EPT[MLG] Summer Arena Details - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Dakure
United States513 Posts
| ||
|
Canucklehead
Canada5074 Posts
On July 11 2012 03:32 Xeris wrote: I think it sucks that NA has the highest number of participants but received the fewest number of spots. There were about 55 people vying for just 6 spots , while EU had 17 people playing for 9. I think theres something inherrently wrong with that. MLGs reason is that NA players perform worse, but Violet won last Arena and he came from NA. I think it sucks for NA players who did well and cant get a chance to play here. blehhh! I blame the dumb qualifying format they use for the arenas for low turnouts from the EU/KR because it's still not really an open qualifier. I think I have this right. The people in the main arena qualifiers are based on the top 9-80 from past MLG and they're separated into the NA/EU/KR main arena qualifier. Now of those players very few of those would be EU/KR because it cost too much to attend MLG, therefore most of the top 9-80 are NA players, which really tilts the NA main arena qualifier into having a lot more players compared to the EU/KR qualifiers. Then they run their open arena qualifier to add between 8-10 people more per region to the existing top 9-80 spread across 3 regional qualifiers. This makes it so you can't get a high turnout for the EU/KR main qualifiers because they already started with a small number of players and the max that can be added to it is 8-10 players. I think this way of qualifying is very bad and if they want to run open qualifiers, they should make it truly open and not semi open. | ||
|
giX
United States185 Posts
On July 11 2012 03:32 Xeris wrote: I think it sucks that NA has the highest number of participants but received the fewest number of spots. There were about 55 people vying for just 6 spots , while EU had 17 people playing for 9. I think theres something inherrently wrong with that. MLGs reason is that NA players perform worse, but Violet won last Arena and he came from NA. I think it sucks for NA players who did well and cant get a chance to play here. blehhh! I agree. MLG racist  | ||
|
jobber123rd
United States501 Posts
On July 11 2012 03:51 TommyP wrote: I just liked the two arenas. We got a 2v2 tournament and the top 8 from winter had a 50% chance of gettin a seed, which as you can tell from my precious posts, I like MLG likes more Arenas, too...but for different games. Spring had two SC2 Arenas, Summer has one SC2 and one LoL, and Fall will have one SC2, one LoL, and one Fighting Games Arena. Edit: Didn't notice that there's a Summer Fighting Arena as well... >_> | ||
|
Wroshe
Netherlands1051 Posts
On July 11 2012 03:32 Xeris wrote: I think it sucks that NA has the highest number of participants but received the fewest number of spots. There were about 55 people vying for just 6 spots , while EU had 17 people playing for 9. I think theres something inherrently wrong with that. MLGs reason is that NA players perform worse, but Violet won last Arena and he came from NA. I think it sucks for NA players who did well and cant get a chance to play here. blehhh! Highly disagree with you on NA needing more spots. The only NA player who has performed good in MLG the last few seasons is Violet, and as HotBid said you can really argue whether you should count him as indicative of the NA Scene. If you for example look at the Spring Arena 2 you had 8 people qualify through the NA Qualifiers: IdrA, Sleep, Mook, SeleCT, HuK, Rain, Killer and Violet. With the exception of Violet all of them placed in the bottom 16. Take a look at the Winter Arena: NA had Ddoro, SaSe, Axslav, Minigun, Drewbie, DeMuslim, DDe and Sheth qualify. With the exception of DeMuslim every single one of those placed in the bottom 16. Another example: TSL4 Qualifiers. In the first eight qualifiers you had one win from a North American: Beastyqt. He however falls under the exact same category as Violet; in fact I feel you shouldn't count him as a North American even more then Violet. On points you get another two players (SeleCT and Sheth) but that only gives you 3 out of 16 spots to be divided between Europe and North America. The big reason that there are so many people vying for NA spots in the invite only qualifier against compared to EU is that a lot more NA people qualify for those due to finishing top 80 in a championship event. Those events are a lot easier for NA players to attend and when they perform decently they get an invite to the arena qualifiers. EU players that don't have the ability to get sent to a MLG Championship event have to fight it out in the brutal open qualifier to hope to earn one of the 8 spots to qualify for the next set of qualifiers. Just to recap. Winter Arena: 8 qualifiers from NA, 7 in the bottom 16. Spring Arena 2: 8 qualifiers from NA, 7 in the bottom 16; only exception is doubtfully a real NA player. TSL4 Qualifers (as of Qualifier 8): 3 out of 16 spots; all others go to Europe. | ||
|
ragnorr
Denmark6097 Posts
On July 11 2012 03:20 Fionn wrote: Wonder why Polt isn't going. Maybe he realized that to get back into Code S he needs to focus in Korea for a while? The arena happens the same time that they are playing in the GSTL, most likely pulled out to focus on that | ||
|
Wroshe
Netherlands1051 Posts
On July 11 2012 04:15 ragnorr wrote: The arena happens the same time that they are playing in the GSTL, most likely pulled out to focus on that That makes a lot of sense to me. I do wonder though why RevivaL is attending when his team has an obviously important GSTL match. | ||
|
DidYuhim
Ukraine1905 Posts
| ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
| ||
|
RHMVNovus
United States738 Posts
On July 11 2012 03:48 Hot_Bid wrote: I wouldn't really use Violet as an example of NA doing well at MLG At face value that seems reasonable, but there was a long period about one year ago that HuK's success was held as evidence of the superiority of the Korean training style, a comparison that I think held an amount of validity. HuK had been training there for approximately as long as Violet's been in NA. HuK's situation before the move has a parallel to Violet's situation *after* the move. Those two situations are very close, though obviously not exact, parallels. Of course, Violet's success would be indicative of the strength of the NA training strategy, not of NA players. At that point, the question becomes what criterion we are using to determine what region a player belongs to. The SeleCT principle, in a way. Birth? 'I know it when I see it?' Self-identification? Violet's not a perfect, or even particularly good, example for NA success, but it's not cut-and-dry a terrible example. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, I should note. Just trying to make the logical underpinnings of the argument clear. | ||
|
ptrpb
Canada753 Posts
#swag #YOLO #nottheworstGSLfinals | ||
|
Chenz
Sweden1197 Posts
On July 11 2012 04:31 RHMVNovus wrote: At face value that seems reasonable, but there was a long period about one year ago that HuK's success was held as evidence of the superiority of the Korean training style, a comparison that I think held an amount of validity. HuK had been training there for approximately as long as Violet's been in NA. HuK's situation before the move has a parallel to Violet's situation *after* the move. Those two situations are very close, though obviously not exact, parallels. Of course, Violet's success would be indicative of the strength of the NA training strategy, not of NA players. At that point, the question becomes what criterion we are using to determine what region a player belongs to. The SeleCT principle, in a way. Birth? 'I know it when I see it?' Self-identification? Violet's not a perfect, or even particularly good, example for NA success, but it's not cut-and-dry a terrible example. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, I should note. Just trying to make the logical underpinnings of the argument clear. The thing is, even if Violet won the last Arena, that doesn't magically make NA have more than 6 player's that can compete with the 9 best EU/KR players. Edit: Also, in terms of regional qualifiers, I'd say using the region a player lives in to be the region he's representing. | ||
|
Wroshe
Netherlands1051 Posts
On July 11 2012 04:31 RHMVNovus wrote: At face value that seems reasonable, but there was a long period about one year ago that HuK's success was held as evidence of the superiority of the Korean training style, a comparison that I think held an amount of validity. HuK had been training there for approximately as long as Violet's been in NA. HuK's situation before the move has a parallel to Violet's situation *after* the move. Those two situations are very close, though obviously not exact, parallels. Of course, Violet's success would be indicative of the strength of the NA training strategy, not of NA players. At that point, the question becomes what criterion we are using to determine what region a player belongs to. The SeleCT principle, in a way. Birth? 'I know it when I see it?' Self-identification? Violet's not a perfect, or even particularly good, example for NA success, but it's not cut-and-dry a terrible example. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, I should note. Just trying to make the logical underpinnings of the argument clear. Just a quick check; hasn't HuK been living in Korea for about 18 months now whereas violet came to NA in October (after he got knocked out of GSL) and has already returned? As to how to label a player: I would rate them on where their country of residence is; with the added point that I feel someone "keeps their old label" for about 6 months before trading it in for their new one. For example I would rate TargA as a SEA player, SeleCT as an NA player but BeastyQT as European player and Violet as a Korean one. The only case in which I feel that my method is lackluster is with foreigners going to Korea. While they improve a lot from going there they don't get to rise to the top of that scene which makes it a lot harder to call them Korean. | ||
|
uikos
United States132 Posts
| ||
|
Wroshe
Netherlands1051 Posts
Even though the NA scene is doing pretty bad it doesn't help that their MLG Arena spots have been taken by people who only chose NA because the qualifier was so easy; for example SaSe at the Winter Arena and Killer and Mook at the Spring Arena 2. | ||
|
kiy0
Portugal593 Posts
On July 11 2012 02:53 Hot_Bid wrote: Wait it's my understanding that these guys were able to qualify for this Arena but just didn't get through the qualifiers right? The same thing happened with TSL qualifiers, what the public perceives as "best" might be true if they played 100 games, but the line dividing top tier and "next best" is very very thin. People tend to forget that StarCraft is a much more non-static field than traditional games, favorites win 70% of the time is good. In these super competitive fields upsets happen. DRG and MKP haven't qualified for TSL either despite playing multiple times in the qualifiers. It happens. Claiming a field of players who actually beat those guys is "weak" is just irresponsible. Yeah, they might have the same name recognition as the three you listed (debatable for Symbol) but to say the field is strong or weak based on the presence of just one or two players who have more name value is not fair at all to MLG or the players who went through a very difficult Korean qualification process. What do you want MLG to do, just constantly invite the same two guys? Honestly, that was a big complaint about their format before and they changed it. It's a product of the difficult Korean field. Be excited that there are so many good players able to challenge others. No offense Hot_Bid, but you of all people should know playing online and offline tournaments are two completely different ball games. Those players that have been mentioned by TommyP are some of the best LAN event tournament players in the world, and there's no getting around it. Throughout all season, they've either won the tournament or placed at least in the top 8. Not having them in MLGs (supposedly the premier american LAN event) is a hit no matter how you look at it. I'm not disregarding the fact that the so called "next best" can contend for a championship. viOLet won the last arena. It will happen from time to time. But recent history has shown us that having the top-tier players in a competition enhances its competitiveness and results greatly. | ||
|
testthewest
Germany274 Posts
On July 11 2012 04:31 RHMVNovus wrote: At that point, the question becomes what criterion we are using to determine what region a player belongs to. Ahh, that's an easy one! Anybody that isn't a direct descendant of Sitting Bull, isn't a true american! Rumors have it that Sitting Bull was never good at starcraft, that's why NA players don't manage to win more.  | ||
|
Tidus Mino
United Kingdom1108 Posts
| ||
|
Serek
United Kingdom459 Posts
| ||
|
Alryk
United States2718 Posts
To them not being seeded and it being "bad" or anything, it wouldn't make any sense. If MVP won GSL (He did), but hadn't participated this season, he would by no means deserve a seed back into Code S the season after that, based on his previous performance/success. (And MVP is more successful than either MKP or DRG if you go by overall consistency) Imo, I'm very excited for the new spring arena... Taeja fighting :D | ||
| ||
