EPTThis obsession with numbers is really silly. It doesn't take into account the current metagame, how good opponents are, essentially nothing at all except raw winrates. By that logic every GSL win is equally difficult and every Korean is equally skilled, which is absolute nonsense.
Zest: The Last Titan - Page 12
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Olli
Austria24416 Posts
This obsession with numbers is really silly. It doesn't take into account the current metagame, how good opponents are, essentially nothing at all except raw winrates. By that logic every GSL win is equally difficult and every Korean is equally skilled, which is absolute nonsense. | ||
|
bestviva
148 Posts
On May 29 2016 19:04 Olli wrote: Mvp had periods of losing matches as well. He won tournaments in the end though. There were people with better overall winrates I assume. Yet Mvp was the one winning GSLs. Nobody currently active comes as close to that ability as Zest. Dominated 2014 harder than anyone has since Mvp. "Slumped" throughout 2015 (was still tied best Proleague player by the end and won an IEM WC). 2016 and he dominates the first GSL, dropping 3 maps total, beating down all 3 of the other semifinalists on his way. Still one of the best Proleague players. GSL seed, qualified for SSL challenger. Yes he's lost matches since, but the only reason why you're even pointing this out is because he didn't before. When you're dominating as hard as he was, it's almost impossible not to fall off a tiny bit. Getting beaten by Stats, possibly the #1 in form player, and a couple dodgy losses here and there don't change the big picture. Zest dominated GSL, he's either the outright best player in the world or up there with a select 1-4, and he's in prime position to continue his success. So what on earth makes some people here think that sOs, who hadn't qualified for either GSL or SSL, has never won a GSL or SSL, is as close to rivaling Mvp according to stu's criteria and going forward, is absolutely beyond my understanding. I'll explain to you why, here's their logic: 1. SOS won the BLIZZCON champion in 2013, but Zest was nobody and achieved nothing in 2013, how dare you Zest fans compare a NOBODY to the almighty SOS! Zest was a loser in 2013 that was a fact can not be changed, but SOS will have a great chance to win a GSL/SSL champion in 2016 which has gone half. Remember guys, if A achieved nothing in one year and B has achieved something, that means A will NEVER be a better player than B! 2. Winrate is everything!! winrate "60%" is such a "magical” number! It is the only perfect and fair standard to judge whether a player is great or not, look at my list , can't you see SOS' winrate is #1 above all the other protosses? yes I know almost every other on my list has won GSL/SSL champion, but SO WHAT? what does a GSL/SSL champion use for when you don't have a high winrate ? NOTHING! And all the GSL/SSL champions can go fuck themselves for their poor winrate too! 3. SOS is going to play Alpha Go this year, the whole universe has confirmed that. he's going to represent the human being as a progamer to fight against the AI. Amazing! and I'm sure he will win because he has the highest winrate of the world, and what about AlphaGo's winrate? 0%...I'm sorry.. ------- I like SOS , but some of his fans are just.....speechless. | ||
|
Elentos
55456 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:17 Olli wrote: Could be because sOs gets easier groups but falls short against stronger players. Win statistics can be a really weak measurement until you take a really close look at them and examine where they come from. This obsession with numbers is really silly. It doesn't take into account the current metagame, how good opponents are, essentially nothing at all except raw winrates. By that logic every GSL win is equally difficult and every Korean is equally skilled, which is absolute nonsense. Turns out that was just a problem with Aligulac because the 2014 seasons are listed as WCS Korea instead of GSL which tanks Zest's win ratios. Still, removing Zest's best and sOs's worst year of GSL has a pretty interesting effect. I agree that the obsession with numbers is silly, especially that arbitrary 60% number that doesn't mean anything. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:17 Olli wrote: Could be because sOs gets easier groups but falls short against stronger players. Win statistics can be a really weak measurement until you take a really close look at them and examine where they come from. This obsession with numbers is really silly. It doesn't take into account the current metagame, how good opponents are, essentially nothing at all except raw winrates. By that logic every GSL win is equally difficult and every Korean is equally skilled, which is absolute nonsense. "Taking into account current metagame" is however one of the biggest reservations people have against all of stuchiu's work. Because "current metagame" is a posh way of saying "balance whine flavour of the month". | ||
|
Olli
Austria24416 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:25 opisska wrote: "Taking into account current metagame" is however one of the biggest reservations people have against all of stuchiu's work. Because "current metagame" is a posh way of saying "balance whine flavour of the month". You're not drawing an accurate picture if you leave it out, though. Otherwise you'd notice a remarkable trend that a ton of zerg players all, at the same time, became really good at the end of WoL. | ||
|
Elentos
55456 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:33 Olli wrote: You're not drawing an accurate picture if you leave it out, though. Otherwise you'd notice a remarkable trend that a ton of zerg players all, at the same time, became really good at the end of WoL. Remember that time from late 2013 until the 2nd half of 2014 where suddenly a bunch of Protoss players got really good at the same time? That was so weird, too. | ||
|
Alarak89
United States880 Posts
On May 29 2016 20:19 Olli wrote: I don't know what your obsession with the number 60 is about. Your criteria in general are really really odd. For example, measured by number of offline championships alone, Taeja would be the best player in history. Win percentage alone, someone else might be? But you're completely ignoring a few very real factors: 1) The reality that GSL and SSL are considered more difficult tournaments due to preparation factoring in. 2) The reality that win percentage means very little if you're not turning it into tournament wins - especially GSL or SSL. 3) The reality that your win percentage against Korean players might have come against different calibers of opponents and can therefore not be measured universally. Example: a win against a player in a GSL finals is measured the same as a Bo1 win against an opponent who might not even be in Code A. That's stupid. And a few more. In other words, you're twisting and using only statistics that benefit your argument. Oh, I forgot to mention, the championships they won must include either GSL, SSL or WCS Finals since they are "the big 3". 1) Preparation is good, but the ability to adjust quickly is also important. 2) In fact, offline win rates has a very strong positive relation with winning offline championships. For exaple, sOs has the highest overall win rate in the league, so he had seven offline championships which is also the most. herO has the third highest overall win rate in the league, so he had six offline championships. Zest tied with the third highest overall win rate in the league, so he had six offline championships as well. 3) Again, they have played for four years with more than 500 or 600 offline games. All the errors can be neglected and there is no such a thing called "luck" during four years period. As long as their opponents are Korean and they are playing offline games, it does not matter at what stage the game was going on. They all have faced a lot of "top-tier" players and "ordinary" players. If you think I am using data that benefit my argument, you can use data that benefit your argument too and they better make sense  But I want to see data, not your "imagination" and "personal feeling" | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15828 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:13 Elentos wrote: Also, interesting tidbit, according to aligulac sOs has better win rates in GSL than Zest but Zest has 3 GSL titles and sOs none. sOs has also 2 world champion titles and zest none. | ||
|
Olli
Austria24416 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:38 Charoisaur wrote: sOs has also 2 world champion titles and zest none. Indeed. Now you value what's more difficult. This by the way is also where statistics guy jumps ship, because it's all "imagination" and "feelings". | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15828 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:35 Elentos wrote: Remember that time from late 2013 until the 2nd half of 2014 where suddenly a bunch of Protoss players got really good at the same time? That was so weird, too. you mean trash players like herO, Classic and Zest? yeah protoss was really imba when even such bad players can suddenly become good. | ||
|
Olli
Austria24416 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:41 Charoisaur wrote: you mean trash players like herO, Classic and Zest? yeah protoss was really imba when even such bad players can suddenly become good. I love to defend protoss, but protoss was definitely too strong then. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:35 Elentos wrote: Remember that time from late 2013 until the 2nd half of 2014 where suddenly a bunch of Protoss players got really good at the same time? That was so weird, too. Thank you both for making my point for me | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15828 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:42 Olli wrote: I love to defend protoss, but protoss was definitely too strong then. I know I just wanted to say that the so called "patchtosses" back then turned out to be legit. | ||
|
Olli
Austria24416 Posts
Wasn't your point that the metagame shouldn't be taken into account? How is pointing out factual imbalances in any way helping your argument then? | ||
|
NinjaToss
Austria1383 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:38 Charoisaur wrote: sOs has also 2 world champion titles and zest none. Well if the IEM World Championship counts then Zest is also a World Champion | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15828 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:45 NinjaToss wrote: Well if the IEM World Championship counts then Zest is also a World Champion okay but then sOs has 3 world titles | ||
|
Olli
Austria24416 Posts
| ||
|
Elentos
55456 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:43 Charoisaur wrote: I know I just wanted to say that the so called "patchtosses" back then turned out to be legit. Many of them are indeed legit. And then there was ParalyzE. | ||
|
NinjaToss
Austria1383 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:48 Olli wrote: Just because something's labelled "World Championship" doesn't make it a more difficult tournament to win. It just sounds cool. Good point, that's why the GSL is still one of the hardest if not the hardest tournament to win. And Zest has 3 of them | ||
|
Alarak89
United States880 Posts
On May 29 2016 21:48 Olli wrote: Just because something's labelled "World Championship" doesn't make it a more difficult tournament to win. It just sounds cool. Who defined that? How do you know? So GSL is harder only because more preparations? Then I would say to adjust and adapt quickly is more important and harder than "preparations" | ||
| ||
