG is an endurance test, Code A qualifiers are not, you only have to win 4 matches to make it into Code A, that is NOTHING compared to the grueling task of getting through open brackets. Endurance wise, MLG is a lot tougher, but it could be argued that Code A qualifiers are certainly more challenging. I think there is definitely LESS skill in the MLG open brackets for several rounds until the pros start to finally face each other, but that's hundreds of worthless games until the pros start playing each other.
But if it were up to me, I wouldn't include the MLG open bracket because it's basically a qualifier, a bunch of players mixed in from bronze to GM to Code S level, the place you really don't want to take balance from.
Honestly I don't think the guy who makes the TLPD cares all that much about international win rates because it seems he pretty much just uses every tournament possible where korea is a lot more exclusive.
but hey, if you are one of those nit pickers that wants to see "true" balance, then create your own damn graph already... sheesh.
|
On July 02 2012 22:18 phodacbiet wrote:
Got it from twitter. But yeah PvZ looks pretty good actually, PvT is surprising as well with terran beginning to take the lead (what changed?).
Should credit @SC2Statistics, which has done all the hard work compiling these in readable form (AND included statistical error). The sheer fact that you didn't credit him in the OP for all the work he does, freely posting to his twitter, reflects very badly on you.
Now that that's been said, looks like Korea remains ahead on the metagame curve. They boast a 4.4% less difference from a 50-50 split on winrates compared to International (5.3% up/down compared to 0.9%). Very hopeful that things will resolve themselves in time (if there still remains plenty of time before HOTS launch).
|
On July 04 2012 10:13 emc wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 00:44 shockaslim wrote:On July 04 2012 00:30 SeaSwift wrote:On July 04 2012 00:00 one-one-one wrote:On July 03 2012 23:55 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:On July 03 2012 21:31 keglu wrote:
[quote]
Its like completly you have no idea what are you talking about. Korean weekly and proleague are tournaments with only superstars and TSL/ OSL/MLG qaulifiers are full of bad players. Wow...
Just do your research before posting please. virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them. You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers. How is requirements for entering a qualifier related to TLPD june statistics ? The last few pages are full of this shit. It has no relevance to this thread at all. Because if you include qualifier stats, you are including stats from the possible equivalent of low-level ladder games. If the qualifier stats consist partially of just random players against actual pros, or random players against other random players, why the fuck would you ever include them in pro statistics? That is of course based on the assumption that non-pros do turn up regularly. But that should answer your question about why it is relevant. How is this different from say, MLG where anyone can sign up for the Open Bracket? MLG takes place in ONLY 3 days, Code A qualifiers take over a week, maybe 2. Then the actual tournament of GSL for instance, takes several months, so players can know weeks in advance who they play and study them. If both players have an equal chance at studying each other, then surely GSL is the hardest possible tournament because of the amount of preparation, not even mentioning the caliber of players which we all know are fantastic. My point is, MLG is an endurance test, Code A qualifiers are not, you only have to win 4 matches to make it into Code A, that is NOTHING compared to the grueling task of getting through open brackets. Endurance wise, MLG is a lot tougher, but it could be argued that Code A qualifiers are certainly more challenging. I think there is definitely LESS skill in the MLG open brackets for several rounds until the pros start to finally face each other, but that's hundreds of worthless games until the pros start playing each other. But if it were up to me, I wouldn't include the MLG open bracket because it's basically a qualifier, a bunch of players mixed in from bronze to GM to Code S level, the place you really don't want to take balance from. Honestly I don't think the guy who makes the TLPD cares all that much about international win rates because it seems he pretty much just uses every tournament possible where korea is a lot more exclusive. but hey, if you are one of those nit pickers that wants to see "true" balance, then create your own damn graph already... sheesh.
But if you were interested in balance, then the GSL is actually one of the poorest places to look. Why? Because of two things: sample size, and study opportunities. The first part is self-explanatory, but the second bears some reflection. Even if some matchup is insanely imbalanced, given enough time, one player might be able to study the play of another specific player to the point where they locate a timing that works against them. This isn't possible in an average game and it does little to comment on the balance of a matchup. You need to understand that when MKP plays DRG in the GSL it's about MKP vs DRG more than it is about T vs Z. On the other hand, when MKP and DRG play at MLG, it's still about MKP vs DRG, sure, but it's also about well-executed, but non-tailored, Terran vs well-executed, but non-tailored, Zerg.
This is a massive difference, because in many respects it means high skill qualifiers like TSL4KR are actually more useful indicators of balance. Why? Because, firstly, they're a larger sample size, and because, secondly, they evaluate players playing neutrally against each other. Yes, there are certainly some weak players who sign up for TSL qualifiers, but they are a small number. They're not enough to actually mean anything, especially since the saturation of pro players is so, so high. It's inconceivable that a whole bunch of mid Diamond players would somehow work their way up the bracket. You might have one outlier, but with the sample size being larger, that matters less. Hell, you could even manually eliminate for players that aren't at least Korean B-Teamers.
It's why I laughed at people who said 0 Zergs in the Ro8 GSL means anything. It doesn't, and it didn't. It just means that the players who played against Zerg that particular time around happened to prepare better/execute their strategies better/get inside their opponent's heads. It might also mean that the Zerg players underprepared or just didn't play their best (which is basically what happened, IMO). It says nothing about the state of PvZ or TvZ because it's not consistent and only exists in one extremely tiny (size-wise) tournament.
The reason Terrans are right to be concerned about TvZ is because Zerg is doing well in every neutral tournament. This means GSTL, TSL4KR, and so on. These are tournaments that you can't prepare for except in a general way. You can't develop a strategy designed specifically to steal you a win against DRG. You have to practice your general matchups in such a way that you'd be capable of facing anyone. This means you play more safely and don't tend to mindgame to the same degree, because you simply don't know your opponent's style as well as you might in the GSL.
It's that simple. GSTL matters. TSL4KR matters. GSL Code A/S matter only when a consistent, prolonged trend is observed, because only after several seasons can individuality be eliminated by group selection.
|
On July 04 2012 10:42 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 10:13 emc wrote:On July 04 2012 00:44 shockaslim wrote:On July 04 2012 00:30 SeaSwift wrote:On July 04 2012 00:00 one-one-one wrote:On July 03 2012 23:55 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:22 emc wrote:
[quote]
virtually anyone can sign up for Code A qualifiers, surely you must understand that there is a much bigger skill gap in a qualifier compared to an actual tournament? If we're looking for unbiased balanced, you have to take players who are closely equal in skill, qualifiers are the furthest from equality because the best players roll over everyone and make it to the real deal. Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them. You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers. How is requirements for entering a qualifier related to TLPD june statistics ? The last few pages are full of this shit. It has no relevance to this thread at all. Because if you include qualifier stats, you are including stats from the possible equivalent of low-level ladder games. If the qualifier stats consist partially of just random players against actual pros, or random players against other random players, why the fuck would you ever include them in pro statistics? That is of course based on the assumption that non-pros do turn up regularly. But that should answer your question about why it is relevant. How is this different from say, MLG where anyone can sign up for the Open Bracket? MLG takes place in ONLY 3 days, Code A qualifiers take over a week, maybe 2. Then the actual tournament of GSL for instance, takes several months, so players can know weeks in advance who they play and study them. If both players have an equal chance at studying each other, then surely GSL is the hardest possible tournament because of the amount of preparation, not even mentioning the caliber of players which we all know are fantastic. My point is, MLG is an endurance test, Code A qualifiers are not, you only have to win 4 matches to make it into Code A, that is NOTHING compared to the grueling task of getting through open brackets. Endurance wise, MLG is a lot tougher, but it could be argued that Code A qualifiers are certainly more challenging. I think there is definitely LESS skill in the MLG open brackets for several rounds until the pros start to finally face each other, but that's hundreds of worthless games until the pros start playing each other. But if it were up to me, I wouldn't include the MLG open bracket because it's basically a qualifier, a bunch of players mixed in from bronze to GM to Code S level, the place you really don't want to take balance from. Honestly I don't think the guy who makes the TLPD cares all that much about international win rates because it seems he pretty much just uses every tournament possible where korea is a lot more exclusive. but hey, if you are one of those nit pickers that wants to see "true" balance, then create your own damn graph already... sheesh. But if you were interested in balance, then the GSL is actually one of the poorest places to look. Why? Because of two things: sample size, and study opportunities. The first part is self-explanatory, but the second bears some reflection. Even if some matchup is insanely imbalanced, given enough time, one player might be able to study the play of another specific player to the point where they locate a timing that works against them. This isn't possible in an average game and it does little to comment on the balance of a matchup. You need to understand that when MKP plays DRG in the GSL it's about MKP vs DRG more than it is about T vs Z. On the other hand, when MKP and DRG play at MLG, it's still about MKP vs DRG, sure, but it's also about well-executed, but non-tailored, Terran vs well-executed, but non-tailored, Zerg. This is a massive difference, because in many respects it means high skill qualifiers like TSL4KR are actually more useful indicators of balance. Why? Because, firstly, they're a larger sample size, and because, secondly, they evaluate players playing neutrally against each other. Yes, there are certainly some weak players who sign up for TSL qualifiers, but they are a small number. They're not enough to actually mean anything, especially since the saturation of pro players is so, so high. It's inconceivable that a whole bunch of mid Diamond players would somehow work their way up the bracket. You might have one outlier, but with the sample size being larger, that matters less. Hell, you could even manually eliminate for players that aren't at least Korean B-Teamers. It's why I laughed at people who said 0 Zergs in the Ro8 GSL means anything. It doesn't, and it didn't. It just means that the players who played against Zerg that particular time around happened to prepare better/execute their strategies better/get inside their opponent's heads. It might also mean that the Zerg players underprepared or just didn't play their best (which is basically what happened, IMO). It says nothing about the state of PvZ or TvZ because it's not consistent and only exists in one extremely tiny (size-wise) tournament. The reason Terrans are right to be concerned about TvZ is because Zerg is doing well in every neutral tournament. This means GSTL, TSL4KR, and so on. These are tournaments that you can't prepare for except in a general way. You can't develop a strategy designed specifically to steal you a win against DRG. You have to practice your general matchups in such a way that you'd be capable of facing anyone. This means you play more safely and don't tend to mindgame to the same degree, because you simply don't know your opponent's style as well as you might in the GSL. It's that simple. GSTL matters. TSL4KR matters. GSL Code A/S matter only when a consistent, prolonged trend is observed, because only after several seasons can individuality be eliminated by group selection.
which is why I don't take winrates or stats very seriously. When terran was winning a lot, I was just happy to watch FD and Nestea take it home in those early days, I didn't really care that zergs were all struggling. I like being the under dog, and now that zerg is considered the strong race, it makes me want to play terran, the race I used to play at master level. Sure, I will admit I was a bit relieved to see the stats even out a bit, but even I know that the sample size will never be up to standards, the player pool will be nit picked, someone will always find a flaw somewhere, and that's inevitable in a game like this, where the game isn't won by stats, it's won through intuition, skill and sometimes luck. Oh and knowing your opponent is a perfectly valid way to play the game, it's why a player like Savior is considered one of the best in BW because he constantly switched his style as people were constantly studying him. I think if anything, the more a player has to prepare, the better the match (usually).
and actually.. a large amount of the games played, are the FIRST rounds, there is a lot of randoms who enter tournaments on the first round so I can't agree with you on the point that qualifiers should be taken more seriously over GSL, that is just rediculous. I will give way and say that a tournament like the MLG championship sunday (not the open brackets) is a good indicator of balance, and last MLG we had a VERY even distribution in the championship bracket.
|
On July 04 2012 11:21 emc wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 10:42 Shiori wrote:On July 04 2012 10:13 emc wrote:On July 04 2012 00:44 shockaslim wrote:On July 04 2012 00:30 SeaSwift wrote:On July 04 2012 00:00 one-one-one wrote:On July 03 2012 23:55 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:47 IshinShishi wrote:On July 03 2012 23:39 Jebediah wrote:On July 03 2012 23:29 IshinShishi wrote:
[quote]
Stop spreading bullshit, you need to be at least in code B, i.e stronger than all of the foreign only tournaments. Participation Requirements: - Must be at least 12 years old - Need to have a SC2 Battle.net account (cannot use your family's or friends' accounts) [Does not have to be a Korean Battle.net account] - Identification (Passport, ID, driver's license) These are the requirements to participate in the 2012 GSL Season 3 Code A Qualifiers. Source: GomTV ?Is that supposed to mean anything?I'm sure that the tournament would be full of platinum and diamond players if those were the only requirements, not full of players in sponsored teams that don't always qualify, this is completely meaningless as it does not represent the reality by any means, never did. There are 576 seats, only 21 participants make it through the preliminaries. You could also argue that the MLG Open Bracket is full of Code A/S class players, because the top 20 are stacked with them. You told emc to stop spreading his bullshit while he was saying what was actually true: Anybody can sign up for the qualifiers. How is requirements for entering a qualifier related to TLPD june statistics ? The last few pages are full of this shit. It has no relevance to this thread at all. Because if you include qualifier stats, you are including stats from the possible equivalent of low-level ladder games. If the qualifier stats consist partially of just random players against actual pros, or random players against other random players, why the fuck would you ever include them in pro statistics? That is of course based on the assumption that non-pros do turn up regularly. But that should answer your question about why it is relevant. How is this different from say, MLG where anyone can sign up for the Open Bracket? MLG takes place in ONLY 3 days, Code A qualifiers take over a week, maybe 2. Then the actual tournament of GSL for instance, takes several months, so players can know weeks in advance who they play and study them. If both players have an equal chance at studying each other, then surely GSL is the hardest possible tournament because of the amount of preparation, not even mentioning the caliber of players which we all know are fantastic. My point is, MLG is an endurance test, Code A qualifiers are not, you only have to win 4 matches to make it into Code A, that is NOTHING compared to the grueling task of getting through open brackets. Endurance wise, MLG is a lot tougher, but it could be argued that Code A qualifiers are certainly more challenging. I think there is definitely LESS skill in the MLG open brackets for several rounds until the pros start to finally face each other, but that's hundreds of worthless games until the pros start playing each other. But if it were up to me, I wouldn't include the MLG open bracket because it's basically a qualifier, a bunch of players mixed in from bronze to GM to Code S level, the place you really don't want to take balance from. Honestly I don't think the guy who makes the TLPD cares all that much about international win rates because it seems he pretty much just uses every tournament possible where korea is a lot more exclusive. but hey, if you are one of those nit pickers that wants to see "true" balance, then create your own damn graph already... sheesh. But if you were interested in balance, then the GSL is actually one of the poorest places to look. Why? Because of two things: sample size, and study opportunities. The first part is self-explanatory, but the second bears some reflection. Even if some matchup is insanely imbalanced, given enough time, one player might be able to study the play of another specific player to the point where they locate a timing that works against them. This isn't possible in an average game and it does little to comment on the balance of a matchup. You need to understand that when MKP plays DRG in the GSL it's about MKP vs DRG more than it is about T vs Z. On the other hand, when MKP and DRG play at MLG, it's still about MKP vs DRG, sure, but it's also about well-executed, but non-tailored, Terran vs well-executed, but non-tailored, Zerg. This is a massive difference, because in many respects it means high skill qualifiers like TSL4KR are actually more useful indicators of balance. Why? Because, firstly, they're a larger sample size, and because, secondly, they evaluate players playing neutrally against each other. Yes, there are certainly some weak players who sign up for TSL qualifiers, but they are a small number. They're not enough to actually mean anything, especially since the saturation of pro players is so, so high. It's inconceivable that a whole bunch of mid Diamond players would somehow work their way up the bracket. You might have one outlier, but with the sample size being larger, that matters less. Hell, you could even manually eliminate for players that aren't at least Korean B-Teamers. It's why I laughed at people who said 0 Zergs in the Ro8 GSL means anything. It doesn't, and it didn't. It just means that the players who played against Zerg that particular time around happened to prepare better/execute their strategies better/get inside their opponent's heads. It might also mean that the Zerg players underprepared or just didn't play their best (which is basically what happened, IMO). It says nothing about the state of PvZ or TvZ because it's not consistent and only exists in one extremely tiny (size-wise) tournament. The reason Terrans are right to be concerned about TvZ is because Zerg is doing well in every neutral tournament. This means GSTL, TSL4KR, and so on. These are tournaments that you can't prepare for except in a general way. You can't develop a strategy designed specifically to steal you a win against DRG. You have to practice your general matchups in such a way that you'd be capable of facing anyone. This means you play more safely and don't tend to mindgame to the same degree, because you simply don't know your opponent's style as well as you might in the GSL. It's that simple. GSTL matters. TSL4KR matters. GSL Code A/S matter only when a consistent, prolonged trend is observed, because only after several seasons can individuality be eliminated by group selection. and actually.. a large amount of the games played, are the FIRST rounds, there is a lot of randoms who enter tournaments on the first round so I can't agree with you on the point that qualifiers should be taken more seriously over GSL, that is just rediculous. I will give way and say that a tournament like the MLG championship sunday (not the open brackets) is a good indicator of balance, and last MLG we had a VERY even distribution in the championship bracket.
But the open bracket first round is composed of an entirely random sampling of players. The only players who progress are the players that are actually good, which means that they end up playing more games. Whether or not there are noobs in the first round doesn't favour any one race, which means taking all the high-level qualifiers together should eliminate all outliers.
|
On July 02 2012 22:23 Whole wrote:
Seems that Korean Terrans were busy figuring out the new TvZ while International Terrans were busy complaining about balance.
International Terrans "We hate Korean Terran comrades. They are killing the hope for Terran buff."
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
