|
On February 08 2025 23:26 ejozl wrote:@WOMBAT This is the list before introducing 'welfare' + Show Spoiler +MARU
INNO
SERRAL
SOS
LIFE
DARK
ROGUE
ZEST
TY
MC
STATS
BYUN
MMA
HERO
CLASSIC
NEEB
TAEJA
PARTING
SOO
SPECIAL
While a fine list it does showcase the number one weakness of using esportsearnings, and that is that some tournaments simply disallow some players of participating in SC2. This is why I introduced 'welfare' and it affects: Serral, MC, MMA, Neeb and special. It's just me arbitrarily going in a deciding to substract % of money away from certain years, this is pretty much just molesting the stats, but I think it's still better than voiding out these players, or leaving it be. The top 3 abusers of their race according to my list are: Dark, SoO and Serral, Rogue is closely behind, so your analysis putting Rogue together with Serral in terms of when they were winning most of their earnings is correct. MVP and Rain are very low because they were the top 1 abusers of the other races, though still ranking behind most of the Zergs, hell even though Life is the lowest abuser of Zerg, he's still higher than MVP. The balance factor for the year is simply found dividing earnings by race by total earnings. I don't know what else there is to reveal, I did say WoL era was higher than post kespa (blizzcon still around), but I now see that I've rated it the same.
So this list is with your era- and the balance-multiplier (prize money per race/total prize money for a given year) but without the welfare-multiplier, correct?
The equation for Serral for 2018 without the welfare-multiplier would be 0,5*1593385/3592321*478420, yes?
So what is Serral's score with the welfare mulitiplier in that year?
Can you show a screenshot of one of the players sheet/excel?
What is the range for this welfare cut? Or was it always the same amount? Did you look per year and apply it each year individually?
You write that "Dark jumped ahead of Rogue and Zest", although he was before them in your original list as well.
And that "herO jumped ahead of Classic and PartinG" but herO was ahead of PartinG before.
You said "Serral would've been at the bottom of the list without 2024". How does this work, when Serral on the non-updated list was rank 11 out of 20?
Given that the modern era gets divided by 4 in comparison to KeSPA and your original article came out in August 2024, I don't see how an update after August 2024 with a dividend of 4 is able to jumpstart Serral from the bottom of the list to rank 8. There is no calculation that could make this work, given the little change that the end of 2024 or even 2024 in its entirety contributed to Serral's total earnings, especially with a denominator of 4.
If I make a quick calculation according to your own explanations, Serral made roughly 85% of his earnings from 2017-2023. And those measly 15% he got in 2024 somehow put him from the bottom of the list to rank 8? And again... how did Serral end up at the bottom of the list at all, when was rank 11 in the original list?
Unless I am misunderstanding something very gravely, seeing how there are contradicting or mutually exclusive as well as non-sensical statements, I am gonna repeat my words from August 9th: "But are there seriously people thinking that this isn't a troll-/bait-post, lol?"
|
On February 08 2025 15:48 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2025 22:14 Charoisaur wrote:On February 07 2025 21:56 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 21:12 Charoisaur wrote:On February 07 2025 20:52 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 20:34 Charoisaur wrote:Now your arguments are getting absolutely wild. Taking Stephano's performance who semi-retired after WoL as baseline that korean skill level didn't get worse  I don't even know if it's worth continuing this argument at this point. That's the same as taking Serral's winrate as baseline and saying because his winrates got better after 2017 koreans got worse Accepted, Stephano was a shitty example. What about Scarlett, Nerchio and MaNa? And yes, I know, this is the biggest sample size, but none of them correlate with the idea that individual Korean skill level massively droped. Why not take Serral as a baseline? Wouldn't he be the most suitable candidate for serving as the baseline given he's the most consistent player ever and hasn't lost motivation at all as far as we can tell? In his first 3 years after his ascension his winrates against koreans were: 2018: Serral is 61–27 (69.32%) in games and 24–4 (85.71%) in matches. 2019:Serral is 65–29 (69.15%) in games and 23–7 (76.67%) in matches. 2020: Serral is 102–44 (69.86%) in games and 42–7 (85.71%) in matches. and in 2024: Serral is 68–9 (88.31%) in games and 26–1 (96.30%) in matches. By your own logic that should be irrefutable proof that koreans have declined. If you want to say "but Serral has improved" you may come to the conclusion that you can't use any player as the baseline because nobody's skill level stays completely consistent across the years. Personally, I will just go what with the pros say. Inno said he's gotten slower with advanced age. Dark said it. Maru said he can't practice much any more due to his injuries. Uthermal in his interview with sc2historian extensively spoke about how younger players are just advantaged in competitive sc2. I don't deny that age takes its toll. It is the scope that is the issue. If we only speak about age droping win percentages by 3%, that is absolutely fine by me. But that would not counter Serral's GOAT claim. And Serral imo isn't the best example because he is the biggest outlier in SC2 history. Further, you cannot take the player that you are trying to relate, as the anchor for the comparison. The relation between prime era players and Serral is the topic, thus you have to have other players to which you compare the idea, that Koreans overall got worse in comparison to Serral, who subsequently rose to power. Serral also has 71% in 2021. Then again 85% in 2023. Did his age reset? What about the other foreigners? Why didn't they get better versus the Koreans? I do not deny that some of these prime era guys probably had injuries or weren't as fast as they were aged 22. My point is that this decline doesn't make a big impact on the GOAT debate. Well, then I agree, I also think that if he played in the Kespa era he likely would have better winrates then anyone who played back then (although only by a slight degree). I just disagree with the premise that korean skill level hasn't decreased at all which in some of your previous replies it seemed you believed. For Serral vs prime era guys I think we've seen that. Maru, Dark, Rogue and Stats were in their prime from 2018-2021 and are considered to be among the greatest of all time. Serral's winrate vs them in that era is probably a good predictor on how he would've fared against the top 10-12 players in the Kespa era (mostly in the 50-60% range). Then we can agree  Looking at your example though, I think you'd have to set at least a 60% win base line. In the time frame you mentioned, Serral's match win rate versus these 4 guys is 61% in total. And it includes a period where you have to add a 45% win rate versus Rogue in a pool of only 4 players. As Rogue is the only player that could match Serral overall (Serral by 2022, which I would still count as Rogue's prime, wins slightly with 8:7 - 53%), I'd take that sample size and time frame, where a 45% win rate versus Rogue is incorporated in a pool of 4 players with a grain of salt. Especially when prime players like INno, sOs, Zest and Solar all had over 65% against the top Koreans from 2013-2015. I don't see, Serral performing worse than them.
Yeah about 60-65% winrate against the top players seems reasonable. Keep in mind that's the winrate I'd expect from him against the championship contenders of that era, vs lower tiered koreans I'd expect a much higher winrate, making his overall winrate probably around 70%
|
On February 09 2025 00:31 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2025 15:48 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 22:14 Charoisaur wrote:On February 07 2025 21:56 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 21:12 Charoisaur wrote:On February 07 2025 20:52 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 20:34 Charoisaur wrote:Now your arguments are getting absolutely wild. Taking Stephano's performance who semi-retired after WoL as baseline that korean skill level didn't get worse I don't even know if it's worth continuing this argument at this point. That's the same as taking Serral's winrate as baseline and saying because his winrates got better after 2017 koreans got worse Accepted, Stephano was a shitty example. What about Scarlett, Nerchio and MaNa? And yes, I know, this is the biggest sample size, but none of them correlate with the idea that individual Korean skill level massively droped. Why not take Serral as a baseline? Wouldn't he be the most suitable candidate for serving as the baseline given he's the most consistent player ever and hasn't lost motivation at all as far as we can tell? In his first 3 years after his ascension his winrates against koreans were: 2018: Serral is 61–27 (69.32%) in games and 24–4 (85.71%) in matches. 2019:Serral is 65–29 (69.15%) in games and 23–7 (76.67%) in matches. 2020: Serral is 102–44 (69.86%) in games and 42–7 (85.71%) in matches. and in 2024: Serral is 68–9 (88.31%) in games and 26–1 (96.30%) in matches. By your own logic that should be irrefutable proof that koreans have declined. If you want to say "but Serral has improved" you may come to the conclusion that you can't use any player as the baseline because nobody's skill level stays completely consistent across the years. Personally, I will just go what with the pros say. Inno said he's gotten slower with advanced age. Dark said it. Maru said he can't practice much any more due to his injuries. Uthermal in his interview with sc2historian extensively spoke about how younger players are just advantaged in competitive sc2. I don't deny that age takes its toll. It is the scope that is the issue. If we only speak about age droping win percentages by 3%, that is absolutely fine by me. But that would not counter Serral's GOAT claim. And Serral imo isn't the best example because he is the biggest outlier in SC2 history. Further, you cannot take the player that you are trying to relate, as the anchor for the comparison. The relation between prime era players and Serral is the topic, thus you have to have other players to which you compare the idea, that Koreans overall got worse in comparison to Serral, who subsequently rose to power. Serral also has 71% in 2021. Then again 85% in 2023. Did his age reset? What about the other foreigners? Why didn't they get better versus the Koreans? I do not deny that some of these prime era guys probably had injuries or weren't as fast as they were aged 22. My point is that this decline doesn't make a big impact on the GOAT debate. Well, then I agree, I also think that if he played in the Kespa era he likely would have better winrates then anyone who played back then (although only by a slight degree). I just disagree with the premise that korean skill level hasn't decreased at all which in some of your previous replies it seemed you believed. For Serral vs prime era guys I think we've seen that. Maru, Dark, Rogue and Stats were in their prime from 2018-2021 and are considered to be among the greatest of all time. Serral's winrate vs them in that era is probably a good predictor on how he would've fared against the top 10-12 players in the Kespa era (mostly in the 50-60% range). Then we can agree Looking at your example though, I think you'd have to set at least a 60% win base line. In the time frame you mentioned, Serral's match win rate versus these 4 guys is 61% in total. And it includes a period where you have to add a 45% win rate versus Rogue in a pool of only 4 players. As Rogue is the only player that could match Serral overall (Serral by 2022, which I would still count as Rogue's prime, wins slightly with 8:7 - 53%), I'd take that sample size and time frame, where a 45% win rate versus Rogue is incorporated in a pool of 4 players with a grain of salt. Especially when prime players like INno, sOs, Zest and Solar all had over 65% against the top Koreans from 2013-2015. I don't see, Serral performing worse than them. Yeah about 60-65% winrate against the top players seems reasonable. Keep in mind that's the winrate I'd expect from him against the championship contenders of that era, vs lower tiered koreans I'd expect a much higher winrate, making his overall winrate probably around 70%
Just to be clear, I was referring to your example, which I still think isn't the best comparison. I think Serral would perform better.
If I look at the numbers of 2013-2015 and how INno (73,62%), Solar (73,49%) and PartinG (71,10%) performed versus the top Korean sample size I used for my era comparison, I gotta wonder why Serral shouldn't achieve similar records.
Yes, I could only test him against the same players a couple of years later and for some not in their prime (2018-2019) but in a pool of Zest, sOs, TY, Classic, INnoVation, Maru, soO, Trap, Creator, Solar, Dark and Stats Serral had a win rate of 85,42% (Rogue wasn't in that pool, as there was no data for him in 2013-2015, but including him, would only boost Serral's numbers, as he won 3 times against Rogue in that period).
Even if we subtract roughly 12,5% because of motivation, age, etc. which I find an extremely high number, Serral would still be around 70-75% versus the best, not even talking about the lower tier Koreans. But I guess, we will never know for sure 
|
On February 09 2025 01:04 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2025 00:31 Charoisaur wrote:On February 08 2025 15:48 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 22:14 Charoisaur wrote:On February 07 2025 21:56 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 21:12 Charoisaur wrote:On February 07 2025 20:52 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 20:34 Charoisaur wrote:Now your arguments are getting absolutely wild. Taking Stephano's performance who semi-retired after WoL as baseline that korean skill level didn't get worse I don't even know if it's worth continuing this argument at this point. That's the same as taking Serral's winrate as baseline and saying because his winrates got better after 2017 koreans got worse Accepted, Stephano was a shitty example. What about Scarlett, Nerchio and MaNa? And yes, I know, this is the biggest sample size, but none of them correlate with the idea that individual Korean skill level massively droped. Why not take Serral as a baseline? Wouldn't he be the most suitable candidate for serving as the baseline given he's the most consistent player ever and hasn't lost motivation at all as far as we can tell? In his first 3 years after his ascension his winrates against koreans were: 2018: Serral is 61–27 (69.32%) in games and 24–4 (85.71%) in matches. 2019:Serral is 65–29 (69.15%) in games and 23–7 (76.67%) in matches. 2020: Serral is 102–44 (69.86%) in games and 42–7 (85.71%) in matches. and in 2024: Serral is 68–9 (88.31%) in games and 26–1 (96.30%) in matches. By your own logic that should be irrefutable proof that koreans have declined. If you want to say "but Serral has improved" you may come to the conclusion that you can't use any player as the baseline because nobody's skill level stays completely consistent across the years. Personally, I will just go what with the pros say. Inno said he's gotten slower with advanced age. Dark said it. Maru said he can't practice much any more due to his injuries. Uthermal in his interview with sc2historian extensively spoke about how younger players are just advantaged in competitive sc2. I don't deny that age takes its toll. It is the scope that is the issue. If we only speak about age droping win percentages by 3%, that is absolutely fine by me. But that would not counter Serral's GOAT claim. And Serral imo isn't the best example because he is the biggest outlier in SC2 history. Further, you cannot take the player that you are trying to relate, as the anchor for the comparison. The relation between prime era players and Serral is the topic, thus you have to have other players to which you compare the idea, that Koreans overall got worse in comparison to Serral, who subsequently rose to power. Serral also has 71% in 2021. Then again 85% in 2023. Did his age reset? What about the other foreigners? Why didn't they get better versus the Koreans? I do not deny that some of these prime era guys probably had injuries or weren't as fast as they were aged 22. My point is that this decline doesn't make a big impact on the GOAT debate. Well, then I agree, I also think that if he played in the Kespa era he likely would have better winrates then anyone who played back then (although only by a slight degree). I just disagree with the premise that korean skill level hasn't decreased at all which in some of your previous replies it seemed you believed. For Serral vs prime era guys I think we've seen that. Maru, Dark, Rogue and Stats were in their prime from 2018-2021 and are considered to be among the greatest of all time. Serral's winrate vs them in that era is probably a good predictor on how he would've fared against the top 10-12 players in the Kespa era (mostly in the 50-60% range). Then we can agree Looking at your example though, I think you'd have to set at least a 60% win base line. In the time frame you mentioned, Serral's match win rate versus these 4 guys is 61% in total. And it includes a period where you have to add a 45% win rate versus Rogue in a pool of only 4 players. As Rogue is the only player that could match Serral overall (Serral by 2022, which I would still count as Rogue's prime, wins slightly with 8:7 - 53%), I'd take that sample size and time frame, where a 45% win rate versus Rogue is incorporated in a pool of 4 players with a grain of salt. Especially when prime players like INno, sOs, Zest and Solar all had over 65% against the top Koreans from 2013-2015. I don't see, Serral performing worse than them. Yeah about 60-65% winrate against the top players seems reasonable. Keep in mind that's the winrate I'd expect from him against the championship contenders of that era, vs lower tiered koreans I'd expect a much higher winrate, making his overall winrate probably around 70% Just to be clear, I was referring to your example, which I still think isn't the best comparison. I think Serral would perform better. If I look at the numbers of 2013-2015 and how INno (73,62%), Solar (73,49%) and PartinG (71,10%) performed versus the top Korean sample size I used for my era comparison, I gotta wonder why Serral shouldn't achieve similar records.
These are their overall records in that era - limited to vs korean only Inno has a 70% winrate with PartinG and Solar being around 64%.
So yeah I'd expect Serral to perform similar to Inno during that era or slightly better, which is not too shabby I think as Inno was really really good.
|
On February 09 2025 01:19 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2025 01:04 PremoBeats wrote:On February 09 2025 00:31 Charoisaur wrote:On February 08 2025 15:48 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 22:14 Charoisaur wrote:On February 07 2025 21:56 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 21:12 Charoisaur wrote:On February 07 2025 20:52 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 20:34 Charoisaur wrote:Now your arguments are getting absolutely wild. Taking Stephano's performance who semi-retired after WoL as baseline that korean skill level didn't get worse I don't even know if it's worth continuing this argument at this point. That's the same as taking Serral's winrate as baseline and saying because his winrates got better after 2017 koreans got worse Accepted, Stephano was a shitty example. What about Scarlett, Nerchio and MaNa? And yes, I know, this is the biggest sample size, but none of them correlate with the idea that individual Korean skill level massively droped. Why not take Serral as a baseline? Wouldn't he be the most suitable candidate for serving as the baseline given he's the most consistent player ever and hasn't lost motivation at all as far as we can tell? In his first 3 years after his ascension his winrates against koreans were: 2018: Serral is 61–27 (69.32%) in games and 24–4 (85.71%) in matches. 2019:Serral is 65–29 (69.15%) in games and 23–7 (76.67%) in matches. 2020: Serral is 102–44 (69.86%) in games and 42–7 (85.71%) in matches. and in 2024: Serral is 68–9 (88.31%) in games and 26–1 (96.30%) in matches. By your own logic that should be irrefutable proof that koreans have declined. If you want to say "but Serral has improved" you may come to the conclusion that you can't use any player as the baseline because nobody's skill level stays completely consistent across the years. Personally, I will just go what with the pros say. Inno said he's gotten slower with advanced age. Dark said it. Maru said he can't practice much any more due to his injuries. Uthermal in his interview with sc2historian extensively spoke about how younger players are just advantaged in competitive sc2. I don't deny that age takes its toll. It is the scope that is the issue. If we only speak about age droping win percentages by 3%, that is absolutely fine by me. But that would not counter Serral's GOAT claim. And Serral imo isn't the best example because he is the biggest outlier in SC2 history. Further, you cannot take the player that you are trying to relate, as the anchor for the comparison. The relation between prime era players and Serral is the topic, thus you have to have other players to which you compare the idea, that Koreans overall got worse in comparison to Serral, who subsequently rose to power. Serral also has 71% in 2021. Then again 85% in 2023. Did his age reset? What about the other foreigners? Why didn't they get better versus the Koreans? I do not deny that some of these prime era guys probably had injuries or weren't as fast as they were aged 22. My point is that this decline doesn't make a big impact on the GOAT debate. Well, then I agree, I also think that if he played in the Kespa era he likely would have better winrates then anyone who played back then (although only by a slight degree). I just disagree with the premise that korean skill level hasn't decreased at all which in some of your previous replies it seemed you believed. For Serral vs prime era guys I think we've seen that. Maru, Dark, Rogue and Stats were in their prime from 2018-2021 and are considered to be among the greatest of all time. Serral's winrate vs them in that era is probably a good predictor on how he would've fared against the top 10-12 players in the Kespa era (mostly in the 50-60% range). Then we can agree Looking at your example though, I think you'd have to set at least a 60% win base line. In the time frame you mentioned, Serral's match win rate versus these 4 guys is 61% in total. And it includes a period where you have to add a 45% win rate versus Rogue in a pool of only 4 players. As Rogue is the only player that could match Serral overall (Serral by 2022, which I would still count as Rogue's prime, wins slightly with 8:7 - 53%), I'd take that sample size and time frame, where a 45% win rate versus Rogue is incorporated in a pool of 4 players with a grain of salt. Especially when prime players like INno, sOs, Zest and Solar all had over 65% against the top Koreans from 2013-2015. I don't see, Serral performing worse than them. Yeah about 60-65% winrate against the top players seems reasonable. Keep in mind that's the winrate I'd expect from him against the championship contenders of that era, vs lower tiered koreans I'd expect a much higher winrate, making his overall winrate probably around 70% Just to be clear, I was referring to your example, which I still think isn't the best comparison. I think Serral would perform better. If I look at the numbers of 2013-2015 and how INno (73,62%), Solar (73,49%) and PartinG (71,10%) performed versus the top Korean sample size I used for my era comparison, I gotta wonder why Serral shouldn't achieve similar records. These are their overall records in that era - limited to vs korean only Inno has a 70% winrate with PartinG and Solar being around 64%. So yeah I'd expect Serral to perform similar to Inno during that era or slightly better, which is not too shabby I think as Inno was really really good.
Ah, yeah my bad, you're right... I looked at the wrong column in my list. Inno was 69,48% and soO came in second at 62,78% versus the mentioned player pool.
Still, given how Serral beat all of them at a 85% win rate, I doubt he'd be worse than INno if 2018/2019 Serral was put in 2013-2015.
|
Northern Ireland25107 Posts
On February 08 2025 23:26 ejozl wrote:@WOMBAT This is the list before introducing 'welfare' + Show Spoiler +MARU
INNO
SERRAL
SOS
LIFE
DARK
ROGUE
ZEST
TY
MC
STATS
BYUN
MMA
HERO
CLASSIC
NEEB
TAEJA
PARTING
SOO
SPECIAL
While a fine list it does showcase the number one weakness of using esportsearnings, and that is that some tournaments simply disallow some players of participating in SC2. This is why I introduced 'welfare' and it affects: Serral, MC, MMA, Neeb and special. It's just me arbitrarily going in a deciding to substract % of money away from certain years, this is pretty much just molesting the stats, but I think it's still better than voiding out these players, or leaving it be. The top 3 abusers of their race according to my list are: Dark, SoO and Serral, Rogue is closely behind, so your analysis putting Rogue together with Serral in terms of when they were winning most of their earnings is correct. MVP and Rain are very low because they were the top 1 abusers of the other races, though still ranking behind most of the Zergs, hell even though Life is the lowest abuser of Zerg, he's still higher than MVP. The balance factor for the year is simply found dividing earnings by race by total earnings. I don't know what else there is to reveal, I did say WoL era was higher than post kespa (blizzcon still around), but I now see that I've rated it the same.
Cheers for the response.
I’m surprised that Rain is the number one Toss abuser, is he notably so by your numbers?
It’s tricky to really gauge by prize money alone, because SC2 has always been so top-heavy in prize distribution. Both between placings generally, plus of course between tournaments.
Also if we’re weighting for that, I assume you’re applying the welfare modifier to racial earnings as well?
Otherwise say, Serral can be doubly punished by his earnings dropping by the welfare modifier, but also get minused for a ‘Zerg OP’ modifier that could be very influenced by those welfare tournaments.
|
Northern Ireland25107 Posts
On February 09 2025 01:04 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2025 00:31 Charoisaur wrote:On February 08 2025 15:48 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 22:14 Charoisaur wrote:On February 07 2025 21:56 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 21:12 Charoisaur wrote:On February 07 2025 20:52 PremoBeats wrote:On February 07 2025 20:34 Charoisaur wrote:Now your arguments are getting absolutely wild. Taking Stephano's performance who semi-retired after WoL as baseline that korean skill level didn't get worse I don't even know if it's worth continuing this argument at this point. That's the same as taking Serral's winrate as baseline and saying because his winrates got better after 2017 koreans got worse Accepted, Stephano was a shitty example. What about Scarlett, Nerchio and MaNa? And yes, I know, this is the biggest sample size, but none of them correlate with the idea that individual Korean skill level massively droped. Why not take Serral as a baseline? Wouldn't he be the most suitable candidate for serving as the baseline given he's the most consistent player ever and hasn't lost motivation at all as far as we can tell? In his first 3 years after his ascension his winrates against koreans were: 2018: Serral is 61–27 (69.32%) in games and 24–4 (85.71%) in matches. 2019:Serral is 65–29 (69.15%) in games and 23–7 (76.67%) in matches. 2020: Serral is 102–44 (69.86%) in games and 42–7 (85.71%) in matches. and in 2024: Serral is 68–9 (88.31%) in games and 26–1 (96.30%) in matches. By your own logic that should be irrefutable proof that koreans have declined. If you want to say "but Serral has improved" you may come to the conclusion that you can't use any player as the baseline because nobody's skill level stays completely consistent across the years. Personally, I will just go what with the pros say. Inno said he's gotten slower with advanced age. Dark said it. Maru said he can't practice much any more due to his injuries. Uthermal in his interview with sc2historian extensively spoke about how younger players are just advantaged in competitive sc2. I don't deny that age takes its toll. It is the scope that is the issue. If we only speak about age droping win percentages by 3%, that is absolutely fine by me. But that would not counter Serral's GOAT claim. And Serral imo isn't the best example because he is the biggest outlier in SC2 history. Further, you cannot take the player that you are trying to relate, as the anchor for the comparison. The relation between prime era players and Serral is the topic, thus you have to have other players to which you compare the idea, that Koreans overall got worse in comparison to Serral, who subsequently rose to power. Serral also has 71% in 2021. Then again 85% in 2023. Did his age reset? What about the other foreigners? Why didn't they get better versus the Koreans? I do not deny that some of these prime era guys probably had injuries or weren't as fast as they were aged 22. My point is that this decline doesn't make a big impact on the GOAT debate. Well, then I agree, I also think that if he played in the Kespa era he likely would have better winrates then anyone who played back then (although only by a slight degree). I just disagree with the premise that korean skill level hasn't decreased at all which in some of your previous replies it seemed you believed. For Serral vs prime era guys I think we've seen that. Maru, Dark, Rogue and Stats were in their prime from 2018-2021 and are considered to be among the greatest of all time. Serral's winrate vs them in that era is probably a good predictor on how he would've fared against the top 10-12 players in the Kespa era (mostly in the 50-60% range). Then we can agree Looking at your example though, I think you'd have to set at least a 60% win base line. In the time frame you mentioned, Serral's match win rate versus these 4 guys is 61% in total. And it includes a period where you have to add a 45% win rate versus Rogue in a pool of only 4 players. As Rogue is the only player that could match Serral overall (Serral by 2022, which I would still count as Rogue's prime, wins slightly with 8:7 - 53%), I'd take that sample size and time frame, where a 45% win rate versus Rogue is incorporated in a pool of 4 players with a grain of salt. Especially when prime players like INno, sOs, Zest and Solar all had over 65% against the top Koreans from 2013-2015. I don't see, Serral performing worse than them. Yeah about 60-65% winrate against the top players seems reasonable. Keep in mind that's the winrate I'd expect from him against the championship contenders of that era, vs lower tiered koreans I'd expect a much higher winrate, making his overall winrate probably around 70% Just to be clear, I was referring to your example, which I still think isn't the best comparison. I think Serral would perform better. If I look at the numbers of 2013-2015 and how INno (73,62%), Solar (73,49%) and PartinG (71,10%) performed versus the top Korean sample size I used for my era comparison, I gotta wonder why Serral shouldn't achieve similar records. Yes, I could only test him against the same players a couple of years later and for some not in their prime (2018-2019) but in a pool of Zest, sOs, TY, Classic, INnoVation, Maru, soO, Trap, Creator, Solar, Dark and Stats Serral had a win rate of 85,42% (Rogue wasn't in that pool, as there was no data for him in 2013-2015, but including him, would only boost Serral's numbers, as he won 3 times against Rogue in that period). Even if we subtract roughly 12,5% because of motivation, age, etc. which I find an extremely high number, Serral would still be around 70-75% versus the best, not even talking about the lower tier Koreans. But I guess, we will never know for sure
I’ll have to continue working on my time machine!
Just based on Serral’s rather long-demonstrated consistency, not having notable slumps, and beating players he’s expected to most all of the time, I think he’d be grand. Not every other player, even GOAT list residents tick all 3 boxes to quite that degree.
Perhaps the biggest variable is really just the different game. Can Serral be as good in HoTS? Or at least as consistently good. That I’m not so sure about.
It feels that Serral can mostly just play his game reasonably comfortably and get to the phase he excels, nearly every game.
Maybe just the extra bit of volatility in HoTS drops him a little?
Granted the drop I’d be talking about is from the #1 guy with a winrate way ahead, to at worst one of the top guys, with the best winrate but by a lesser margin.
Until my time machine is ready alas I cannot definitively answer, but I think it’s exceedingly likely he’d at least be up there. As is the ‘would he win a GSL if he’d been regularly competing in it?’ question.
|
On February 09 2025 22:06 WombaT wrote:
Cheers for the response.
I’m surprised that Rain is the number one Toss abuser, is he notably so by your numbers?
It’s tricky to really gauge by prize money alone, because SC2 has always been so top-heavy in prize distribution. Both between placings generally, plus of course between tournaments.
Also if we’re weighting for that, I assume you’re applying the welfare modifier to racial earnings as well?
Otherwise say, Serral can be doubly punished by his earnings dropping by the welfare modifier, but also get minused for a ‘Zerg OP’ modifier that could be very influenced by those welfare tournaments.
I don't think this list makes a lot of sense in any case anyway.
Like you yourself said, arbitrary multipliers of 4 and 2 that put ByuN who only ever won a patch PT ahead of Serral is simply absurd.
You further have another completely intransparent, arbitrary welfare-multiplier for a metric like prize money that is inherently flawed, while also not taking into account that the prime era also had a lot more tournaments that dispersed the player pool and allowed for more winnings than the modern era.
There are many more things like statements by the author which don't make sense if we compare the players in the initial and the updated list.
Apply to that the dismissive, borderline sarcastic tone of the original article, I doubt that any of this should be taken seriously.
On February 09 2025 20:44 WombaT wrote:
I’ll have to continue working on my time machine!
Just based on Serral’s rather long-demonstrated consistency, not having notable slumps, and beating players he’s expected to most all of the time, I think he’d be grand. Not every other player, even GOAT list residents tick all 3 boxes to quite that degree.
Perhaps the biggest variable is really just the different game. Can Serral be as good in HoTS? Or at least as consistently good. That I’m not so sure about.
It feels that Serral can mostly just play his game reasonably comfortably and get to the phase he excels, nearly every game.
Maybe just the extra bit of volatility in HoTS drops him a little?
Granted the drop I’d be talking about is from the #1 guy with a winrate way ahead, to at worst one of the top guys, with the best winrate but by a lesser margin.
Until my time machine is ready alas I cannot definitively answer, but I think it’s exceedingly likely he’d at least be up there. As is the ‘would he win a GSL if he’d been regularly competing in it?’ question.
Yeah, a time machine would help sort things out indeed... but would also make these discussions a lot more boring
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
