EPTNo way a valid current top 100 doesn't include Coca.
Introducing the SC2 World Ranking - Page 9
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
figq
12519 Posts
No way a valid current top 100 doesn't include Coca. | ||
|
RyLai
United States477 Posts
On August 08 2012 17:07 figq wrote: Include team leagues. They do matter. DongRaeGu was first a team league celebrity. No way a valid current top 100 doesn't include Coca. No, they don't. I mean, they do, but it would be unfair to other players on the team who simply don't have the opportunity to play team league matches. DRG is ALWAYS going to play in clutch positions. But whoever always gets chosen to play the first position has the best opportunity to get free points. As a result, his rating is inflated. So they should be eliminated as they bring an unfair way to obtain points to players. DRG started off as a team league celebrity, but he's also now a individual league celebrity as well. The fact is, before he broke out, he doesn't really deserve to be in the top 10 of the individual league rankings with his performance. Sure, the skill was there, but he still needed work. Eventually he DID break out and exploded to the top. I feel that excluding team leagues from the rankings would not hurt him as he still would be considered a top player. It would be unfair to consider someone with no achievements in the individual league a top player when someone like Mvp has been crushing face since before DRG became a team league celebrity and until DRG became an individual league champion. If we do that, the rankings will mean nothing and will be worth as much as biased speculation on who the best player is. And CoCa doesn't have to be outside the top 100 if the current international tournament system was fixed. All of this ranking business is pretty irrelevant until that is fixed unless you want to split things up into Korean and International (non-Korean) ratings, which is not much different from the Korean and International ELO ratings that we currently have. | ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
On August 08 2012 17:21 RyLai wrote: 1. Their teams send them to play, because they are good enough to play, so they deserve the recognition for their skill.No, they don't. I mean, they do, but it would be unfair to other players on the team who simply don't have the opportunity to play team league matches 2. Same argument applies to all individual tournaments - they only include players who are sent there by their teams, players who are seeded or invited etc. | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On August 08 2012 17:26 figq wrote: 1. Their teams send them to play, because they are good enough to play, so they deserve the recognition for their skill. 2. Same argument applies to all individual tournaments - they only include players who are sent there by their teams, players who are seeded or invited etc. I think he means that in an all-kill format, if you are on a strong team, your team mates may win before you get a chance to be sent out. Or a medium strong player may not be sent out at all. Likewise in a not all-kill format, you may not have to play your game if you are towards the end and your team already won/lost. Thus you will get more or less opportunities to gain points depending on which team you are on, which is not fair when you try to compare individuals. | ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
On August 08 2012 17:30 Cascade wrote: The main conclusion from this is that making such ranking is futile, because there could be a top 10 world class player who doesn't make it into top 100.I think he means that in an all-kill format, if you are on a strong team, your team mates may win before you get a chance to be sent out. Or a medium strong player may not be sent out at all. Likewise in a not all-kill format, you may not have to play your game if you are towards the end and your team already won/lost. Thus you will get more or less opportunities to gain points depending on which team you are on, which is not fair when you try to compare individuals. | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On August 08 2012 17:33 figq wrote: The main conclusion from this is that making such ranking is futile, because there could be a top 10 world class player who doesn't make it into top 100. The conclusion from this is that if you were to do such a ranking, it would not include team leagues. The reason making this ranking is futile is completely unrelated to the team leagues. | ||
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51449 Posts
1st: 500 Is the only one i think is a bit out. I mean some of those 8 men invitee DH tournaments were stacked. 2011 ones, Valencia and Stockholm had MC IdrA WhiteRa HuK DRG BoxeR Naniwa Hero Thorzain. Deserves a bit more credibility from 500 points xD maybe 1000 | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
I don't think there is enough money in sc2 to have essentially every progamer (and their coaches) travelling around to every tier 1 and tier 0 event, even if you organise them in best possible order. Just imagine the number of people (hundreds?) and all the flight tickets around the world, and hotel bills. One can dream though.  | ||
|
RyLai
United States477 Posts
On August 08 2012 17:26 figq wrote: 1. Their teams send them to play, because they are good enough to play, so they deserve the recognition for their skill. 2. Same argument applies to all individual tournaments - they only include players who are sent there by their teams, players who are seeded or invited etc. 1) Their skill is recognized with the team league trophy. 2) That's a reason why things need to be changed in the pro scene before we even begin arguments on something as trivial as a ranking system. On August 08 2012 17:33 figq wrote: The main conclusion from this is that making such ranking is futile, because there could be a top 10 world class player who doesn't make it into top 100. Yes, but this can be fixed. Not easily. But it can be fixed. The problem is that there is probably nobody willing to do it. You would need well-performing, popular players like Mvp, Flash, MKP, DRG, and Taeja to take a stand and change the current system. We would also need more sponsors to send more players around the world... And that is much more difficult... But it could happen with time and hard work. BoxeR pushed eSports forward, but there are still changes that need to be done. And including team league results would not all of a sudden put a top 10 world class player into the top 100. And if things change and that happens to still be the case, it's the result of the player simply not being given the chance to perform. If he gets sent to a few events (which if he is THAT good, people WILL notice him and WILL sponsor him), then he WILL quickly rise up in the rankings. And under the current ELO system by TLPD, CoCa comes in at #12. I don't see what the problem is. DRG is #13. He's in the top 20. | ||
|
RyLai
United States477 Posts
On August 08 2012 17:39 Cascade wrote: And RyLai, no matter how awesome it would be to reorganise everything as you suggested, and even assuming that all the parts involved would manage to agree on something like that: I don't think there is enough money in sc2 to have essentially every progamer (and their coaches) travelling around to every tier 1 and tier 0 event, even if you organise them in best possible order. Just imagine the number of people (hundreds?) and all the flight tickets around the world, and hotel bills. One can dream though. Yes, money is the other big issue. But at the same time, international SC2 players are doing this all the time anyway. It only makes a big difference to Koreans. And I wouldn't fly the coaches.  Maybe the managers. We can't baby our players and give them EVERYTHING you know. ^^Obviously, we can't make large steps such as these over a matter of months, or even years. Decades, maybe. The most we can hope for is over the next few years is that we will be able to do something like this with 16-32 players at a time for Tier 1 and Tier S events (there, I think that name works ^^). Professional Tennis started off really small. There is no reason Starcraft can't do the same. The Open era started 40-50 years ago, and during that time tournaments got bigger and bigger. I mean, another solution would be to lengthen each series of events. For example, the US section could be held over the course of 1-2 years, then the European section for the next 1-2 years, then finally the Asian section for the final 1-2 years. It would cut down international travel costs. But the fact is, if we want to move forward, we need to reorganize professional SC2 as we know it. You can't really dump money into a failing system and hope it improves. You need to have a working system, then put money into that. Then the money is spent well, investors get what they want, growth occurs, and everyone is happy. Granted, I don't work with ATP tennis so I don't know how sponsorships and endorsements for tournaments work, but I do know that you get your company's name/logo on the back drop and constantly have your name pop up on the ads that go on during changeovers and breaks. ^^ I honestly don't believe any of this will happen (maybe because of my pessimistic nature), but I do honestly believe these ideas could work if the right people took an interest and tried to apply the concepts behind them. I mean, who WOULDN'T want to be able to objectively compare Koreans and Internationals? The only chances we get are few and far in between. At the very least, I just want professional SC2 to be united. I mean, KeSpa and GOM shouldn't have even had to fight when KeSpa tried to get into the SC2 scene. There should've already been a system where KeSpa could assimilate into. Granted, we did start small and tournaments were slowly popping up, but I think it's time for us to start organizing ourselves. I mean, I've sort of lost interest because things keep changing, new tournaments keep popping up, and because of all the new tournaments there's like a damned new tournament every day and I can't keep track of it all. I don't even bother watching most of the time anymore and just focus on the GSL whenever I happen to see it on the Upcoming Events list. I mean, even the old tournaments are throwing in new crap just to fill the time so they can have viewers. I mean, IPL fight club? NASL KotH? Surely, we can spend our time better than this can't we? But, then again, for the organizations involved, I can't really blame them. They need a consistent source of income. They need to pay their employees and their employees need to pay their bills... Perhaps SC2 boomed faster than it should've? I don't even know... Oh shit... I forgot to include TSL in my list of tournaments... That too should be considered a major event. But the thing I truly admire about the TSL is that it only comes once a year, around the same time each year, and that never changes. As a result, they can build hype, and everyone looks forward to it.And for the record, GOAT talks are silly, but hell, if everything got cleaned up and achievements got standardized (so to say), we could start those obnoxious GOAT talks. Obviously Mvp would be a pick for this sort of "Pre-Open Era" with 4 GSLs. But, when he got 2 of those when GSLs happened every month (1 of which being a weird International GSL tournament), 1 before the GSL during the Open Era of GSL, and 1 when the GSL became truly hard to win and happens like once ever 2-3 months? It becomes hard to make a call. >.> Especially if someone a decade or two later wins 5 GSLs when they only come up once a year. Of course, Mvp will be the greatest of OUR time (until the Queen buff hit). | ||
|
7Sevii
United States17 Posts
One issue that is particularly striking to me is the low point values given for WCS nationals. GOMtv is running WCS Korea instead of GSL code S. Objectively, WCS Korea should be ranked like any other WCS National tournament, but it is basically Code S in a double elimination format. I will think about this some more, leaving to watch WCS korea now. | ||
|
ThePlayer33
Australia2378 Posts
| ||
|
Skytt
Scotland333 Posts
On August 08 2012 18:12 RyLai wrote: I mean, another solution would be to lengthen each series of events. For example, the US section could be held over the course of 1-2 years, then the European section for the next 1-2 years, then finally the Asian section for the final 1-2 years. It would cut down international travel costs. But the fact is, if we want to move forward, we need to reorganize professional SC2 as we know it. I honestly don't believe any of this will happen (maybe because of my pessimistic nature), but I do honestly believe these ideas could work if the right people took an interest and tried to apply the concepts behind them. I mean, who WOULDN'T want to be able to objectively compare Koreans and Internationals? The only chances we get are few and far in between. At the very least, I just want professional SC2 to be united. I mean, KeSpa and GOM shouldn't have even had to fight when KeSpa tried to get into the SC2 scene. There should've already been a system where KeSpa could assimilate into. Granted, we did start small and tournaments were slowly popping up, but I think it's time for us to start organizing ourselves. I mean, I've sort of lost interest because things keep changing, new tournaments keep popping up, and because of all the new tournaments there's like a damned new tournament every day and I can't keep track of it all. I don't even bother watching most of the time anymore and just focus on the GSL whenever I happen to see it on the Upcoming Events list. I mean, even the old tournaments are throwing in new crap just to fill the time so they can have viewers. I mean, IPL fight club? NASL KotH? Surely, we can spend our time better than this can't we? But, then again, for the organizations involved, I can't really blame them. They need a consistent source of income. They need to pay their employees and their employees need to pay their bills... Perhaps SC2 boomed faster than it should've? I don't even know... I really, really dislike this idea, this would basically mean the SC2 tournament scene goes through a 6 year cycle which is longer than a lot than most players careers last just now. I guess you intended it as an exaggerated concept compared to your previous idea. I agree however that the big organisations in the scene need to come together to organise tournaments, formats, scheduling and such. KeSPA, GOM, MLG, IPL, NASL, IEM, Dreamhack and any other tournament that wants to run offline events with a significant prize pool ($5000 and above?) should have to agree upon dates, ensuring that rules are standardised so that no confusion arises at different tournaments (MLG Rules anyone?). They need to agree on a schedule so that no major tournaments are conflicting, this is good for teams, players, sponsors and for the events, who will be able to get the players they want and less division between the tournaments (It's pretty tiring getting up at 10ish for a european tournament, then staying up til 5am to watch MLG, then potentially korean leagues after that )I don't have so much of an issue with online fluff tournaments, most are casted from replays anyway which are easier for the players to arrange. I feel MLG took a great initiative with restructuring their league system, especially with the funding of players to travel to the Arenas. If GOM and Kespa lay down the foundations of the GSL/OSL that last 3 months, with a months gap in between. This will allow non-Korean tournaments to choose dates better suited to those competing in the Leagues to be able to fly out without comprimising their performance in the leagues. What you also have to consider is that the Proleague will most likely be restructured to incorporate the ESF teams, which will probably be more important to Korean teams than flying players to foreign tournaments. We could see B-teamers being given the opporunity to gain much needed experiance at MLGs and IPLs etc. | ||
|
Micket
United Kingdom2163 Posts
I think the lack of foreigners in GSL makes up for lack of Koreans in NASL so its more or less fair. | ||
|
sekritzzz
1515 Posts
On August 08 2012 21:09 Micket wrote: I think we should do it similar to Tennis, where we have 'majors' which are all ranked the same, and then other smaller events, with the largest of these smaller events being half the points score of a major. I think majors are GSL, Dreamhack, MLG, IPL, IEM finals and NASL. I think the lack of foreigners in GSL makes up for lack of Koreans in NASL so its more or less fair. except GSL is about 10 times as hard as any of the other tournaments mentioned with it so it'd be kind of unfair to put them together. Its nothing like tennis tbh. | ||
|
Skytt
Scotland333 Posts
On August 08 2012 21:32 sekritzzz wrote: except GSL is about 10 times as hard as any of the other tournaments mentioned with it so it'd be kind of unfair to put them together. Its nothing like tennis tbh. And the lack of koreans in the NASL is because they don't like the organisation | ||
|
vAtAZz
France250 Posts
| ||
|
RyLai
United States477 Posts
On August 08 2012 21:05 Skytt wrote: I really, really dislike this idea, this would basically mean the SC2 tournament scene goes through a 6 year cycle which is longer than a lot than most players careers last just now. I guess you intended it as an exaggerated concept compared to your previous idea. I agree however that the big organisations in the scene need to come together to organise tournaments, formats, scheduling and such. KeSPA, GOM, MLG, IPL, NASL, IEM, Dreamhack and any other tournament that wants to run offline events with a significant prize pool ($5000 and above?) should have to agree upon dates, ensuring that rules are standardised so that no confusion arises at different tournaments (MLG Rules anyone?). They need to agree on a schedule so that no major tournaments are conflicting, this is good for teams, players, sponsors and for the events, who will be able to get the players they want and less division between the tournaments (It's pretty tiring getting up at 10ish for a european tournament, then staying up til 5am to watch MLG, then potentially korean leagues after that )I don't have so much of an issue with online fluff tournaments, most are casted from replays anyway which are easier for the players to arrange. I feel MLG took a great initiative with restructuring their league system, especially with the funding of players to travel to the Arenas. If GOM and Kespa lay down the foundations of the GSL/OSL that last 3 months, with a months gap in between. This will allow non-Korean tournaments to choose dates better suited to those competing in the Leagues to be able to fly out without comprimising their performance in the leagues. What you also have to consider is that the Proleague will most likely be restructured to incorporate the ESF teams, which will probably be more important to Korean teams than flying players to foreign tournaments. We could see B-teamers being given the opporunity to gain much needed experiance at MLGs and IPLs etc. The long SC2 season was a possible solution to the money issue due to flight costs. If we reduce the amount of flights required, then we can reduce the costs to the players and teams, making a truly international SC2 World Tour schedule more viable. Sadly, I think that a 3-6 year season is bad as well... If any changes were to be made to the season, I'd think shortening it would be better, but that would make travel costs a bit more hectic, make traveling more exhausting, and completely squeeze out anything smaller than MLGs and IEMs (meaning only MLG, IEM, GSL, NASL, TSL, and IPL; I feel like I'm missing some major tournaments again). It's nice that MLG will pay for travel, but I doubt GOM will do the same. These are the guys who boycotted the NASL for both travel and hotel expenses. GOM however DOES have the GOM house, so living is taken care of. And I double the NASL will do it either since they wouldn't put out in order to keep the Koreans (probably more that they couldn't really afford it). And I feel that spamming major tournaments sort of lessens the prestige of winning it. The Olympics are rather huge because you only get one chance every 4 years to win an Olympic gold in any event. The majors in tennis are huge because there are only 4 every year as opposed to ~10 Master's Series and like 15-20 ATP Tour events. I feel like there should be fewer of the larger tournaments, since these are what players should really be practicing and playing for, and the uncountable tournaments should be the lower level tournaments where players earn points, money, and set themselves up mentally for the major tournaments. But again, the international tournament calender can be in any format so long as the players and teams agree to it and as a result every team sends their players to a majority of the events. What we should be really aiming for is to send the best of the world (Koreans AND Internationals) to a few tournaments every year, and for the rest of the year have them compete around the world as they see fit (also aiming to try and minimize fatigue from air travel). At the very least we should be aiming a few times a year to have everyone compete in one tournament so that we can see how everyone stacks up against one another and have an amazing tournament. I mean, when was the last time when we had something as crazy as the GSL Super Tournament? EVERYONE in Korea was in on it, and it was AMAZING to see everyone go at it. Sure, it ended in sort of a blowout, but that will happen sometimes. At this point, the only place to watch the BEST SC2 is at the GSL (or the Korean WCS selection tournament). And that's kind of unfortunate. The NASL used to be sick when the Koreans participated (even without the absolute top players of that time). I mean, we say that SC2 has become international, but there's still the Korean TLPD and the International TLPD. As for what should be majors, only the GSL, NASL, and IPL have prize pools of 100k or higher (though OSL comes close at 90k). After that comes ESWC, Blizzcon, Dreamhack Winter, Blizzard Cup, IEM World Championship, and MLG Championships with over 50k in prize money. Then there's everything else, that's 20k to about 30k. Homestory Cup, ASUS ROG, IEM, MLG Arena, Dreamhack (aside from Winter), an TSL. Then we have a bunch of random online stuff. I feel like ALL of the top players should attend the GSL, NASL, IPL, and OSL. After that, they can attend the other events. However, due to qualifying requirements, it'd probably be best to stick to one tournament chain (IEM or MLG), then supplement that with Dreamhack, Homestory Cup, or ASUS ROG. I feel that players should be able to choose their schedules outside of majors (which should be mandatory). Tennis forces players to play a minimum number of events, which is kind of sad. On August 08 2012 21:09 Micket wrote: I think we should do it similar to Tennis, where we have 'majors' which are all ranked the same, and then other smaller events, with the largest of these smaller events being half the points score of a major. I think majors are GSL, Dreamhack, MLG, IPL, IEM finals and NASL. I think the lack of foreigners in GSL makes up for lack of Koreans in NASL so its more or less fair. We can't do it like tennis until we standardize the schedule and make it so that everyone has a near equal opportunity to play every tournament. As it is, the Koreans are sitting in Korea playing the GSL and nothing else. The lack of foreigners in the GSL is a result of the fact that it's not really worth the time and effort for most people to even attempt qualifying. This results in, as many have said before, the GSL being the most difficult tournament to win because it's the ONLY tournament that the top Koreans are really concerned about, raising its difficulty level and lowering the difficulty of others. If you want to debate that, look at how the top players of the international scene only go mid-way through the GSL. HuK, Taeja, HerO, PuMa - these are players who more often than not are basically owning the international scene and have all got wrecked in Korea. Yes, they did post up Ro8 results, which are damn good, but we haven't had a semifinal appearance since Jinro. Stephano looked like AMAZING last year, and looked ordinary against the Koreans in the Blizzard Cup. If we can equalize the player base in every "major" tournament, then we can consider all "majors" to be equal, but as it is, foreigner events are much easier than the GSL, so the GSL deserves a lot more weight in any form of ranking system. | ||
|
catplanetcatplanet
3829 Posts
I agree with a lot of people here that you need to split it into KR and non-KR. Right now this is like opterown's World Champion thing, which is just for fun. | ||
CosmicSpiral
United States15275 Posts
On August 08 2012 14:23 Cascade wrote: Hmm, I agree with you in general, that the point system has some big flaws and that it probably will not get used widely. But I think you are overdoing it a bit when it comes to shoot him down. He has made a fair try to convert the tennis point system to starcraft, I think that deserves more than this kind of replies.Of course a completely new system for sc2, that perfectly addresses every little detail you can think of would be really sweet, but it doesn't seem to be that easy to design. Which is why we have many different rankings in parallel, like the ELO from TLPD, ladder rankings, sc2earnings, power rankings etc. Unless you have some great idea to solve this problem, I don't feel it is fair to be too aggressive to people that works on new ways to approach the problem. For the list, you are just doing an as long list as possible for the sake of it... Do you for example really need to take teh argument "you need to decide how many, if any, points to give to all the smaller events." and plit it up into the first four points? Why would you treat a close loss any different? Why would you treat an injured player any different? Why would you treat different matchup differently (do you treat left handed players differently in tennis?)? Anyway, I just feel that you add things to the list to make the list long rather than actually trying to say something.But again, I agree with your general standpoint, and imo, the one big insurmountable problem is your third last point (that you list together with all the random ones...). ie that all the best players don't play in all the top tournaments. Which is the one reason that this point system isn't really going to work that well. The second largest issue is that people would have to agree on how to distribute the points among the tournaments, but I think that could be done decently if it were not for the main problem. (Which would be your point 1 to 4 more or less. )The rest of the details you bring up I think could be sorted out, or ignored. If the main problem was not there. edit: oops, do --> don't >_> If I thought Metalteeth was stupid I would simply dry witty insults like those stuck-up people on old British comedies. He has put in a lot of work into this project; he should be proud that he has created a working model in the first place. But if he is serious about creating an accurate model then there are a lot of obvious issues he has to address. The first and most important one is that he is trying to apply the ATP point system to a different scene. Several people before me have already mentioned why this will not work. If this is just for fun then it doesn't matter where the results agree with public perception. That is why I suggested that he should start from nothing and build up. Many of the rankings you mentioned have certain problems that make them unreliable and they all stem from their origins. Elo was created for chess, specifically for the way the chess scene worked; when applied to SC2 it is not nearly as reliable, Hell it does not even work smoothly in competitive chess anymore (engine abuse is pretty common when Elo actually matters). Statements 1-5 are a convoluted way of questioning the entire scope of the system. The intuitive way of judging skill is a holistic, coherent process. You look at the player's achievements. You learn what tournaments he has played, what tournaments he has not played, and what tournaments he cannot play. You look at periods of strength and weakness, how often they occur, and attempt to figure out patterns. You watch his games, you learn his approach, you make judgments on the strength of his playstyle. You look at the competition he faced along the way; you judge the competition by the same standards as mentioned. Obviously there is no solid foundation to start off from, it's all kind of circular. But the point is you look at everything to make a proper judgment. Team leagues, qualifiers, weeklies and monthlies all provide valuable information. They are not necessarily prestigious or considered important, but that is irrelevant. A proper system that attempts to statistically analyze skill uses all available information at its disposal. So if a system only uses major and premier tournaments then it already missing crucial data, and so it cannot be taken seriously. Statements 6-10 question the lack of consideration towards factors within the tournament. Tournament placings are a combination of skill and luck. A bad bracket can be the difference between 1st place and 4th place. Avoiding your weakest matchup can result in a tournament win (hello Jjakji!). Barely losing a series because of one mistake is important, especially when the loser was a heavy underdog; this is one reason why Elo can be somewhat accurate. I think it's obvious that if a certain player loses a match because he has to throw up from food poisoning (MLG Providence), his loss should hurt his ranking less than if he lost under normal circumstances. However if his condition is chronic (Mvp or sC) then it is accepted as an unfortunate part of his "skill set", so to speak. Statements 11-13 are just general problems. Everyone cannot attend the same tournament every single time. No system can perfectly analyze every little thing. No system can perfectly rank skill within a player pool. But any well-designed system can overcome 11 as well as anticipate when situations 12 and 13 will occur. I don't mind Elo that much since I know when it will skew a player's ranking and I can just adjust it in my own head. I don't like the ATP system so I think you can guess my stance on that. There must be some way to rank individual major/premier tournaments through a combination of general skill level and prestige. Prestige alone means nothing but how it affects a player's mindset (and subsequently his performance) cannot be denied. Well the main problem will always be there. I don't see a way around it. | ||
| ||
