• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 13:13
CEST 19:13
KST 02:13
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL21] Ro16 Preview Pt2: All Star10Team Liquid Map Contest #22 - The Finalists16[ASL21] Ro16 Preview Pt1: Fresh Flow9[ASL21] Ro24 Preview Pt2: News Flash10[ASL21] Ro24 Preview Pt1: New Chaos0
Community News
2026 GSL Season 1 Qualifiers19Maestros of the Game 2 announced92026 GSL Tour plans announced15Weekly Cups (April 6-12): herO doubles, "Villains" prevail1MaNa leaves Team Liquid25
StarCraft 2
General
MaNa leaves Team Liquid Maestros of the Game 2 announced 2026 GSL Tour plans announced Team Liquid Map Contest #22 - The Finalists Blizzard Classic Cup @ BlizzCon 2026 - $100k prize pool
Tourneys
2026 GSL Season 1 Qualifiers INu's Battles#14 <BO.9 2Matches> Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament GSL CK: More events planned pending crowdfunding RSL Revival: Season 5 - Qualifiers and Main Event
Strategy
Custom Maps
[D]RTS in all its shapes and glory <3 [A] Nemrods 1/4 players [M] (2) Frigid Storage
External Content
Mutation # 522 Flip My Base The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 521 Memorable Boss Mutation # 520 Moving Fees
Brood War
General
Leta's ASL S21 Ro.16 review BW General Discussion BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Data needed ASL21 General Discussion
Tourneys
Escore Tournament StarCraft Season 2 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL21] Ro16 Group C [ASL21] Ro16 Group D
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers What's the deal with APM & what's its true value Any training maps people recommend? Fighting Spirit mining rates
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Dawn of War IV Diablo IV Total Annihilation Server - TAForever Starcraft Tabletop Miniature Game
Dota 2
The Story of Wings Gaming
League of Legends
G2 just beat GenG in First stand
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Vanilla Mini Mafia Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas TL Mafia Community Thread Five o'clock TL Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread YouTube Thread
Fan Clubs
The IdrA Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread [Req][Books] Good Fantasy/SciFi books Movie Discussion!
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion McBoner: A hockey love story Cricket [SPORT]
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Strange computer issues (software) [G] How to Block Livestream Ads
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Sexual Health Of Gamers
TrAiDoS
lurker extra damage testi…
StaticNine
Broowar part 2
qwaykee
Funny Nicknames
LUCKY_NOOB
Iranian anarchists: organize…
XenOsky
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1780 users

The StarCraft 2 GOAT - An in-depth analysis - Page 4

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 11 Next All
sc2turtlepants
Profile Joined December 2023
49 Posts
July 22 2024 18:15 GMT
#61
On July 23 2024 00:58 MJG wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 23 2024 00:36 sc2turtlepants wrote:
On July 22 2024 20:17 MJG wrote:
You haven't tried to account for any of that context though. You've simply assumed that all things are equal across all eras and expansions, and then treated the numbers as absolute. It should be obvious to everyone here that all eras and expansions are not equal, and so treating the numbers as absolute is somewhat foolish.

This is blatantly untrue and is addressed at length in Premo's post. How about you try reading it before starting arguments in the comments?

I did read it.

He hasn't done it.

Not what I'm talking about anyway.

Maybe you're the one who needs to read posts before starting arguments?


Well, akshually, the absurd degree to which he weighted eras and tournament types is where he did exactly what you're talking about
PremoBeats
Profile Joined March 2024
550 Posts
Last Edited: 2024-07-22 18:27:11
July 22 2024 18:21 GMT
#62
On July 23 2024 03:03 lokol4890 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 23 2024 01:56 PremoBeats wrote:
On July 22 2024 23:12 Biedrik wrote:
I am a long time StarCraft 2 fan and have a background in critical thinking as I was part of many debate clubs

Potent "I took a few undergraduate courses in philosophy" energy.

Nah, I'm a dentist But I love dissecting topics and critical thinking.


Since you seem to be fairly active in this thread, may I ask if you thought at any point that aligulac could be skewed? I'm looking at this part of your discussion:

Show nested quote +
1. Serral has occupied either Rank 1 or 2 since Dec 2017/List 2023 when he claimed rank 1 for the first time (he only lost it on list 369 and 370 due to the start of his military service where a break in playing signed him as inactive).

2. Maru lost rank 2 in that same time frame to several people including Dark, Reynor, Clem and MaxPax.


Serral won his first premier event in Jan 2018, then got top 8 at iem, and then won his second premier event (both european esls) in June 2018. You saw all this data. You don't see anything wrong with a player jumping to no1/2 without winning premier events?

The maru point follows a similar pattern, streaky reynor overtakes maru, so does clem, and so does maxpax, a player who has never won a premier event in his whole career.

Your statistical analysis highlights a giant hole in aligulac's rating system, yet I don't see this mentioned anywhere (if you already addressed this I apologize)



I am honestly not sure if advancements in Premier Tournaments are taken into account.

Thought #1: If Clem drops for example in the semis to Serral (a much higher ranked player than him, thus Clem does not get penalized much), and Maru drops in the finals to Serral (their ranking is closer, thus he gets more penalty in relation), they both lost 1 time in the tournament, but it could be that Maru loses more points. The same is true if Clem wins against Serral or Maru. Add to that..
Thought #2: If Clem plays more majors where he faces Reynor or MaxPax than Maru plays them at all, Clem could boost his rating by not winning Premier Tournaments, as he still beats highly rated players. This idea would require aligulac majors, which I do not know it does.

But this is a good point, that I honestly didn't catch. I'll look into it.
Yoshi Kirishima
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
United States10366 Posts
Last Edited: 2024-07-22 20:38:22
July 22 2024 20:32 GMT
#63
On July 23 2024 02:13 Poopi wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 23 2024 01:50 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
On July 22 2024 21:49 Poopi wrote:
On July 22 2024 20:40 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
On July 22 2024 20:17 MJG wrote:
On July 22 2024 17:58 PremoBeats wrote:
On July 22 2024 17:08 MJG wrote:
On July 22 2024 16:31 PremoBeats wrote:
On July 22 2024 15:56 MJG wrote:
On July 22 2024 15:29 PremoBeats wrote:
[quote]
Not sure how serious your comment is, but in which of my 7 metrics that were analyzed did you see me "torture data"?

Did you read the article? Did you understand that the data regarding the person which came out on top was penalized pr "tortured" the most? By far?

That's exactly the point, you only analysed seven metrics! I'm sure I could find seven metrics that would give Has as the correct answer if I tried hard enough!

I was being facetious and I thought it was pretty obvious...

No amount of statistical analysis is likely to change my opinion that Legacy of the Void is a balance/design shitshow. It's the videogaming equivalent of getting 100m sprinters to wear clown shoes. Fun and entertaining? Sure. Provides useful data for measuring accomplishments? Definitely not.

Why would you say that LotV is a balance shitshow? What exactly do you mean by it? There is extensive data about balancing out there.... but as you said: You seem to have pre-formed opinion that isn't likely to change.

Luckily for me, I've already posted about Legacy of the Void's design problems elsewhere, so I'll quote it here:

We had two versions of the game where a general overview of Starcraft 2 strategy would tell us that Zerg is the race that benefits most from being able to take faster expansions, from having larger maps, from having more open maps, and from the game being less "deathbally". Legacy of the Void was specifically designed so that we need to take faster expansions, so that the maps are generally larger, so that the maps are generally more open, and so that the game is significantly less "deathbally". Zerg has gone on to win more money than any other race in Legacy of the Void. This is going to read as balance whine, but I don't think it's a balance issue. No amount of tweaking unit stats is going to make a significant difference to core design flaws that result from Blizzard's decision to move to a 12 worker start and fewer minerals per base...


EDIT:

I'm definitely sceptical that statistics are capable of telling us who the GOAT is. They can definitely weed out people who shouldn't be in the conversation, but there are so many subjective factors that also deserve to be part of the conversation. Here are some examples:

  • How much harder are prep-tournament than weekend-tournaments? How do you factor this into the statistics?
  • How much harder are team-leagues when snipers can be prepared?
  • How important are team-league statistics compared to individual-league statistics?
  • How much more pressure does a player feel when playing in the GSL studio than when playing at a LAN?
  • How much more important than everything else was GSL in the early days?
  • How quickly did the importance of GSL wane with time?
  • How important is sustained dominance in a period where barely any new talent is coming through? Does the fact that the NesTea award has been achieved many more times in Legacy of the Void demonstrate that the lack of new talent coming through has made sustained success easier?
  • How did losing Korean team-houses post-Proleague affect talent development in Korea?
  • How much has balance impacted on win-rates at various points in time? Or game design choices? Or map-pools?

It's admirable - and I said this about Mizenhauer's attempt as well - that you're trying to only use statistics. But it's ultimately a losing effort when there are so so so so so many subjective factors that should also be considered.

A statistical analysis can give Serral or Maru or whoever else as the answer all it wants, I couldn't care less.

All things are influenced by contexts, but that does not mean, that they are less real or immeasurable.

You haven't tried to account for any of that context though. You've simply assumed that all things are equal across all eras and expansions, and then treated the numbers as absolute. It should be obvious to everyone here that all eras and expansions are not equal, and so treating the numbers as absolute is somewhat foolish.

Mvp is an obvious example where handwaving away all the subjective context is silly. Mvp was dominant in a time period were simply reaching GSL was a massive achievement, and new stars were frequently bursting onto the scene. In comparison, Maru's first GSL win was in a tournament that NoRegret qualified for. Not to dunk too hard on NoRegret, but those are not comparable data sets, and I'm sure there are lots of examples of other data sets that don't deserve to be taken into equal consideration. I'm also sure that every one of those examples is going to be incredibly subjective.

So torture the data all you like, you can't answer the GOAT question through data alone.


You're lowering the value of Maru's first GSL win because NoRegret qualified?
In MVP's first GSL win, Choya got Top 8... the skill level of most SC2 players in 2011 was not very high.
Just look at all the GSL players who qualified and quickly faded away or failed to qualify again. I would say that's a sign that the players qualifying were at a low level, than to say that the field was very deep and competitive.
There's a clear gap between the players who knew how to play a decent macro game, like MVP and Nestea, and players like Choya, InCa, and whoever the heck jookTo is.

"Macro game" is an outdated term / not precise enough lol. It's more about "playstyle" and how you like to play the game -> you can start with cheesy strats and it can evolve into a macro game. Is being good at playing "macro games" that start weird (ie. changing timings) better or worse than being good at the "macro games" that start with "macro builds" / passive strats (fast CC or whatever is "meta")?
Similarly, when zerg had an utterly broken / OP composition (ie. broodlord infestor), the game in TvZ was often about the terran trying to find a way to kill the zerg before he got to that compo, while the zerg tried to survive / "get there" for his win condition. The that were players "good" at getting there, but worse in other compartiments of the game (for example being in the driver seat, or whatever), were they less skillfull than those who thrived in chaos/creating game?

All in all, different eras / patchs (extensions) rewarded different skill sets. If you think Choya / InCa / jookTo were bad players / not skilled, you are being naïve imho. Or you simply weren't around / following GSL + other tourneys during that era, because those guys were actually strong.


Macro game is a very reasonable term.

In WoL, there ended up not being many good aggressive openers, especially once the maps figured out how to be more standard and stable. Terrans would open with the same hellion banshee all the time and be pretty much completely safe in TvZ, they would open with a 1/1/1 or expo into 1/1/1 in TvT and as long as they got their tanks up and split and vikings up they'd be safe vs all harass. There was often not much happening til players started trying to get 3rd bases.

If you knew how to play macro and not lose to 1 base plays or early harass builds, then you were ahead.

Choya was not at all strong. He was maybe decent for a couple seasons but quickly fell off. Like most players.

It's really tiring hearing people say "you weren't around back then / didn't watch the scene closely" just cus you have a different opinion.

Then define strong?
Bomber STRUGGLED for a long time to have good results in GSL / tournaments but he was known to be a monster in practice / ladder etc. Does that mean he wasn’t strong when his results were good?
I am not saying Choya was the strongest sc2 player back then but dismissing is skill is a bit disrespectful / naive.
FireCake was pretty « bad » / unsuccessful at Super Smash Bros Melee prior to playing sc2/WoL, but he managed to get decent results in StarCraft 2.
Sometimes it’s about form / motivation or whatever.

All in all my point is mainly that you can’t dismiss a tournament results because you think InCa reaching a finals + you think InCa is bad means the whole tournament is invalid

Context matters a lot ; and InCa was strong in that particular tournament
You didn’t get to the finals of a GSL / ro8 by luck alone


Look, I'm not the one being dismissive. You're missing the context of my point. Someone suggested that Maru's GSL win might not have meant much if NoRegret managed to qualify. Choya isn't a shining example of a GSL player either and he made Ro8 which is considered an impressive placement.

If you think that we shouldn't dismiss MVP's win when players like Choya can get Ro8 then i hope you'd agree we shouldn't dismiss the strength of GSL when Maru won with NoRegret qualifying.

My stance is that the level of competition may have decreased a bit over time, but GSL was still very competitive around 2017-2018 and only started falling off a little from 2018-2019 onwards, and then sharply declining the last couple years. Players in 2017-2018 were still pretty much in their peak forms and shouldn't be considered to be weaker than their 2015 selves. Maybe in 2018 they were slightly slightly weaker, but it's not like they fell off so hard that Serral dominating them means nothing in terms of whether he'd be able to beat their 2015 selves if he was fulltime in 2015.
Mid-master streaming MECH ONLY + commentary www.twitch.tv/yoshikirishima +++ "If all-in fails, all-in again."
UnLarva
Profile Joined March 2019
458 Posts
July 22 2024 20:40 GMT
#64
There are no contextual weightings in Aligulac ratings (other than what people may include to it, winks). It is always player vs player -mode, by default. That gives the best resolution available.

A rating of a player is always (and only) measured by his/her opponent's rating. Nothing more, nothing less. That is why it is as objective as rating systems come. It measure only a player strength vs other as it is, regardless of circumstances, or context.

Biggest problem with Aligulac is (and always has been) the objectivity and equality of inclusion of 'data worthy' input.

For GOAT (of now) candidates this is not a problem, but generally there exists one hell of 'inclusion bias'. System needed already much more volunteers in during heydays of the this all. Now, when everything but the Skill, and competition following from that is ever highest levels, the documentation level and pressure to do so is in it's lowest.

Regardless of that, no matter how low levels of volunteer participation have gone, we can be sure that at the top, things are properly taken in account, and we can be sure that no man hours put to the infernal and toily process of inclusion of missing data over the whole historical existence can ever change the overall picture.

Statistics happen only after the fact(s), not before them.

Nothing of this can change the facts, even measured by Aligulac. A measurement is just as good as it's input. For top GOAT contenders it is nearly perfect.
Part-time Serralogist
Poopi
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
France12911 Posts
July 22 2024 20:49 GMT
#65
On July 23 2024 05:32 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 23 2024 02:13 Poopi wrote:
On July 23 2024 01:50 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
On July 22 2024 21:49 Poopi wrote:
On July 22 2024 20:40 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
On July 22 2024 20:17 MJG wrote:
On July 22 2024 17:58 PremoBeats wrote:
On July 22 2024 17:08 MJG wrote:
On July 22 2024 16:31 PremoBeats wrote:
On July 22 2024 15:56 MJG wrote:
[quote]
That's exactly the point, you only analysed seven metrics! I'm sure I could find seven metrics that would give Has as the correct answer if I tried hard enough!

I was being facetious and I thought it was pretty obvious...

No amount of statistical analysis is likely to change my opinion that Legacy of the Void is a balance/design shitshow. It's the videogaming equivalent of getting 100m sprinters to wear clown shoes. Fun and entertaining? Sure. Provides useful data for measuring accomplishments? Definitely not.

Why would you say that LotV is a balance shitshow? What exactly do you mean by it? There is extensive data about balancing out there.... but as you said: You seem to have pre-formed opinion that isn't likely to change.

Luckily for me, I've already posted about Legacy of the Void's design problems elsewhere, so I'll quote it here:

We had two versions of the game where a general overview of Starcraft 2 strategy would tell us that Zerg is the race that benefits most from being able to take faster expansions, from having larger maps, from having more open maps, and from the game being less "deathbally". Legacy of the Void was specifically designed so that we need to take faster expansions, so that the maps are generally larger, so that the maps are generally more open, and so that the game is significantly less "deathbally". Zerg has gone on to win more money than any other race in Legacy of the Void. This is going to read as balance whine, but I don't think it's a balance issue. No amount of tweaking unit stats is going to make a significant difference to core design flaws that result from Blizzard's decision to move to a 12 worker start and fewer minerals per base...


EDIT:

I'm definitely sceptical that statistics are capable of telling us who the GOAT is. They can definitely weed out people who shouldn't be in the conversation, but there are so many subjective factors that also deserve to be part of the conversation. Here are some examples:

  • How much harder are prep-tournament than weekend-tournaments? How do you factor this into the statistics?
  • How much harder are team-leagues when snipers can be prepared?
  • How important are team-league statistics compared to individual-league statistics?
  • How much more pressure does a player feel when playing in the GSL studio than when playing at a LAN?
  • How much more important than everything else was GSL in the early days?
  • How quickly did the importance of GSL wane with time?
  • How important is sustained dominance in a period where barely any new talent is coming through? Does the fact that the NesTea award has been achieved many more times in Legacy of the Void demonstrate that the lack of new talent coming through has made sustained success easier?
  • How did losing Korean team-houses post-Proleague affect talent development in Korea?
  • How much has balance impacted on win-rates at various points in time? Or game design choices? Or map-pools?

It's admirable - and I said this about Mizenhauer's attempt as well - that you're trying to only use statistics. But it's ultimately a losing effort when there are so so so so so many subjective factors that should also be considered.

A statistical analysis can give Serral or Maru or whoever else as the answer all it wants, I couldn't care less.

All things are influenced by contexts, but that does not mean, that they are less real or immeasurable.

You haven't tried to account for any of that context though. You've simply assumed that all things are equal across all eras and expansions, and then treated the numbers as absolute. It should be obvious to everyone here that all eras and expansions are not equal, and so treating the numbers as absolute is somewhat foolish.

Mvp is an obvious example where handwaving away all the subjective context is silly. Mvp was dominant in a time period were simply reaching GSL was a massive achievement, and new stars were frequently bursting onto the scene. In comparison, Maru's first GSL win was in a tournament that NoRegret qualified for. Not to dunk too hard on NoRegret, but those are not comparable data sets, and I'm sure there are lots of examples of other data sets that don't deserve to be taken into equal consideration. I'm also sure that every one of those examples is going to be incredibly subjective.

So torture the data all you like, you can't answer the GOAT question through data alone.


You're lowering the value of Maru's first GSL win because NoRegret qualified?
In MVP's first GSL win, Choya got Top 8... the skill level of most SC2 players in 2011 was not very high.
Just look at all the GSL players who qualified and quickly faded away or failed to qualify again. I would say that's a sign that the players qualifying were at a low level, than to say that the field was very deep and competitive.
There's a clear gap between the players who knew how to play a decent macro game, like MVP and Nestea, and players like Choya, InCa, and whoever the heck jookTo is.

"Macro game" is an outdated term / not precise enough lol. It's more about "playstyle" and how you like to play the game -> you can start with cheesy strats and it can evolve into a macro game. Is being good at playing "macro games" that start weird (ie. changing timings) better or worse than being good at the "macro games" that start with "macro builds" / passive strats (fast CC or whatever is "meta")?
Similarly, when zerg had an utterly broken / OP composition (ie. broodlord infestor), the game in TvZ was often about the terran trying to find a way to kill the zerg before he got to that compo, while the zerg tried to survive / "get there" for his win condition. The that were players "good" at getting there, but worse in other compartiments of the game (for example being in the driver seat, or whatever), were they less skillfull than those who thrived in chaos/creating game?

All in all, different eras / patchs (extensions) rewarded different skill sets. If you think Choya / InCa / jookTo were bad players / not skilled, you are being naïve imho. Or you simply weren't around / following GSL + other tourneys during that era, because those guys were actually strong.


Macro game is a very reasonable term.

In WoL, there ended up not being many good aggressive openers, especially once the maps figured out how to be more standard and stable. Terrans would open with the same hellion banshee all the time and be pretty much completely safe in TvZ, they would open with a 1/1/1 or expo into 1/1/1 in TvT and as long as they got their tanks up and split and vikings up they'd be safe vs all harass. There was often not much happening til players started trying to get 3rd bases.

If you knew how to play macro and not lose to 1 base plays or early harass builds, then you were ahead.

Choya was not at all strong. He was maybe decent for a couple seasons but quickly fell off. Like most players.

It's really tiring hearing people say "you weren't around back then / didn't watch the scene closely" just cus you have a different opinion.

Then define strong?
Bomber STRUGGLED for a long time to have good results in GSL / tournaments but he was known to be a monster in practice / ladder etc. Does that mean he wasn’t strong when his results were good?
I am not saying Choya was the strongest sc2 player back then but dismissing is skill is a bit disrespectful / naive.
FireCake was pretty « bad » / unsuccessful at Super Smash Bros Melee prior to playing sc2/WoL, but he managed to get decent results in StarCraft 2.
Sometimes it’s about form / motivation or whatever.

All in all my point is mainly that you can’t dismiss a tournament results because you think InCa reaching a finals + you think InCa is bad means the whole tournament is invalid

Context matters a lot ; and InCa was strong in that particular tournament
You didn’t get to the finals of a GSL / ro8 by luck alone


Look, I'm not the one being dismissive. You're missing the context of my point. Someone suggested that Maru's GSL win might not have meant much if NoRegret managed to qualify. Choya isn't a shining example of a GSL player either and he made Ro8 which is considered an impressive placement.

If you think that we shouldn't dismiss MVP's win when players like Choya can get Ro8 then i hope you'd agree we shouldn't dismiss the strength of GSL when Maru won with NoRegret qualifying.

My stance is that the level of competition may have decreased a bit over time, but GSL was still very competitive around 2017-2018 and only started falling off a little from 2018-2019 onwards, and then sharply declining the last couple years. Players in 2017-2018 were still pretty much in their peak forms and shouldn't be considered to be weaker than their 2015 selves. Maybe in 2018 they were slightly slightly weaker, but it's not like they fell off so hard that Serral dominating them means nothing in terms of whether he'd be able to beat their 2015 selves if he was fulltime in 2015.

I agree on the history etc, but sometimes being full time doesn’t allow a player to shine. We can estimate what Serral could have achieved, but it’s difficult to really know.
We don’t have a clear answer for sc2, albeit we have strong candidates
WriterMaru
lokol4890
Profile Joined May 2023
114 Posts
July 22 2024 20:53 GMT
#66
On July 23 2024 05:40 UnLarva wrote:
There are no contextual weightings in Aligulac ratings (other than what people may include to it, winks). It is always player vs player -mode, by default. That gives the best resolution available.

A rating of a player is always (and only) measured by his/her opponent's rating. Nothing more, nothing less. That is why it is as objective as rating systems come. It measure only a player strength vs other as it is, regardless of circumstances, or context.

Biggest problem with Aligulac is (and always has been) the objectivity and equality of inclusion of 'data worthy' input.

For GOAT (of now) candidates this is not a problem, but generally there exists one hell of 'inclusion bias'. System needed already much more volunteers in during heydays of the this all. Now, when everything but the Skill, and competition following from that is ever highest levels, the documentation level and pressure to do so is in it's lowest.

Regardless of that, no matter how low levels of volunteer participation have gone, we can be sure that at the top, things are properly taken in account, and we can be sure that no man hours put to the infernal and toily process of inclusion of missing data over the whole historical existence can ever change the overall picture.

Statistics happen only after the fact(s), not before them.

Nothing of this can change the facts, even measured by Aligulac. A measurement is just as good as it's input. For top GOAT contenders it is nearly perfect.


Well this is just not true. Aligulac is pretty imperfect, exactly because it doesn't account for setting. Are you really hanging your hat on serral being top 1,2 in the world in 2017, really? Or maxpax being top 2 at any point during his career? Because this is where aligulac's "objectivity" leads us. Aligulac ratings are close to useless, by themselves, in goat discussions.
UnLarva
Profile Joined March 2019
458 Posts
July 22 2024 20:54 GMT
#67
On July 23 2024 05:53 lokol4890 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 23 2024 05:40 UnLarva wrote:
There are no contextual weightings in Aligulac ratings (other than what people may include to it, winks). It is always player vs player -mode, by default. That gives the best resolution available.

A rating of a player is always (and only) measured by his/her opponent's rating. Nothing more, nothing less. That is why it is as objective as rating systems come. It measure only a player strength vs other as it is, regardless of circumstances, or context.

Biggest problem with Aligulac is (and always has been) the objectivity and equality of inclusion of 'data worthy' input.

For GOAT (of now) candidates this is not a problem, but generally there exists one hell of 'inclusion bias'. System needed already much more volunteers in during heydays of the this all. Now, when everything but the Skill, and competition following from that is ever highest levels, the documentation level and pressure to do so is in it's lowest.

Regardless of that, no matter how low levels of volunteer participation have gone, we can be sure that at the top, things are properly taken in account, and we can be sure that no man hours put to the infernal and toily process of inclusion of missing data over the whole historical existence can ever change the overall picture.

Statistics happen only after the fact(s), not before them.

Nothing of this can change the facts, even measured by Aligulac. A measurement is just as good as it's input. For top GOAT contenders it is nearly perfect.


Well this is just not true. Aligulac is pretty imperfect, exactly because it doesn't account for setting. Are you really hanging your hat on serral being top 1,2 in the world in 2017, really? Or maxpax being top 2 at any point during his career? Because this is where aligulac's "objectivity" leads us. Aligulac ratings are close to useless, by themselves, in goat discussions.

Part-time Serralogist
UnLarva
Profile Joined March 2019
458 Posts
July 22 2024 21:03 GMT
#68
Useless? Why? For the GOAT a particular setting SHOULD be irrelevant. Like, by default (per tl.net and reddit and all)

As long as MaxPax doesn't appear and carry his person offline with the cheering crowd he can never be even a GOAT contender, even if he beat other goats 100-0 in other contexts. That, as measured by Aligulac, doesn't diminish his skill.

Critics against Aligulac are the same the OP of this thread must suffer. Without your teeth you cannot chew.
Part-time Serralogist
MJG
Profile Joined May 2018
United Kingdom1451 Posts
Last Edited: 2024-07-22 21:32:54
July 22 2024 21:03 GMT
#69
On July 23 2024 03:15 sc2turtlepants wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 23 2024 00:58 MJG wrote:
On July 23 2024 00:36 sc2turtlepants wrote:
On July 22 2024 20:17 MJG wrote:
You haven't tried to account for any of that context though. You've simply assumed that all things are equal across all eras and expansions, and then treated the numbers as absolute. It should be obvious to everyone here that all eras and expansions are not equal, and so treating the numbers as absolute is somewhat foolish.

This is blatantly untrue and is addressed at length in Premo's post. How about you try reading it before starting arguments in the comments?

I did read it.

He hasn't done it.

Not what I'm talking about anyway.

Maybe you're the one who needs to read posts before starting arguments?


Well, akshually, the absurd degree to which he weighted eras and tournament types is where he did exactly what you're talking about

It's really not. Picking a single cut-off point for weighting results isn't nearly what I was getting at. But I'm going to stop discussing this because it's clear that nobody is going to budge, that we're all talking past one another, and that the discourse is getting increasingly bitter...



The irony remains that I don't even know who I consider to be the GOAT. I just know that it's neither of the two most mentioned contenders because I'm just that biased against Legacy of the Void being taken seriously!
puking up frothing vitriolic sarcastic spittle
UnLarva
Profile Joined March 2019
458 Posts
July 22 2024 21:19 GMT
#70
On July 23 2024 05:53 lokol4890 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 23 2024 05:40 UnLarva wrote:
There are no contextual weightings in Aligulac ratings (other than what people may include to it, winks). It is always player vs player -mode, by default. That gives the best resolution available.

A rating of a player is always (and only) measured by his/her opponent's rating. Nothing more, nothing less. That is why it is as objective as rating systems come. It measure only a player strength vs other as it is, regardless of circumstances, or context.

Biggest problem with Aligulac is (and always has been) the objectivity and equality of inclusion of 'data worthy' input.

For GOAT (of now) candidates this is not a problem, but generally there exists one hell of 'inclusion bias'. System needed already much more volunteers in during heydays of the this all. Now, when everything but the Skill, and competition following from that is ever highest levels, the documentation level and pressure to do so is in it's lowest.

Regardless of that, no matter how low levels of volunteer participation have gone, we can be sure that at the top, things are properly taken in account, and we can be sure that no man hours put to the infernal and toily process of inclusion of missing data over the whole historical existence can ever change the overall picture.

Statistics happen only after the fact(s), not before them.

Nothing of this can change the facts, even measured by Aligulac. A measurement is just as good as it's input. For top GOAT contenders it is nearly perfect.


Well this is just not true. Aligulac is pretty imperfect, exactly because it doesn't account for setting. Are you really hanging your hat on serral being top 1,2 in the world in 2017, really? Or maxpax being top 2 at any point during his career? Because this is where aligulac's "objectivity" leads us. Aligulac ratings are close to useless, by themselves, in goat discussions.


http://aligulac.com/about/faq/

It works as it claims to work. By logic.

Problems occur when there are years long asymmetry between what really is inclusion-worthy and what is really included (to the data set). For GOAT contenders this is NOT the problem, for many others it is.

Aligulac's metric for the Goats is best resolution for performance you have, measured by real, factual results player vs player matches, day by day. Regardless of circumstances. Period.
Part-time Serralogist
Starcloud
Profile Joined September 2018
138 Posts
July 22 2024 21:33 GMT
#71
On July 22 2024 17:08 MJG wrote:

EDIT:

I'm definitely sceptical that statistics are capable of telling us who the GOAT is. They can definitely weed out people who shouldn't be in the conversation, but there are so many subjective factors that also deserve to be part of the conversation. Here are some examples:

Well, of course there are subjective matters that affect to the results of this debate. But also that is why it is interesting as well. In addition, statistics in a long run have a huge impact on what or who is greater or greatest of a bunch. Lets try to have a go at few of these claims for the sake of the debate.

On July 22 2024 17:08 MJG wrote:
  • How much harder are prep-tournament than weekend-tournaments? How do you factor this into the statistics?

Well this is one of the most interesting points. Prep-tournaments are different that weekenders. But again, based on the statistics and analyzing the gameplay of the best players we can determine that it generally doesnt make a lot of difference about the winrates of a person.

On July 22 2024 17:08 MJG wrote:
[*]How much harder are team-leagues when snipers can be prepared?
[*]How important are team-league statistics compared to individual-league statistics?

I dont think team-leagues should be given that much of value. Its whole different format after all with different goals.

On July 22 2024 17:08 MJG wrote:
[*]How much more pressure does a player feel when playing in the GSL studio than when playing at a LAN?

I dont know how is this any way relevant to the discussion ?

On July 22 2024 17:08 MJG wrote:
[*]How much more important than everything else was GSL in the early days?
[*]How quickly did the importance of GSL wane with time?

These issues have been discussed to the death and general consensus has been already decided. No need to go through again.

On July 22 2024 17:08 MJG wrote:
[*]How important is sustained dominance in a period where barely any new talent is coming through? Does the fact that the NesTea award has been achieved many more times in Legacy of the Void demonstrate that the lack of new talent coming through has made sustained success easier?

Yes, this of course does matter. However this topic too has already been discussed a lot in 10:s of previous threads. It affects some, but in the end there arent countless Marus/Serrals/Clems/Rains/Flashes coming out of new player pools however big they may be. Makes competition harder for sure though.

On July 22 2024 17:08 MJG wrote:
[*]How did losing Korean team-houses post-Proleague affect talent development in Korea?

I dont see how this issue has anything to do with the topic.

On July 22 2024 17:08 MJG wrote:
[*]How much has balance impacted on win-rates at various points in time? Or game design choices? Or map-pools?

This is maybe the hardest thing to analyze and to add to the results. However, if we have large enough time-window and data to go through, those things dont have that much of an impact overall. As we are talking about time-window of 10+ years and have all the data from these times, the balance/design/map-pools are not that big of an deal in the big picture.

On July 22 2024 17:08 MJG wrote:
It's admirable - and I said this about Mizenhauer's attempt as well - that you're trying to only use statistics. But it's ultimately a losing effort when there are so so so so so many subjective factors that should also be considered.

A purely statistical analysis can give Serral or Maru or whoever else as the answer all it wants, I couldn't care less because it isn't the whole picture.


I think its just the other way around; The large amount of time and statistics from every era of gameplay diminish the subjective matters that affect to the equation. If you look at the lists that the OP and Miz have done and still have different opinion, thats okay. However if we want to neutrally determine who might be the best of all time, then the statistics are the ONLY information that you can base your opinions believably. Of course there are things that we cant measure with statistics and are up to debate, but they can never be the central of the discussion, because then we lose the credibility of the matter in hand.
Charoisaur
Profile Joined August 2014
Germany16062 Posts
Last Edited: 2024-07-22 22:02:48
July 22 2024 22:01 GMT
#72
Do we really need to nitpick about how meaningful aligulac ratings are? Yeah, it's not a good metric to use, but Serral would be at the top regardless of the rating system we use, his winrates are just so far ahead of any other player.

Btw starcrafthistorian released a really good interview with uthermal that includes the topic, and he basically summarized what I also think

Many of the coolest moments in sc2 happen due to worker harassment
UnLarva
Profile Joined March 2019
458 Posts
July 22 2024 22:04 GMT
#73
In Defence of Aligulac.

For every serious rating system, the objectivity is the key, there cannot be privileged data points/factors, and if there are, then they apply equally to everyone. Highest resolution will come if a player's rating is always updated after every game he plays. For practical reasons this is seldom possible. Aligulac updates a list after every two weeks period, that gives very good resolution. For 'real time' rating this happens every day.

This particular rating system doesn't weight anything contextual to a match result. A winner win and loser lose, and their ratings are adjusted accordingly, following the set rules and logic (openly declared from the beginning) to take account 3 different races in the game. These rules apply to everyone. The system is build so that, your only way to improve your rating is to perform better than your expected result (math, uh, oh math, declared openly though).

For all out-of-system purposes and agendas it is useful to know that there are no difference between a random weekly tournament match between Caracalla2 vs Umphteen and Katowice 202X Maru vs Serral Final, as they equally measure a player in a given circumstances.

What is generally considered the weakness and fault of the Aligulac system, is it's biggest strength. Only player vs player result have impact to the rating of player.

Both Serral and Maru have been measured by the system over their entire careers using same criteria and logic, with exceptionally high level of data inclusion and volunteerism to do that for both.

2-0 for Serral.
Part-time Serralogist
JJH777
Profile Joined January 2011
United States4417 Posts
July 22 2024 22:16 GMT
#74
Aligulac definitely has major issues that were clear even before Serral was rated highly on it. Anyone who played outside of Korea was very overrated. Look at someone like Polt, he won super tournament in 2011 but besides that was a middle of the road KR player usually eliminated pretty early. He leaves KR and dominated the NA scene and he is top 5 on aligulac for ages and I believe even hit #1 a few times. I don't believe Polt was ever the #1 or even a top 3 player and I don't think that's a controversial take.

Another good and even more extreme example is King Kong. He made it all the way top 3 in late 2013 by nigh exclusively beating up on SEA and AUS players. He had basically no games played against the actual best players in the world but he was so dominant in his home region aligulac named him the 3rd best player in the world. In actual skill I guarantee King Kong was literally never even top 50 in the entire history of SC2 and most people haven't even heard of him. If that doesn't show how flawed aligulac is I don't know what will.

All that to say at this point in time Serral would without a doubt be the top player in any objective rating system. Both in current and likely in overall time spent as #1. However he would not have hit #1 in 2017 and would not have spent most of 2018 as #1 and his overall time spent as #1 would be a lot lower. That was pure rating inflation due to beating up on players worse than him. The first time he hit #1 his winrate vs Koreans was in the 40% range for the few months leading up to it. His winrate has continued to be inflated particularly in the years that had 3 EU regionals with 8 player round robin groups. If you put Maru in a serral-less EU regional group with round robin 3 times per year his aligulac would jump significantly.
UnLarva
Profile Joined March 2019
458 Posts
July 22 2024 22:28 GMT
#75
Aligulac ratings are internally self-regulating. No matter how high can someone climb, it needs only someone lower rated to 're-normalize' it by winning a match, or two, or three.

With enough big sample sets everything will be set to show the real strength of a player. More accurately more bigger sample, irrespective to a context.

In Serral's case, there haven't yet occurred a situation were someone can really make a dent to his rating. Biggest dent by individual competition was made by Clem few years ago.

The system's logic is that, unless you're really better than the rest, you cannot just dominate the scene half of the game's existence without real skill. Measured by the Aligulac rating (rating inflation included).
Part-time Serralogist
UnLarva
Profile Joined March 2019
458 Posts
July 22 2024 22:34 GMT
#76
"If you put Maru in a serral-less EU regional group with round robin 3 times per year his aligulac would jump significantly."

"If you put Maru in a serral-less GSL with what ever bracket system 3 times per year his GSL trophy-count would stay same."
Part-time Serralogist
lokol4890
Profile Joined May 2023
114 Posts
July 22 2024 22:34 GMT
#77
On July 23 2024 06:03 UnLarva wrote:
Useless? Why? For the GOAT a particular setting SHOULD be irrelevant. Like, by default (per tl.net and reddit and all)

As long as MaxPax doesn't appear and carry his person offline with the cheering crowd he can never be even a GOAT contender, even if he beat other goats 100-0 in other contexts. That, as measured by Aligulac, doesn't diminish his skill.

Critics against Aligulac are the same the OP of this thread must suffer. Without your teeth you cannot chew.


If I understood your initial point correctly, maxpax not appearing in offline events matters little. Aligulac rates him super high, exemplified by him passing maru in no.2 several times. Keep that up for years and, based on your initial assessment, you'd have to put in the goat list. Otherwise you're doing the same thing that supposedly cannot be done: contextualize the data instead of just taking it as is.

Are you gonna answer the other problem with aligulac as applied to serral: top 1 or 2 since 2017, prior to him winning any premier events, or should I just assume you view this as fine. You can't complain that people present their opinions just because they disagree with you.
UnLarva
Profile Joined March 2019
458 Posts
Last Edited: 2024-07-22 23:04:40
July 22 2024 22:41 GMT
#78
On July 23 2024 07:34 lokol4890 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 23 2024 06:03 UnLarva wrote:
Useless? Why? For the GOAT a particular setting SHOULD be irrelevant. Like, by default (per tl.net and reddit and all)

As long as MaxPax doesn't appear and carry his person offline with the cheering crowd he can never be even a GOAT contender, even if he beat other goats 100-0 in other contexts. That, as measured by Aligulac, doesn't diminish his skill.

Critics against Aligulac are the same the OP of this thread must suffer. Without your teeth you cannot chew.


If I understood your initial point correctly, maxpax not appearing in offline events matters little. Aligulac rates him super high, exemplified by him passing maru in no.2 several times. Keep that up for years and, based on your initial assessment, you'd have to put in the goat list. Otherwise you're doing the same thing that supposedly cannot be done: contextualize the data instead of just taking it as is.

Are you gonna answer the other problem with aligulac as applied to serral: top 1 or 2 since 2017, prior to him winning any premier events, or should I just assume you view this as fine. You can't complain that people present their opinions just because they disagree with you.


MaxPax has 0 premier tournament victories (offline or online). He can be excluded from the GOAT conversation only by that fact (set by general consensus in these parts), even if he would have several hundreds points better Aligulac rating than the rest.

His rating would still measure his skill objectively, irrespective to the context.

In reverse, Rogue would be the guy respective to the "context".

Added clarification: it's not any a player's fault if their opponent cannot perform enough well to get some rating. But it doesn't generally require an insane rating (relative to peers) to perform in a contexts that really matter. Particularly if talking about a GOAT. Maru cannot be the Goat because he have no World Championship title, and Serral cannot be that because he didn't take a part to The GSL when it really mattered anything.
Part-time Serralogist
Poopi
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
France12911 Posts
July 22 2024 22:59 GMT
#79
On July 23 2024 07:16 JJH777 wrote:
Aligulac definitely has major issues that were clear even before Serral was rated highly on it. Anyone who played outside of Korea was very overrated. Look at someone like Polt, he won super tournament in 2011 but besides that was a middle of the road KR player usually eliminated pretty early. He leaves KR and dominated the NA scene and he is top 5 on aligulac for ages and I believe even hit #1 a few times. I don't believe Polt was ever the #1 or even a top 3 player and I don't think that's a controversial take.

Another good and even more extreme example is King Kong. He made it all the way top 3 in late 2013 by nigh exclusively beating up on SEA and AUS players. He had basically no games played against the actual best players in the world but he was so dominant in his home region aligulac named him the 3rd best player in the world. In actual skill I guarantee King Kong was literally never even top 50 in the entire history of SC2 and most people haven't even heard of him. If that doesn't show how flawed aligulac is I don't know what will.

All that to say at this point in time Serral would without a doubt be the top player in any objective rating system. Both in current and likely in overall time spent as #1. However he would not have hit #1 in 2017 and would not have spent most of 2018 as #1 and his overall time spent as #1 would be a lot lower. That was pure rating inflation due to beating up on players worse than him. The first time he hit #1 his winrate vs Koreans was in the 40% range for the few months leading up to it. His winrate has continued to be inflated particularly in the years that had 3 EU regionals with 8 player round robin groups. If you put Maru in a serral-less EU regional group with round robin 3 times per year his aligulac would jump significantly.

Yeah I don't think people realize that dominating EU in 2018 with players like MaNa / Has getting to finals is not particularly difficult. Reynor was only able to play the latest DH iirc and he was the only real "threat" in EU at the time imho. SpeCial was pretty good back then too and I believe he also managed to go far that year but the brackets from back then were not super competitive in EU

Aligulac is a particularly flawed tool. You could abuse it if you wanted to (or even not knowingly)
WriterMaru
UnLarva
Profile Joined March 2019
458 Posts
July 22 2024 23:08 GMT
#80
Dear @Poopi, It may have not been particularly difficult to dominate EU 2018, but that same guy who did it also won The GSL vs World, and Blizzcon same year.

Sure, Aligulac rewarded him for such feats. Keep it honest.
Part-time Serralogist
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 11 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
15:00
Season 2 - Bonus Cup 8
uThermal323
RotterdaM278
IndyStarCraft 217
LiquipediaDiscussion
Ladder Legends
15:00
Valedictorian Cup #1
MaxPax vs Krystianer
Solar vs Cham
SteadfastSC99
Liquipedia
PSISTORM Gaming Misc
14:55
FSL s10 Code S FINALS
Freeedom37
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
uThermal 323
RotterdaM 278
IndyStarCraft 217
ProTech124
Rex 105
Ryung 102
SteadfastSC 99
BRAT_OK 58
EmSc Tv 15
StarCraft: Brood War
actioN 324
firebathero 216
Hyun 142
Sexy 108
Dewaltoss 105
ToSsGirL 51
Pusan 47
Free 47
Sharp 47
Rock 35
[ Show more ]
soO 34
yabsab 20
IntoTheRainbow 20
Terrorterran 15
Barracks 15
GoRush 12
Dota 2
Gorgc7319
qojqva1514
Counter-Strike
fl0m1867
byalli1076
Super Smash Bros
AZ_Axe122
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor739
Liquid`Hasu448
MindelVK13
Other Games
Grubby2025
singsing1645
FrodaN1170
B2W.Neo636
XBOCT295
Sick267
QueenE245
mouzStarbuck214
KnowMe143
Organizations
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Main Stream20895
Other Games
gamesdonequick417
StarCraft 2
EmSc Tv 15
EmSc2Tv 15
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
[ Show 21 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Adnapsc2 13
• Dystopia_ 5
• IndyKCrew
• sooper7s
• Migwel
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Kozan
StarCraft: Brood War
• Airneanach44
• FirePhoenix2
• Michael_bg 1
• HerbMon 1
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• WagamamaTV291
League of Legends
• Jankos4427
• TFBlade964
Other Games
• imaqtpie310
• Shiphtur245
Upcoming Events
BSL
1h 47m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
16h 47m
WardiTV Map Contest Tou…
17h 47m
Ladder Legends
21h 47m
BSL
1d 1h
CranKy Ducklings
1d 6h
Replay Cast
1d 15h
Wardi Open
1d 16h
Afreeca Starleague
1d 16h
Soma vs hero
Monday Night Weeklies
1d 22h
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
2 days
Replay Cast
2 days
Afreeca Starleague
2 days
Leta vs YSC
Replay Cast
4 days
The PondCast
4 days
KCM Race Survival
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Escore
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Replay Cast
6 days
IPSL
6 days
Ret vs Art_Of_Turtle
Radley vs TBD
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Escore Tournament S2: W4
RSL Revival: Season 4
NationLESS Cup

Ongoing

BSL Season 22
ASL Season 21
CSL 2026 SPRING (S20)
IPSL Spring 2026
KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 2
StarCraft2 Community Team League 2026 Spring
WardiTV TLMC #16
Nations Cup 2026
IEM Rio 2026
PGL Bucharest 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 1
BLAST Open Spring 2026
ESL Pro League S23 Finals
ESL Pro League S23 Stage 1&2
PGL Cluj-Napoca 2026

Upcoming

Escore Tournament S2: W5
Acropolis #4
BSL 22 Non-Korean Championship
CSLAN 4
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
HSC XXIX
uThermal 2v2 2026 Main Event
Maestros of the Game 2
2026 GSL S2
RSL Revival: Season 5
2026 GSL S1
XSE Pro League 2026
IEM Cologne Major 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 2
CS Asia Championships 2026
IEM Atlanta 2026
Asian Champions League 2026
PGL Astana 2026
BLAST Rivals Spring 2026
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.