|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On September 03 2014 05:28 viperattack999 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2014 05:13 Phredxor wrote:On September 03 2014 04:19 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 04:08 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 04:03 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:48 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:41 opisska wrote:On September 03 2014 03:31 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:25 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:21 Zealously wrote:
[quote]
Both were eliminated in the Ro4. Come on, don't dodge. Who's better? We have to wait till the next tournament and see. Still undecided. Until they play, I don't know. It's just an opinion based on stats. I don't understand why you think head-to-head decides which player is better overall. Head-to-head is played in one single match-up with two styles clashing. Some players' styles suck against others' (see Life vs Soulkey, GSL S5 2012 Ro16), that doesn't necessarily the losing player is worse overall, or even in the match-up. Isn't it entirely the player's fault that he uses a "style" that is weak against certain strategies? Sure, but that doesn't mean Shine is a better player than Soulkey. On September 03 2014 03:41 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:31 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:25 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:21 Zealously wrote:
[quote]
Both were eliminated in the Ro4. Come on, don't dodge. Who's better? We have to wait till the next tournament and see. Still undecided. Until they play, I don't know. It's just an opinion based on stats. I don't understand why you think head-to-head decides which player is better overall. Head-to-head is played in one single match-up with two styles clashing. Some players' styles suck against others' (see Life vs Soulkey, GSL S5 2012 Ro16), that doesn't necessarily the losing player is worse overall, or even in the match-up. Because it's the purest form of competition we have. A player can be a beast in the team house, even in on-line tournaments, (example: DonRaeGoo before he made a name in GSL), but proving yourself on the big stage is different. It's where champions are made. Not on a calculator. There's no accounting for the pressure of being on stage where its all on the line. No statistics in the world can prepare a player for that. We're not computers. We're human. And coping under pressure is a big part of being a champion. Champions are not decided on paper. The best mechanics in the world don't matter a row of beans if your too nervous to make the tough decisions under pressure. I'm not even sure what you're saying anymore. You started by saying that head-to-head decides who the best player is, but now you're talking about something else. Of course we're human and of course coping with pressure is an important part of winning tournaments, but that still doesn't mean that player A beating player B in head-to-head makes player A better than player B versus players C, D, E and so on. Perhaps it might in some sports (Tennis, I guess), but with how different styles and match-ups are in SC2, there is no way that beating one player makes you better than that player in every aspect. That's what the Power Rank is. Not "Which player would beat the next player head-to-head", but "Which player would beat the most players on a regular basis". I don't know what to say. Championships matter, statistics are nice to look at, and are interesting, but to say stats trump winning tournaments ... I have no answer to that. It's not stats. "Number of tournament wins" is also a statistic. What I'm talking about is skill. How good is a player? How well can he play and which players can he beat? Surely you see that winning an easy tournament is not the same as reaching the Ro4 in an extremely stacked tournament, and that the second is a greater achievement - in terms of difficulty - than the first? Heres my point. If Flash beats rain in two best of three qualifiers, 2-1. Then Rain beats Flash in the GSL finals 4-2. Statistically they're 6-6 versus each other. Aligulac would say they are equal. But they aren't even close. Rain is way way ahead because he won the GSL. Flash didn't. At the end of the day the stats don't tell the story, the title does. The title means far more than the stats. Classic better player than soO? Depends on how you define better.
If you were to make a Power Rank, would you place Classic above soO?
|
On September 03 2014 05:04 Ammanas wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2014 04:52 The_Red_Viper wrote:On September 03 2014 04:31 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 04:19 The_Red_Viper wrote:On September 03 2014 04:08 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 04:03 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:48 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:41 opisska wrote:On September 03 2014 03:31 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:25 viperattack999 wrote:
[quote]
We have to wait till the next tournament and see. Still undecided. Until they play, I don't know. It's just an opinion based on stats. I don't understand why you think head-to-head decides which player is better overall. Head-to-head is played in one single match-up with two styles clashing. Some players' styles suck against others' (see Life vs Soulkey, GSL S5 2012 Ro16), that doesn't necessarily the losing player is worse overall, or even in the match-up. Isn't it entirely the player's fault that he uses a "style" that is weak against certain strategies? Sure, but that doesn't mean Shine is a better player than Soulkey. On September 03 2014 03:41 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:31 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:25 viperattack999 wrote:
[quote]
We have to wait till the next tournament and see. Still undecided. Until they play, I don't know. It's just an opinion based on stats. I don't understand why you think head-to-head decides which player is better overall. Head-to-head is played in one single match-up with two styles clashing. Some players' styles suck against others' (see Life vs Soulkey, GSL S5 2012 Ro16), that doesn't necessarily the losing player is worse overall, or even in the match-up. Because it's the purest form of competition we have. A player can be a beast in the team house, even in on-line tournaments, (example: DonRaeGoo before he made a name in GSL), but proving yourself on the big stage is different. It's where champions are made. Not on a calculator. There's no accounting for the pressure of being on stage where its all on the line. No statistics in the world can prepare a player for that. We're not computers. We're human. And coping under pressure is a big part of being a champion. Champions are not decided on paper. The best mechanics in the world don't matter a row of beans if your too nervous to make the tough decisions under pressure. I'm not even sure what you're saying anymore. You started by saying that head-to-head decides who the best player is, but now you're talking about something else. Of course we're human and of course coping with pressure is an important part of winning tournaments, but that still doesn't mean that player A beating player B in head-to-head makes player A better than player B versus players C, D, E and so on. Perhaps it might in some sports (Tennis, I guess), but with how different styles and match-ups are in SC2, there is no way that beating one player makes you better than that player in every aspect. That's what the Power Rank is. Not "Which player would beat the next player head-to-head", but "Which player would beat the most players on a regular basis". I don't know what to say. Championships matter, statistics are nice to look at, and are interesting, but to say stats trump winning tournaments ... I have no answer to that. It's not stats. "Number of tournament wins" is also a statistic. What I'm talking about is skill. How good is a player? How well can he play and which players can he beat? Surely you see that winning an easy tournament is not the same as reaching the Ro4 in an extremely stacked tournament, and that the second is a greater achievement - in terms of difficulty - than the first? While i agree with pretty much everything you said so far, what do you mean with "skill" ? The only real measurement of skill we have is winning/losing, if you want to compare players they obviously should face the same competition. Level of play and opponents beat. I think it's possible to tell that a player is good without said player winning much. Fionn predicted Bogus being great when he had a horrible PL record, long before he became Innovation and absurdly good. Well that's more like potential imo, if you don't win the games you play you aren't good enough at that time. But sometimes people talk about "skill" like it would be something like art, not really measurable. I don't agree with that though, if you lose you were worse, simple as that (even though i rage too when my favorite player loses to some "protoss bs" or something like that^^) I don't think it's as easy as that. As you said, skill is very hard to describe. Some think of it as a pure mechanical thing (maybe including things like positioning etc) - in that case it is very possible for more skilled player to lose due to things like mind games. Some argue, that strategy, mind games, things like that are also part of the skill. On the other hand, those are also things that can be influenced by an outsider - if your coach tells you to 2 rax because after studying 40 replays of your opponent he found out they don't scout one specific location on the map - it is a strategy, maybe even mind game. But it is your own skill? So yeah, I don't think it's as easy as 'the player who won is the more skilled player'.
Well that are fair points, but imo win/loss is the best we have to determine the skill of someone. I mean you can look at MKP's splits all day long and say he has the best micro ever, if he loses the game regardless it doesn't really matter.
Same can be said about literally every other part of the game. Maybe player X would win every game after 15 mins, if he dies to every timing attack that hits before that it is useless. etc
So at the end of the day i think win% (if we have a comparable competition) is the best we have.
On September 03 2014 05:29 Zealously wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2014 05:28 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 05:13 Phredxor wrote:On September 03 2014 04:19 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 04:08 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 04:03 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:48 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:41 opisska wrote:On September 03 2014 03:31 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:25 viperattack999 wrote:
[quote]
We have to wait till the next tournament and see. Still undecided. Until they play, I don't know. It's just an opinion based on stats. I don't understand why you think head-to-head decides which player is better overall. Head-to-head is played in one single match-up with two styles clashing. Some players' styles suck against others' (see Life vs Soulkey, GSL S5 2012 Ro16), that doesn't necessarily the losing player is worse overall, or even in the match-up. Isn't it entirely the player's fault that he uses a "style" that is weak against certain strategies? Sure, but that doesn't mean Shine is a better player than Soulkey. On September 03 2014 03:41 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:31 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:25 viperattack999 wrote:
[quote]
We have to wait till the next tournament and see. Still undecided. Until they play, I don't know. It's just an opinion based on stats. I don't understand why you think head-to-head decides which player is better overall. Head-to-head is played in one single match-up with two styles clashing. Some players' styles suck against others' (see Life vs Soulkey, GSL S5 2012 Ro16), that doesn't necessarily the losing player is worse overall, or even in the match-up. Because it's the purest form of competition we have. A player can be a beast in the team house, even in on-line tournaments, (example: DonRaeGoo before he made a name in GSL), but proving yourself on the big stage is different. It's where champions are made. Not on a calculator. There's no accounting for the pressure of being on stage where its all on the line. No statistics in the world can prepare a player for that. We're not computers. We're human. And coping under pressure is a big part of being a champion. Champions are not decided on paper. The best mechanics in the world don't matter a row of beans if your too nervous to make the tough decisions under pressure. I'm not even sure what you're saying anymore. You started by saying that head-to-head decides who the best player is, but now you're talking about something else. Of course we're human and of course coping with pressure is an important part of winning tournaments, but that still doesn't mean that player A beating player B in head-to-head makes player A better than player B versus players C, D, E and so on. Perhaps it might in some sports (Tennis, I guess), but with how different styles and match-ups are in SC2, there is no way that beating one player makes you better than that player in every aspect. That's what the Power Rank is. Not "Which player would beat the next player head-to-head", but "Which player would beat the most players on a regular basis". I don't know what to say. Championships matter, statistics are nice to look at, and are interesting, but to say stats trump winning tournaments ... I have no answer to that. It's not stats. "Number of tournament wins" is also a statistic. What I'm talking about is skill. How good is a player? How well can he play and which players can he beat? Surely you see that winning an easy tournament is not the same as reaching the Ro4 in an extremely stacked tournament, and that the second is a greater achievement - in terms of difficulty - than the first? Heres my point. If Flash beats rain in two best of three qualifiers, 2-1. Then Rain beats Flash in the GSL finals 4-2. Statistically they're 6-6 versus each other. Aligulac would say they are equal. But they aren't even close. Rain is way way ahead because he won the GSL. Flash didn't. At the end of the day the stats don't tell the story, the title does. The title means far more than the stats. Classic better player than soO? Depends on how you define better. If you were to make a Power Rank, would you place Classic above soO?
No, not even close
|
On September 03 2014 05:29 Zealously wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2014 05:28 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 05:13 Phredxor wrote:On September 03 2014 04:19 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 04:08 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 04:03 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:48 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:41 opisska wrote:On September 03 2014 03:31 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:25 viperattack999 wrote:
[quote]
We have to wait till the next tournament and see. Still undecided. Until they play, I don't know. It's just an opinion based on stats. I don't understand why you think head-to-head decides which player is better overall. Head-to-head is played in one single match-up with two styles clashing. Some players' styles suck against others' (see Life vs Soulkey, GSL S5 2012 Ro16), that doesn't necessarily the losing player is worse overall, or even in the match-up. Isn't it entirely the player's fault that he uses a "style" that is weak against certain strategies? Sure, but that doesn't mean Shine is a better player than Soulkey. On September 03 2014 03:41 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:31 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:25 viperattack999 wrote:
[quote]
We have to wait till the next tournament and see. Still undecided. Until they play, I don't know. It's just an opinion based on stats. I don't understand why you think head-to-head decides which player is better overall. Head-to-head is played in one single match-up with two styles clashing. Some players' styles suck against others' (see Life vs Soulkey, GSL S5 2012 Ro16), that doesn't necessarily the losing player is worse overall, or even in the match-up. Because it's the purest form of competition we have. A player can be a beast in the team house, even in on-line tournaments, (example: DonRaeGoo before he made a name in GSL), but proving yourself on the big stage is different. It's where champions are made. Not on a calculator. There's no accounting for the pressure of being on stage where its all on the line. No statistics in the world can prepare a player for that. We're not computers. We're human. And coping under pressure is a big part of being a champion. Champions are not decided on paper. The best mechanics in the world don't matter a row of beans if your too nervous to make the tough decisions under pressure. I'm not even sure what you're saying anymore. You started by saying that head-to-head decides who the best player is, but now you're talking about something else. Of course we're human and of course coping with pressure is an important part of winning tournaments, but that still doesn't mean that player A beating player B in head-to-head makes player A better than player B versus players C, D, E and so on. Perhaps it might in some sports (Tennis, I guess), but with how different styles and match-ups are in SC2, there is no way that beating one player makes you better than that player in every aspect. That's what the Power Rank is. Not "Which player would beat the next player head-to-head", but "Which player would beat the most players on a regular basis". I don't know what to say. Championships matter, statistics are nice to look at, and are interesting, but to say stats trump winning tournaments ... I have no answer to that. It's not stats. "Number of tournament wins" is also a statistic. What I'm talking about is skill. How good is a player? How well can he play and which players can he beat? Surely you see that winning an easy tournament is not the same as reaching the Ro4 in an extremely stacked tournament, and that the second is a greater achievement - in terms of difficulty - than the first? Heres my point. If Flash beats rain in two best of three qualifiers, 2-1. Then Rain beats Flash in the GSL finals 4-2. Statistically they're 6-6 versus each other. Aligulac would say they are equal. But they aren't even close. Rain is way way ahead because he won the GSL. Flash didn't. At the end of the day the stats don't tell the story, the title does. The title means far more than the stats. Classic better player than soO? Depends on how you define better. If you were to make a Power Rank, would you place Classic above soO?
I wouldn't no. In the last 6 months SOO has 3 GSL finals and a victory. Who in the last 6 months can match that. Maybe Zest. Think Zest would still be my number 1. But its close among a number of people.
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On September 03 2014 05:37 viperattack999 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2014 05:29 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 05:28 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 05:13 Phredxor wrote:On September 03 2014 04:19 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 04:08 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 04:03 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:48 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:41 opisska wrote:On September 03 2014 03:31 Zealously wrote:
[quote]
I don't understand why you think head-to-head decides which player is better overall. Head-to-head is played in one single match-up with two styles clashing. Some players' styles suck against others' (see Life vs Soulkey, GSL S5 2012 Ro16), that doesn't necessarily the losing player is worse overall, or even in the match-up. Isn't it entirely the player's fault that he uses a "style" that is weak against certain strategies? Sure, but that doesn't mean Shine is a better player than Soulkey. On September 03 2014 03:41 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:31 Zealously wrote:
[quote]
I don't understand why you think head-to-head decides which player is better overall. Head-to-head is played in one single match-up with two styles clashing. Some players' styles suck against others' (see Life vs Soulkey, GSL S5 2012 Ro16), that doesn't necessarily the losing player is worse overall, or even in the match-up. Because it's the purest form of competition we have. A player can be a beast in the team house, even in on-line tournaments, (example: DonRaeGoo before he made a name in GSL), but proving yourself on the big stage is different. It's where champions are made. Not on a calculator. There's no accounting for the pressure of being on stage where its all on the line. No statistics in the world can prepare a player for that. We're not computers. We're human. And coping under pressure is a big part of being a champion. Champions are not decided on paper. The best mechanics in the world don't matter a row of beans if your too nervous to make the tough decisions under pressure. I'm not even sure what you're saying anymore. You started by saying that head-to-head decides who the best player is, but now you're talking about something else. Of course we're human and of course coping with pressure is an important part of winning tournaments, but that still doesn't mean that player A beating player B in head-to-head makes player A better than player B versus players C, D, E and so on. Perhaps it might in some sports (Tennis, I guess), but with how different styles and match-ups are in SC2, there is no way that beating one player makes you better than that player in every aspect. That's what the Power Rank is. Not "Which player would beat the next player head-to-head", but "Which player would beat the most players on a regular basis". I don't know what to say. Championships matter, statistics are nice to look at, and are interesting, but to say stats trump winning tournaments ... I have no answer to that. It's not stats. "Number of tournament wins" is also a statistic. What I'm talking about is skill. How good is a player? How well can he play and which players can he beat? Surely you see that winning an easy tournament is not the same as reaching the Ro4 in an extremely stacked tournament, and that the second is a greater achievement - in terms of difficulty - than the first? Heres my point. If Flash beats rain in two best of three qualifiers, 2-1. Then Rain beats Flash in the GSL finals 4-2. Statistically they're 6-6 versus each other. Aligulac would say they are equal. But they aren't even close. Rain is way way ahead because he won the GSL. Flash didn't. At the end of the day the stats don't tell the story, the title does. The title means far more than the stats. Classic better player than soO? Depends on how you define better. If you were to make a Power Rank, would you place Classic above soO? I wouldn't no. In the last 6 months SOO has 3 GSL finals and a victory. Who in the last 6 months can match that. Maybe Zest. Think Zest would still be my number 1. But its close among a number of people.
But if I've understood what you've said previously, shouldn't Taeja and Flash both come out ahead of Zest because they beat him where it mattered?
Also, soO has no victories.
|
On September 03 2014 05:39 Zealously wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2014 05:37 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 05:29 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 05:28 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 05:13 Phredxor wrote:On September 03 2014 04:19 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 04:08 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 04:03 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:48 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:41 opisska wrote:
[quote]
Isn't it entirely the player's fault that he uses a "style" that is weak against certain strategies? Sure, but that doesn't mean Shine is a better player than Soulkey. On September 03 2014 03:41 viperattack999 wrote:
[quote]
Because it's the purest form of competition we have. A player can be a beast in the team house, even in on-line tournaments, (example: DonRaeGoo before he made a name in GSL), but proving yourself on the big stage is different. It's where champions are made. Not on a calculator. There's no accounting for the pressure of being on stage where its all on the line. No statistics in the world can prepare a player for that.
We're not computers. We're human. And coping under pressure is a big part of being a champion. Champions are not decided on paper. The best mechanics in the world don't matter a row of beans if your too nervous to make the tough decisions under pressure. I'm not even sure what you're saying anymore. You started by saying that head-to-head decides who the best player is, but now you're talking about something else. Of course we're human and of course coping with pressure is an important part of winning tournaments, but that still doesn't mean that player A beating player B in head-to-head makes player A better than player B versus players C, D, E and so on. Perhaps it might in some sports (Tennis, I guess), but with how different styles and match-ups are in SC2, there is no way that beating one player makes you better than that player in every aspect. That's what the Power Rank is. Not "Which player would beat the next player head-to-head", but "Which player would beat the most players on a regular basis". I don't know what to say. Championships matter, statistics are nice to look at, and are interesting, but to say stats trump winning tournaments ... I have no answer to that. It's not stats. "Number of tournament wins" is also a statistic. What I'm talking about is skill. How good is a player? How well can he play and which players can he beat? Surely you see that winning an easy tournament is not the same as reaching the Ro4 in an extremely stacked tournament, and that the second is a greater achievement - in terms of difficulty - than the first? Heres my point. If Flash beats rain in two best of three qualifiers, 2-1. Then Rain beats Flash in the GSL finals 4-2. Statistically they're 6-6 versus each other. Aligulac would say they are equal. But they aren't even close. Rain is way way ahead because he won the GSL. Flash didn't. At the end of the day the stats don't tell the story, the title does. The title means far more than the stats. Classic better player than soO? Depends on how you define better. If you were to make a Power Rank, would you place Classic above soO? I wouldn't no. In the last 6 months SOO has 3 GSL finals and a victory. Who in the last 6 months can match that. Maybe Zest. Think Zest would still be my number 1. But its close among a number of people. But if I've understood what you've said previously, shouldn't Taeja and Flash both come out ahead of Zest because they beat him where it mattered? Also, soO has no victories.
If only considering the last 30 days then yes. But I think that's way too short. Maybe 6 months with recent data carrying more weight. Then the collective body of results over that time gives a better picture.
Maybe a monthly write up on each player and how things played out based on the month with a more stable longer term power rank.
If I were to write up for Rain I'd say he's on the verge of breaking out and threatening top spot but we need some tournament results before such a move is made.
Your right about soo, my mistake.
|
The power rank can't be reduced to any single metric, else it would be a formula you could program. As I always understood it the power rank was this:
On September 02 2014 21:14 Plexa wrote:
[Lastly let's remember what the power rank is really about; it's about working out a list of players you hope to god aren't in your side of the bracket, the players that make their contemporaries hearts sink when they get paired together
It's a "Holy crap that guy is scary" list that a single writer and student of the game compiles after consulting various TL staff and contributors. How players win games matters, what stage the player is on winning those games matters, head to heads matter, weekend tournaments and well prepared matches matter. It all matters because it all effects one guys opinion.
|
On September 03 2014 05:39 Zealously wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2014 05:37 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 05:29 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 05:28 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 05:13 Phredxor wrote:On September 03 2014 04:19 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 04:08 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 04:03 viperattack999 wrote:On September 03 2014 03:48 Zealously wrote:On September 03 2014 03:41 opisska wrote:
[quote]
Isn't it entirely the player's fault that he uses a "style" that is weak against certain strategies? Sure, but that doesn't mean Shine is a better player than Soulkey. On September 03 2014 03:41 viperattack999 wrote:
[quote]
Because it's the purest form of competition we have. A player can be a beast in the team house, even in on-line tournaments, (example: DonRaeGoo before he made a name in GSL), but proving yourself on the big stage is different. It's where champions are made. Not on a calculator. There's no accounting for the pressure of being on stage where its all on the line. No statistics in the world can prepare a player for that.
We're not computers. We're human. And coping under pressure is a big part of being a champion. Champions are not decided on paper. The best mechanics in the world don't matter a row of beans if your too nervous to make the tough decisions under pressure. I'm not even sure what you're saying anymore. You started by saying that head-to-head decides who the best player is, but now you're talking about something else. Of course we're human and of course coping with pressure is an important part of winning tournaments, but that still doesn't mean that player A beating player B in head-to-head makes player A better than player B versus players C, D, E and so on. Perhaps it might in some sports (Tennis, I guess), but with how different styles and match-ups are in SC2, there is no way that beating one player makes you better than that player in every aspect. That's what the Power Rank is. Not "Which player would beat the next player head-to-head", but "Which player would beat the most players on a regular basis". I don't know what to say. Championships matter, statistics are nice to look at, and are interesting, but to say stats trump winning tournaments ... I have no answer to that. It's not stats. "Number of tournament wins" is also a statistic. What I'm talking about is skill. How good is a player? How well can he play and which players can he beat? Surely you see that winning an easy tournament is not the same as reaching the Ro4 in an extremely stacked tournament, and that the second is a greater achievement - in terms of difficulty - than the first? Heres my point. If Flash beats rain in two best of three qualifiers, 2-1. Then Rain beats Flash in the GSL finals 4-2. Statistically they're 6-6 versus each other. Aligulac would say they are equal. But they aren't even close. Rain is way way ahead because he won the GSL. Flash didn't. At the end of the day the stats don't tell the story, the title does. The title means far more than the stats. Classic better player than soO? Depends on how you define better. If you were to make a Power Rank, would you place Classic above soO? I wouldn't no. In the last 6 months SOO has 3 GSL finals and a victory. Who in the last 6 months can match that. Maybe Zest. Think Zest would still be my number 1. But its close among a number of people. But if I've understood what you've said previously, shouldn't Taeja and Flash both come out ahead of Zest because they beat him where it mattered? Also, soO has no victories.
Yup that's exactly what I was getting at.
obviously winning head to head in big matches is important but it's still only one part pf everything that needs to be taken into account for a power ranking. I'm a massive FlaSh fanboi but even I can see why Rain is up there.
|
|
|
Sen!!!! I feel like Jim should be 5th/6th (or the list of "runner-ups")... just because Jim has made it clear that he could play with the koreans as well as sen, and definitely shown the sc2 community that, even though, the chinese scene may be less open, it doesnt give us the right to think there's no one there that could prove to b as much of a threat as someone like Sen.
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On September 03 2014 07:12 Hider wrote:
Because I can see what you wrote, I'd just like to clarify something for future reference. This ranking does not pretend to be the end-all of rankings everywhere. In the end, it is a subjective ranking made by a person (aided by others, granted) that watches and studies a lot of Starcraft. Controversial picks on shaky grounds have been made in Power Ranks in the past, and that's fine and well because in the end, the ranking is still made largely by the writer and based in that writer's opinions on the players. I won't make any off-the-wall stupid picks, but interpretation and weighting of results is unique to the writer and has, as far as I know, always been so.
On September 03 2014 07:20 Advantageous wrote:
Sen!!!! I feel like Jim should be 5th/6th (or the list of "runner-ups")... just because Jim has made it clear that he could play with the koreans as well as sen, and definitely shown the sc2 community that, even though, the chinese scene may be less open, it doesnt give us the right to think there's no one there that could prove to b as much of a threat as someone like Sen.
The foreign ranking was originally a top 10, in which Jim was placed 7th (just behind Vortix). I shortened it to a 5-man ranking because I felt it would be too clunky to have two full rankings piled on top of each other. I should probably have clarified this earlier. This was the original ranking:
On September 02 2014 08:12 Darkhorse wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2014 07:42 Cricketer12 wrote:On September 02 2014 05:28 Darkhorse wrote:On September 02 2014 05:26 NotSorry wrote:It's okay God will forgive you dirty heathens for not realizing his rightful place at #1. On September 02 2014 05:26 Darkhorse wrote:
Wow everyone wants Flash #1 already
Also can someone complain about the foreigner rank please I want to make people mad too! Sorry man, but when I heard foreigner top 5 those were exactly who came to my mind I guess I did a good job then. Still I want RAGE NO HUK f*** you man, no seriously, HuK prob better than major right now I think, major only good cause his TvT OP and he kills violet and polt The original had 10. Dayshi 9. Welmu 8. Huk 7. Jim 6. Vortix
|
United States97276 Posts
I own the Maru fan club and even I say Flash should be #1
|
On September 03 2014 07:59 Shellshock wrote:
I own the Maru fan club and even I say Flash should be #1
What does owning the Maru fan club have to do with you putting Flash over Rain? 
|
United States97276 Posts
On September 03 2014 08:02 ZAiNs wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2014 07:59 Shellshock wrote:
I own the Maru fan club and even I say Flash should be #1 What does owning the Maru fan club have to do with you putting Flash over Rain?
no one cares about protoss
|
Anyway, the Flash question may be obsolete in 2 days and 58 minutes.
|
imo, cause my opinion totally matters
10. hero - only losses are to top Koreans
9. Innovation - regaining form, code s 16
8. Cure - hot month of august, gaining form
7. PartinG - balanced, has that "it" factor where he can all-kill in SPL or 4-0 a GSL group and no one would be that surprised
6. SoO - strong BoXs vs top Koreans. falls flat in the clutch and without time to prepare
5. Taeja - it's summer, he won 3 tourneys, altho they were foreign, altho he beat some decent competition
4. Maru - very balanced player with good consistency
3. Zest - 2 GSLs, a silver in IEM Toronto, and #1 in the Asian qualifier: very strong recent results in player leagues, but in PvT, his over-reliance on blink into colossus is getting figured out and delaying upgrades so long is unsustainable
2. FlaSh - kinda obvious
1. Rain - less momentum, but similar results over a much longer time frame
|
ITT: Flash fanboys, Taeja haters, and generally unhappy folks.
Good job TL, great write up! I liked it :D
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On September 03 2014 20:06 liberate71 wrote:
ITT: Flash fanboys, Taeja haters, and generally unhappy folks.
Good job TL, great write up! I liked it :D
You mean to say that people have a tendency to undervalue players' achievements if it fits them? Well i'll be...
|
On September 02 2014 03:59 Superbanana wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2014 03:51 ANLProbe wrote:On September 02 2014 03:25 Superbanana wrote:Honestly, i think Maru, Taeja, Parting and Rain are too high on the list, while Cure, soO and iNnoVation are too low. *runs away Anyways, its very hard to evaluate "who is the best right now?", despite recent results im pretty sure sOs, herO and Solar still know how to play and that they maybe deserve a place on the list  Its not the same as " who played better this month?", something that is not as hard to answer. Not an an easy task so i call this power rank a good job. The foreign list is prolly my own list, except that i would switch Sen with Bunny herO has been awful since Protoss hasn't been dominating. Innovation hasn't really shown much. The end of protoss domination is quite recent, i believe that herO is a trully skilled player that might get back on track after a very short period of underwhelming results. And its true iNnovation hasn't shown much, and that alone is enough to take him out of an objective list, but that doesn't necessarily makes the list better Myself, i believe that iNnovation is top 10 in the world and actually highter than its placed on this power rank. About the other you agree? lol edit: in other words im making subjective statements about player skills
And now i have an objective reason to believe Parting and Maru are too high and iNnoVation is too low
Wait and see, iNnoVation will get a kespa team and have great results in GSL and proleague from now on.
|
Germany25657 Posts
Yeah Flash is definitely Number 1. Oh wait...
|
September Power Rank was ok
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
