Welmu, Nerchio advance from Group A of WCS EU Ro32 - Page 4

On May 14 2014 21:54 Sapphire.lux wrote:

Retired players don't play. Stephano is not retired.

On May 14 2014 22:34 Emix_Squall wrote:


Open a dictionnary that's not what retired means!

On May 14 2014 22:45 Emix_Squall wrote:
Except he is not a " professional player" anymore as you call him, he retired ... that's the whole point. Playing a game doesn't mean your professionnal at it, being able to compete in it doesn't either, being professionnal at something is where a state of mind meets practical needs. He doesn't need the money of these tournaments to live, and he OBVIOSULY doesn't have the state of mind of a pro.

The only reason people want to call him a "pro" and say he's out of retirement is to feel better about their favorite players. Coz it hurts when you say "yeah I support that dude but he lost to a retired player".

And I'm not supporting Stephano specifically here, I don't even like the playstyle he displayed lately. But you can't just interprete things and change words to fit your needs ...

On May 14 2014 23:02 johnbongham wrote:


Um lets see. He is still currently employed by a professional gaming organization as a professional starcraft 2 player. He competes in the highest level of professional competition with other professional players for real money. Maybe if he just sat at home and streamed ladder you could make a realistic case for him still being retired, but that is not the case and he is not retired. Either way, being 'retired' or not is not an excuse and its not a reason to diminish the victories of the players who defeat him, especially when it is 100% clear he is not retired (although I bet hes thinking about it now lol).

On May 14 2014 23:02 johnbongham wrote:


Um lets see. He is still currently employed by a professional gaming organization as a professional starcraft 2 player. He competes in the highest level of professional competition with other professional players for real money. Maybe if he just sat at home and streamed ladder you could make a realistic case for him still being retired, but that is not the case and he is not retired. Either way, being 'retired' or not is not an excuse and its not a reason to diminish the victories of the players who defeat him, especially when it is 100% clear he is not retired (although I bet hes thinking about it now lol).

On May 14 2014 23:06 johnbongham wrote:


Edit: Also, is it any surprise we see Stephano come out of retirement to compete as soon as he believes he has found a strategy that he can abuse all the way to big victories and big prize money? Stephano has always been about abusing certain units and builds with a very high win %. It has been such a relief to see him fail miserably in his attempt to abuse his way to the top and in the process abuse the tournament organizers, staff, and spectators who have sit through his games.

On May 14 2014 23:11 Waise wrote:

so... you hate people who try to find strategies that work? or only when they involve a unit you don't like? are you the grand overseer of what builds are considered abusive?

if a strategy is broken then it's on blizzard to fix it. there's no reason not to do things that work. it enrages me that protoss can still make pylon wall cannon rushes work (against jaedong, no less), but it's not the players' fault for doing it...

On May 14 2014 23:06 johnbongham wrote:


Edit: Also, is it any surprise we see Stephano come out of retirement to compete as soon as he believes he has found a strategy that he can abuse all the way to big victories and big prize money? Stephano has always been about abusing certain units and builds with a very high win %. It has been such a relief to see him fail miserably in his attempt to abuse his way to the top and in the process abuse the tournament organizers, staff, and spectators who have sit through his games.

On May 14 2014 23:09 Sapphire.lux wrote:
This is why i write about the silliness of calling him retired. It's nothing but a way to keep pressure of and, unfortunately, make his opponents look bad.

shameful display

On May 14 2014 23:50 Emix_Squall wrote:


Thanks for the brainless bashing! Part of your previous message kind of made sense (he still earns a salary from EG, I guess that's a part I didn't consider,) but you just discredited yourself with that.



And that's why I believe calling him "retired" isn't about what you feel you should call someone but really about where his priorities are at. The same way some people may want to call him "retired" to shame whoever his opponents are/were, some want to call him "not retired" to feel better for his opponents. But the fact is, he plays a game (sure at a top level but that's not relevant), and that's not what he earns his living from anymore (I would assume).

And whatever interpretation people want to make of him defeating or losing to X or Y doesn't change that.

On May 15 2014 00:18 Sapphire.lux wrote:

Me thinks you have a horse in this race and your not being entirely objective here. It's not a matter of interpretation as you make it sound, he is either active or retired. It's simple.

On May 14 2014 09:27 Waxangel wrote:


yes, there's something admirable about Stephano's willingness to suffer a little to gain an advatange

it's like if an MMA fighter went into fights reeking because he didn't bathe for three months. it's pretty gross, but you have to respect his dedication to winning :D

On May 15 2014 00:28 Emix_Squall wrote:


I honestly stopped following most SC2 events lately, so I really can't say anything about any of these players curent level of play > ergo I honestly have no horse in that race. And I agree with you, it is not a matter of interpretation (like I said multiple times in this thread). But nevermind, The Oxford definition someone just linked proves me wrong as it precisely describe the case of professionnal athletes, and includes the competition element in its definition.
My idea was mostly based on the fact that professionnal athletes aren't only defined by the competing part of their activity, but it seems to be what 's taken into account here. I'm not a native english speaker but I assume Oxford dictionary is a good reference so there's nothing for me to add if their definition goes against my point. I was wrong!