|
Bisutopia19239 Posts
|
On June 05 2013 12:19 BoxingKangaroo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2013 12:14 LighT. wrote:On June 05 2013 12:09 Splynn wrote:On June 05 2013 11:44 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 11:41 GolemMadness wrote:On June 05 2013 11:40 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 11:37 GolemMadness wrote:On June 05 2013 11:32 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 11:29 GolemMadness wrote:On June 05 2013 11:03 takingbackoj wrote:
[quote]
Yeah it's kind of puzzling how that was decided. I could see if Soulkey beat Innovation and then didn't go on to win WCS KR, then I might be able to see an argument. But since that was the finals, I am not sure how you can say the guy that beat Innovation and won the tourney is not better than Innovation. Strange.
I also agree with those puzzled about Hero being #10. I like the guy but he's not top 10. Seems like he got the Liquid bump.
Any who, as an NFL fan I love Power Rankings as much as I loathe Power Rankings. They never seem to make sense to anyone other than the person who makes them but its fun to insult the rankers logic. Winning a series doesn't automatically make you the better player, regardless of how important that series is. That is flawed logic. Flawed logic? It's the only sound logic there is. Everything else is based on opinion. Playing someone heads up is the best way to determine whos better. No, it isn't. What if they played another series afterwards and Innovation won? Now are they suddenly equal? A ton of different factors go into who wins a series. Skill, nerves, luck, race match up, help with preparation, etc. Saying that one player is just automatically better because he won a single deciding game is just ridiculous. No they wouldn't be equal. Innovation would be better because he didn't lose to him. Thats how sports work. If the Heat win the finals it would be a rough road to hoe to claim the Spurs were better. So what you're saying is that when Soulkey wins a series, he's the better player, but then if they play another series afterwards and Innovation wins, suddenly he's the better player? Do you not realise that this logic makes zero sense? Am I in an alternate world or something. That sounds incredibly logical to me. If x beats y then x is better. If y beats x then y is better. Am I missing something here? Yea you are missing something here. Let's say that there are two players playing against each other, a zerg and a terran (we'll call them Zerg and Terran). Zerg wins, and barely. According to you, that makes him better. But what if Zerg is really bad at zvp and zvz, and Terran is really good in all his other matchups? What if styles are just weird in this matchup, and Zerg can beat Terran, but has a really poor record otherwise? Say that Zerg, outside of this matchup, has a 40% win ratio, and Terran has a 75% win ratio? The better player is obviously Terran here, even if he did just lose to Zerg. A heads up game doesn't decide who the better player is. Introduce Protoss. He beats Zerg. But Terran beats him! Now who's the best player out of the three? Obviously Protoss! He beat Zerg, who was the better player beforehand. Which means that Terran is now the best player, because he beat Protoss! And off we go into Wonderland. It can't work that way. The better example would be. Let's say Soulkey and Innovation played in the SPL. And then the following day in the GSL. So let's say Soulkey beat Innovation in the Ace Match. According to takingbackoj's logic, Soulkey is the better player. Then the following day, Innovation beat Soulkey in the GSL. In a span of a day, now according to takingbackoj's logic, Innovation is the better player. See how flawed it is? When you take into consideration who's the "Better" player, you have to take into consideration variance, sample size and how they fair against the rest of the competition. As for the NBA comparison...hmm the better example would be.. Charlotte Bobcats vs Miami Heat in a home/home series. Miami demolishes Charlotte @ Miami. So Miami is the better team. The next night, Charlotte beats Mami. So now Charlotte is all of a sudden the better of the two? Flawed analogy. The winner of the championship game of any competition (NBA, NFL, etc.) is generally considered the best team of that season. The 'best' competition in SC2 currently is GSL and Soulkey just won it.
I'm not sure about it being flawed. If you're following the conversation, there's more to it than that.
As for your response. Yes and no. In the NBA the winning team has a lot of luck (injuries, match ups, outliers) that come into play in order to take the final series. When the Miami Heat did NOT win the championship two years ago with Lebron/Bosh/Wade, does it clearly LA Lakers were better? I dont know about that. A lot of people would argue it.
Going into the offseason and into the new season as well. Unless a team is TRULY dominant ala the Laker's 16-1 campaign + reign, The Boston Celtics historical run with Russell, its more accurate to group teams in tiers because the elite teams are on similar levels.
|
Bisutopia19239 Posts
On June 05 2013 12:25 Shellshock1122 wrote:IrOn? please... WC3 Legend Grubby owned him
Grubby almost edged in CBNC however IrOn won 2 gsl's with oGs, and we only refer to IrOn in his prime.
|
I agree with this list, but things could change a lot depending on what happens this weekend.
|
On June 05 2013 12:10 snakeeyez wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2013 12:06 Popkiller wrote:
Innovation's road to the GSL finals was harder, his Proleague stats are better, he's better.
Soulkey was just better that one night and edged out a win in a best of seven that made neither player look like a champion.
Also consider that SK's semi-final match was another seven game series full of bad play...
Honestly it all comes down to this weekend, though. If Soulkey wins again I'll give more credit.
Bingo. Let me ask this though if immvp was the best not that long ago what evidence do we have that he is now inferior in skill to this current list? He just won EU wcs so that is some evidence he is still top player
Like... Eight months ago? And then at the end of WoL went 1-18 in Korea? Beating foreigners is not enough.
|
On June 05 2013 12:27 takingbackoj wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2013 12:14 LighT. wrote:On June 05 2013 12:09 Splynn wrote:On June 05 2013 11:44 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 11:41 GolemMadness wrote:On June 05 2013 11:40 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 11:37 GolemMadness wrote:On June 05 2013 11:32 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 11:29 GolemMadness wrote:On June 05 2013 11:03 takingbackoj wrote:
[quote]
Yeah it's kind of puzzling how that was decided. I could see if Soulkey beat Innovation and then didn't go on to win WCS KR, then I might be able to see an argument. But since that was the finals, I am not sure how you can say the guy that beat Innovation and won the tourney is not better than Innovation. Strange.
I also agree with those puzzled about Hero being #10. I like the guy but he's not top 10. Seems like he got the Liquid bump.
Any who, as an NFL fan I love Power Rankings as much as I loathe Power Rankings. They never seem to make sense to anyone other than the person who makes them but its fun to insult the rankers logic. Winning a series doesn't automatically make you the better player, regardless of how important that series is. That is flawed logic. Flawed logic? It's the only sound logic there is. Everything else is based on opinion. Playing someone heads up is the best way to determine whos better. No, it isn't. What if they played another series afterwards and Innovation won? Now are they suddenly equal? A ton of different factors go into who wins a series. Skill, nerves, luck, race match up, help with preparation, etc. Saying that one player is just automatically better because he won a single deciding game is just ridiculous. No they wouldn't be equal. Innovation would be better because he didn't lose to him. Thats how sports work. If the Heat win the finals it would be a rough road to hoe to claim the Spurs were better. So what you're saying is that when Soulkey wins a series, he's the better player, but then if they play another series afterwards and Innovation wins, suddenly he's the better player? Do you not realise that this logic makes zero sense? Am I in an alternate world or something. That sounds incredibly logical to me. If x beats y then x is better. If y beats x then y is better. Am I missing something here? Yea you are missing something here. Let's say that there are two players playing against each other, a zerg and a terran (we'll call them Zerg and Terran). Zerg wins, and barely. According to you, that makes him better. But what if Zerg is really bad at zvp and zvz, and Terran is really good in all his other matchups? What if styles are just weird in this matchup, and Zerg can beat Terran, but has a really poor record otherwise? Say that Zerg, outside of this matchup, has a 40% win ratio, and Terran has a 75% win ratio? The better player is obviously Terran here, even if he did just lose to Zerg. A heads up game doesn't decide who the better player is. Introduce Protoss. He beats Zerg. But Terran beats him! Now who's the best player out of the three? Obviously Protoss! He beat Zerg, who was the better player beforehand. Which means that Terran is now the best player, because he beat Protoss! And off we go into Wonderland. It can't work that way. The better example would be. Let's say Soulkey and Innovation played in the SPL. And then the following day in the GSL. So let's say Soulkey beat Innovation in the Ace Match. According to takingbackoj's logic, Soulkey is the better player. Then the following day, Innovation beat Soulkey in the GSL. In a span of a day, now according to takingbackoj's logic, Innovation is the better player. See how flawed it is? When you take into consideration who's the "Better" player, you have to take into consideration variance, sample size and how they fair against the rest of the competition. As for the NBA comparison...hmm the better example would be.. Charlotte Bobcats vs Miami Heat in a home/home series. Miami demolishes Charlotte @ Miami. So Miami is the better team. The next night, Charlotte beats Mami. So now Charlotte is all of a sudden the better of the two? Well this is my basic thought process here. When ranking players or teams or whatever, you go with the evidence presented. If someone beats someone else in a competition, I will weigh that heavier than what those two opponents did elsewhere particularly if its a best of 7 series and particularly if the winner also won the finals or its equivalent. Im not just looking at that one series though. Im looking at the fact that Soulkey beat other top opponents on the way. Im looking at how Soulkey commonly competes and often times beats other top tier players as well. In my opinion, there is no better litmus test than heads up. That is the closest thing their is to deciding whos better. Is it full proof? No but is it better than assessing their other matches and pretty much guessing which one has beat better players. To put it more plainly, if someone tells me David beat Jeff at SC2 but lost to Eric, im going to assume Eric is better than David regardless of Jeffs talent. When asking yourself who is better in any competition aren't you really asking who would win between the two? Soulkey won in a best of 7. That might not tell the whole story but that is pretty damning evidence to support Soulkey being better and for me to believe otherwise, I would have to see equally damning evidence to dispute it.
On 5-4 record of Innovation and Soulkey, can you really boldly state and have the majority agree with you that Soulkey is clearly the better of the two, especially when there's a 1 win difference?
The whole x beat y but lose to z, so z > y is flawed.
Flash has a better head to head vs Innovation AND Soulkey.
Life has the better head to head vs Flash.
Innovation has the better head to head vs Life.
And Soulkey has the better head to head vs Innovation.
partinG has the better head to head vs Flash
According tho this..it would be..
Parting > Flash > Soulkey > Innovation > Life > Flash...you end up back in square 1
hmm...
There is no clear "x beat y but lost to z, so z > y" going on here. It's more tier based.
|
No Flash?
Corrupt players in top 10?
What sort of top 10 is this!?
|
On June 05 2013 09:39 Redrot wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2013 09:16 Arisen wrote:
i disagree with soulkey vs innovation. People dick ride innovation way to hard. I think soulkey justified himself as a really great player under pressure and innovation proved that he needs to work on that part of his game. Innovation might have looked more dominant in the games he won, but I think soulkey proved to be the better all around player ^This. This this this. Innovation may be able to win in an all out macro game most of the time, but that doesn't by any means mean that he is a better player. I think that what is even more impressive was the comeback, no ordinary player, and not Innovation, would be able to have held his cool. In the previous GSL matches with Innovation, he never was actually tested by being down in a series, or by having early pressure applied to the extend Soulkey did. If Innovation were to work on reacting to early pressure, then perhaps I would understand putting him as #1. rOrO's games were mostly macro oriented, and the games Innovation lost to Soulkey were early pressure. Also as a zerg player, I feel like zerg is still a bit underpowered. Yes, I know that a zerg just won GSL again, but the overall tournament winrates state otherwise. Also, I would like to see matches between Losira/Kangho, HerO, and Mvp, because that is an extremely close call imo. Normally I would say HerO would lose, but he has been doing great recently.
Dear god, gtfo.
Zerg underpowered. Hahaha.
|
|
|
wait, so life beat mvp on past wins, but...but mvp has more, and then if we are talking about recent results...mvp has more am i missing something?
|
I am a massive Soulkey fanboy and I find the write-up for him at #2 absolutely terrible. I don't care where he's ranked in this power ranking to be honest, it doesn't mean anything and he won the title that actual matters. However, it seems the writer of this power ranking didn't follow the BW scene at all because otherwise he would have known that Soulkey was one of the best proleague players in the world in both Bw and the Bw/Sc2 league, was just starting to get deep in individual tournaments, and was really impressing people with some innovative ZvT. He was one of the best Zergs from Kespa in the switch to WoL, and he's proven (in my fanboy eyes anyways) to be the best Kespa Zerg (if not Zerg period) in HotS. Trying to discredit this guy and compare him to jjakji (who hadn't been around dominating for two years before his title like Soulkey has been), Sniper, and the other guy shows a lack of knowledge and seems sort of silly.
But it doesn't really matter, no one can stop the neo G. Soulkey train!!! CHOO CHOO.
|
On June 05 2013 12:33 GolemMadness wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2013 12:10 snakeeyez wrote:On June 05 2013 12:06 Popkiller wrote:
Innovation's road to the GSL finals was harder, his Proleague stats are better, he's better.
Soulkey was just better that one night and edged out a win in a best of seven that made neither player look like a champion.
Also consider that SK's semi-final match was another seven game series full of bad play...
Honestly it all comes down to this weekend, though. If Soulkey wins again I'll give more credit.
Bingo. Let me ask this though if immvp was the best not that long ago what evidence do we have that he is now inferior in skill to this current list? He just won EU wcs so that is some evidence he is still top player Like... Eight months ago? And then at the end of WoL went 1-18 in Korea? Beating foreigners is not enough.
This and the fact that you looked at his play and can you honestly state that he's looked as brilliant as some of the performances by the top crop of players? No doubt Mvp is still a great player but I'm not sure you can put him in the same tier as the other top players. Mvp has done nothing for LG-IM in GST, he was in Code B when he transferred to europe and he was completely outclassed when he was taken out of Code S. There's some strong arguments suggesting this claim..
|
Flash is 5-3 against Innovation, btw.
In HotS only.
|
What?
Soulkey fumbled to a championship?
Did I seriously just heard this?
And comparing him to Jiakji,Seed.
lol.
SK has been consistently performing well in GSL pre-HotS( 2 times Ro8) and during HotS.
If you look at his track record, SK has been steadily improving.
0-3 to 4-3 against best RTS player of all-time.
Yup, He clearly fumbled his way to a championship.
The amount of bias is just meh.
|
TeamLiquid is not responsible for rage or rage related injuries suffered from reading the Power Rank.
|
On June 05 2013 12:35 LighT. wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2013 12:27 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 12:14 LighT. wrote:On June 05 2013 12:09 Splynn wrote:On June 05 2013 11:44 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 11:41 GolemMadness wrote:On June 05 2013 11:40 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 11:37 GolemMadness wrote:On June 05 2013 11:32 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 11:29 GolemMadness wrote:
[quote]
Winning a series doesn't automatically make you the better player, regardless of how important that series is. That is flawed logic. Flawed logic? It's the only sound logic there is. Everything else is based on opinion. Playing someone heads up is the best way to determine whos better. No, it isn't. What if they played another series afterwards and Innovation won? Now are they suddenly equal? A ton of different factors go into who wins a series. Skill, nerves, luck, race match up, help with preparation, etc. Saying that one player is just automatically better because he won a single deciding game is just ridiculous. No they wouldn't be equal. Innovation would be better because he didn't lose to him. Thats how sports work. If the Heat win the finals it would be a rough road to hoe to claim the Spurs were better. So what you're saying is that when Soulkey wins a series, he's the better player, but then if they play another series afterwards and Innovation wins, suddenly he's the better player? Do you not realise that this logic makes zero sense? Am I in an alternate world or something. That sounds incredibly logical to me. If x beats y then x is better. If y beats x then y is better. Am I missing something here? Yea you are missing something here. Let's say that there are two players playing against each other, a zerg and a terran (we'll call them Zerg and Terran). Zerg wins, and barely. According to you, that makes him better. But what if Zerg is really bad at zvp and zvz, and Terran is really good in all his other matchups? What if styles are just weird in this matchup, and Zerg can beat Terran, but has a really poor record otherwise? Say that Zerg, outside of this matchup, has a 40% win ratio, and Terran has a 75% win ratio? The better player is obviously Terran here, even if he did just lose to Zerg. A heads up game doesn't decide who the better player is. Introduce Protoss. He beats Zerg. But Terran beats him! Now who's the best player out of the three? Obviously Protoss! He beat Zerg, who was the better player beforehand. Which means that Terran is now the best player, because he beat Protoss! And off we go into Wonderland. It can't work that way. The better example would be. Let's say Soulkey and Innovation played in the SPL. And then the following day in the GSL. So let's say Soulkey beat Innovation in the Ace Match. According to takingbackoj's logic, Soulkey is the better player. Then the following day, Innovation beat Soulkey in the GSL. In a span of a day, now according to takingbackoj's logic, Innovation is the better player. See how flawed it is? When you take into consideration who's the "Better" player, you have to take into consideration variance, sample size and how they fair against the rest of the competition. As for the NBA comparison...hmm the better example would be.. Charlotte Bobcats vs Miami Heat in a home/home series. Miami demolishes Charlotte @ Miami. So Miami is the better team. The next night, Charlotte beats Mami. So now Charlotte is all of a sudden the better of the two? Well this is my basic thought process here. When ranking players or teams or whatever, you go with the evidence presented. If someone beats someone else in a competition, I will weigh that heavier than what those two opponents did elsewhere particularly if its a best of 7 series and particularly if the winner also won the finals or its equivalent. Im not just looking at that one series though. Im looking at the fact that Soulkey beat other top opponents on the way. Im looking at how Soulkey commonly competes and often times beats other top tier players as well. In my opinion, there is no better litmus test than heads up. That is the closest thing their is to deciding whos better. Is it full proof? No but is it better than assessing their other matches and pretty much guessing which one has beat better players. To put it more plainly, if someone tells me David beat Jeff at SC2 but lost to Eric, im going to assume Eric is better than David regardless of Jeffs talent. When asking yourself who is better in any competition aren't you really asking who would win between the two? Soulkey won in a best of 7. That might not tell the whole story but that is pretty damning evidence to support Soulkey being better and for me to believe otherwise, I would have to see equally damning evidence to dispute it. On 5-4 record of Innovation and Soulkey, can you really boldly state and have the majority agree with you that Soulkey is clearly the better of the two, especially when there's a 1 win difference? The whole x beat y but lose to z, so z > y is flawed. Flash has a better head to head vs Innovation AND Soulkey. Life has the better head to head vs Flash. Innovation has the better head to head vs Life. And Soulkey has the better head to head vs Innovation. partinG has the better head to head vs Flash According tho this..it would be.. Parting > Flash > Soulkey > Innovation > Life > Flash...you end up back in square 1 hmm... There is no clear "x beat y but lost to z, so z > y" going on here. It's more tier based.
Well like I said, what argument for Innovation being better should outweigh his loss to Soulkey? Shouldn't heads up and major tournament wins be the most important values when judging which player is better than another? Soulkey has him on both in HotS. Is he definitely better than Innovation? No, can't ever be 100% positive. But if you wanted to go that route then you can't be 100% sure any player is better than any other player really.
Soulkey has the major tournament win, he beat Innovation heads up in a best of 7 on the way. Innovation has a better pro league record and won more maps on his way to losing WCS KR, the same WCS KR that Soulkey won. I mean weighing those facts, I think Soulkey has earned the top spot.
|
United States8476 Posts
On June 05 2013 12:46 Witten wrote:
I am a massive Soulkey fanboy and I find the write-up for him at #2 absolutely terrible. I don't care where he's ranked in this power ranking to be honest, it doesn't mean anything and he won the title that actual matters. However, it seems the writer of this power ranking didn't follow the BW scene at all because otherwise he would have known that Soulkey was one of the best proleague players in the world in both Bw and the Bw/Sc2 league, was just starting to get deep in individual tournaments, and was really impressing people with some innovative ZvT. He was one of the best Zergs from Kespa in the switch to WoL, and he's proven (in my fanboy eyes anyways) to be the best Kespa Zerg (if not Zerg period) in HotS. Trying to discredit this guy and compare him to jjakji (who hadn't been around dominating for two years before his title like Soulkey has been), Sniper, and the other guy shows a lack of knowledge and seems sort of silly.
But it doesn't really matter, no one can stop the neo G. Soulkey train!!! CHOO CHOO.
I followed the BW scene about as much as you could follow it. I'm actually of the opinion that Soulkey is the real deal. It was never said that he was on the same level as jjakji, but rather that is ambiguous in which category he belongs in. This is mainly to justify the 2nd place placement.
|
On June 05 2013 12:51 FakeDeath wrote:
What?
Soulkey fumbled to a championship?
Did I seriously just heard this?
And comparing him to Jiakji,Seed.
lol.
SK has been consistently performing well in GSL pre-HotS( 2 times Ro8) and during HotS.
If you look at his track record, SK has been steadily improving.
0-3 to 4-3 against best RTS player of all-time.
Yup, He clearly fumbled his way to a championship.
The amount of bias is just meh.
I'm a Soulkey fan but I do feel he sort of fumbled into the finals when he should have went into it cleanly. Both times against Parting and sOs he had them against the ropes and made some stupid mistakes that allowed them to tie up the series. Watching those games live made me question his ability somewhat. These games make me question whether he is really championship material. He proved himself in the finals but I am not too sure he could have done it against someone who was more experienced than Innovation. I hope he can win at the WCS Finals in a more convincing fashion. That will purge any doubts anyone has of him.
Can't tell if you're serious about best RTS player of all-time.. best RTS player of all-time does not lose from a 3-0 lead in a bo7 when he is in his prime.
|
glad to see the power rank return 
|
On June 05 2013 12:55 takingbackoj wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2013 12:35 LighT. wrote:On June 05 2013 12:27 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 12:14 LighT. wrote:On June 05 2013 12:09 Splynn wrote:On June 05 2013 11:44 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 11:41 GolemMadness wrote:On June 05 2013 11:40 takingbackoj wrote:On June 05 2013 11:37 GolemMadness wrote:On June 05 2013 11:32 takingbackoj wrote:
[quote]
Flawed logic? It's the only sound logic there is. Everything else is based on opinion. Playing someone heads up is the best way to determine whos better. No, it isn't. What if they played another series afterwards and Innovation won? Now are they suddenly equal? A ton of different factors go into who wins a series. Skill, nerves, luck, race match up, help with preparation, etc. Saying that one player is just automatically better because he won a single deciding game is just ridiculous. No they wouldn't be equal. Innovation would be better because he didn't lose to him. Thats how sports work. If the Heat win the finals it would be a rough road to hoe to claim the Spurs were better. So what you're saying is that when Soulkey wins a series, he's the better player, but then if they play another series afterwards and Innovation wins, suddenly he's the better player? Do you not realise that this logic makes zero sense? Am I in an alternate world or something. That sounds incredibly logical to me. If x beats y then x is better. If y beats x then y is better. Am I missing something here? Yea you are missing something here. Let's say that there are two players playing against each other, a zerg and a terran (we'll call them Zerg and Terran). Zerg wins, and barely. According to you, that makes him better. But what if Zerg is really bad at zvp and zvz, and Terran is really good in all his other matchups? What if styles are just weird in this matchup, and Zerg can beat Terran, but has a really poor record otherwise? Say that Zerg, outside of this matchup, has a 40% win ratio, and Terran has a 75% win ratio? The better player is obviously Terran here, even if he did just lose to Zerg. A heads up game doesn't decide who the better player is. Introduce Protoss. He beats Zerg. But Terran beats him! Now who's the best player out of the three? Obviously Protoss! He beat Zerg, who was the better player beforehand. Which means that Terran is now the best player, because he beat Protoss! And off we go into Wonderland. It can't work that way. The better example would be. Let's say Soulkey and Innovation played in the SPL. And then the following day in the GSL. So let's say Soulkey beat Innovation in the Ace Match. According to takingbackoj's logic, Soulkey is the better player. Then the following day, Innovation beat Soulkey in the GSL. In a span of a day, now according to takingbackoj's logic, Innovation is the better player. See how flawed it is? When you take into consideration who's the "Better" player, you have to take into consideration variance, sample size and how they fair against the rest of the competition. As for the NBA comparison...hmm the better example would be.. Charlotte Bobcats vs Miami Heat in a home/home series. Miami demolishes Charlotte @ Miami. So Miami is the better team. The next night, Charlotte beats Mami. So now Charlotte is all of a sudden the better of the two? Well this is my basic thought process here. When ranking players or teams or whatever, you go with the evidence presented. If someone beats someone else in a competition, I will weigh that heavier than what those two opponents did elsewhere particularly if its a best of 7 series and particularly if the winner also won the finals or its equivalent. Im not just looking at that one series though. Im looking at the fact that Soulkey beat other top opponents on the way. Im looking at how Soulkey commonly competes and often times beats other top tier players as well. In my opinion, there is no better litmus test than heads up. That is the closest thing their is to deciding whos better. Is it full proof? No but is it better than assessing their other matches and pretty much guessing which one has beat better players. To put it more plainly, if someone tells me David beat Jeff at SC2 but lost to Eric, im going to assume Eric is better than David regardless of Jeffs talent. When asking yourself who is better in any competition aren't you really asking who would win between the two? Soulkey won in a best of 7. That might not tell the whole story but that is pretty damning evidence to support Soulkey being better and for me to believe otherwise, I would have to see equally damning evidence to dispute it. On 5-4 record of Innovation and Soulkey, can you really boldly state and have the majority agree with you that Soulkey is clearly the better of the two, especially when there's a 1 win difference? The whole x beat y but lose to z, so z > y is flawed. Flash has a better head to head vs Innovation AND Soulkey. Life has the better head to head vs Flash. Innovation has the better head to head vs Life. And Soulkey has the better head to head vs Innovation. partinG has the better head to head vs Flash According tho this..it would be.. Parting > Flash > Soulkey > Innovation > Life > Flash...you end up back in square 1 hmm... There is no clear "x beat y but lost to z, so z > y" going on here. It's more tier based. Well like I said, what argument for Innovation being better should outweigh his loss to Soulkey? Shouldn't heads up and major tournament wins be the most important values when judging which player is better than another? Soulkey has him on both in HotS. Is he definitely better than Innovation? No, can't ever be 100% positive. But if you wanted to go that route then you can't be 100% sure any player is better than any other player really. Soulkey has the major tournament win, he beat Innovation heads up in a best of 7 on the way. Innovation has a better pro league record and won more maps on his way to losing WCS KR, the same WCS KR that Soulkey won. I mean weighing those facts, I think Soulkey has earned the top spot.
No matter which route you take it doesn't make it a 100% accurate indicator of who is better. You are entitled to your opinion that Soulkey should be number one but so are the writers in putting him at number two.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
Hyuk
Much
CuteAngel
