Happy New Year everyone! Welcome to the 2014, a year of Brood War. Reading our BW forums lately has been an absolute delight and we've been bombarded with good news after good news. How far can it go is still unclear, but it's important to remember that it wasn't always like this. It feels like just yesterday when Sonic started casting from his shoe shop offices with a handful of players and small, but loyal viewer base. To witness what Sonic has managed to achieve with his persistence and hard work is truly remarkable and inspiring.
In two days ninth edition of Sonic Starleague will start, sponsored by HumanWorks with the biggest prize pool yet and most definitely, the highest star power. If you were to look at the players list of SSL9 some five years ago, you could easily mistaken it for an OSL or an MSL. We've already been graced with a sneak preview of our favorite players in the ever so entertaining group selection. Seeing the high quality of organization with a packed venue was really beautiful, and players themselves have put on quite a show.
However, it was not all moonlight and roses for the SSL9. Sonic's first sponsor has pulled back after some disagreements and it seemed like Sonic will have to sponsor the event himself, which is not ideal. Fortunately, just today a new sponsor of SSL9 was announced which is very important for the sustainability of the whole league. Besides that little hiccup, this tournament will also be bigger than its previous editions. Sonic has opened his new studio where offline matches will be held, starting with round of 32 and onward. Also, there are two new maps made specifically for this tournament and Blizzard themselves will support the event publicly.
English Broadcast of SSL
Just like last time, TeamLiquid will offer an English cast of the games, with Sayle behind the mic. Unfortunately, this time there are two days when games are played with one being Thursday, which is a work day. That's why the Thursday broadcast will not be live, but instead will be casted at 20:00 GMT (+00:00) on that same day which should also be more favorable to the American viewers. The Saturday casts will be live, starting at 10:00 GMT (+00:00).
I really hope you all make sure to tune in, either to English cast or the original Korean cast with Kim Carry and Lee Seung Won, so we can show to everyone that Brood War is still very much alive and appreciated.
An offline group selection ceremony, which was only introduced with the 8th SSL, serves as a convenient indicator for the success of a league. The 9th Sonic Starleague was delayed quite a bit which raised questions. Will the production quality be top notch? Any fresh story-lines or drama shaping up? And perhaps the most critical one: Are there still enough fans to watch and attend it in person? The answer the fans gave to Sonic at the Ilchi Art Hall was clear: You keep aiming higher every time and you can count on us to back you up.
D-ES is an official partner for the 9th Sonic Starleague.
According to Sonic, over thousand horny Korean nerds gathered at the gates of the Ilchi Art Hall. Only the toughest five hundred made it through and the rest had to go home dry. The lucky crowd's reward was the opportunity to witness the rise of a new Brood War era for Choi Eun-Ae and Seo Yeon-Ji are no more - the times of Stargirls 2.0 aka Interview Girls are upon us!
Cheon Bo-Yeong & Ha-Kyeong
Besides the obvious upgrade in graphics, both new models are quite experienced with the mic (the latter under OGN as well) and it showed. beast didn't wait long to ask Ha-Kyeong for her number and Cheon Bo-Yeong soon caught up by making Mini sing for her. And their own first impressions? Ha-Kyeong thinks Bisu's looks are over-hyped and faced with Terror's half-dog cousin, Cheon Bo-Yeong swiftly exclaimed: "What a beautiful night it is, everyone!"
And beautiful it was. While the awkward juice girls from SSL7 may still be dearly missed by some, at least the juice itself made a comeback - this time at the hands of none other than Sonic, Kim Carrier and Lee Seung-Won, the leaders of our revolution. Fifteen new players made their offline SOSPA debut as well, and what follows is merely a teaser...
Recently hospitalized after an accident, Larva still made it and even prepared a dish-washing gift set for Lazy, Cola and Modesty. (B-Teamers used to have to wash the dishes in progaming houses.)
Fear not fanboys, Larva has been busy streaming his practice sessions from the hospital bed.
Bisu countered Ha-Kyeong's remark about his over-hyped looks by advising her to consult an optometrist. In her defence, she has only been to the two previous SSL finals, so she may not understand that the majority of the male audience would still pick this guy over her in a second...
...which may prove to be his only shot considering the audience was almost entirely male.
Zeus, nicknamed the Safety Toss, dressed up as a construction worker and gave everyone a hearty laugh with his sexy dance.
One does not get called Ceremony Toss for nothing.
Whether you love or hate Terror, you were probably curious to know if he'd suddenly switch to a slightly more reserved, official mode at the offline group selection. Instead, he switched into dog mode.
Warning: Extremely creepy content that may not be safe for life.
Holding a grudge against Pusan who recently accused Terror of stream-cheating, the dog begged to be matched up against him. Pusan rolled up his sleeves in response. The ancient warrior himself came out with a funky mix full of mine trigging sound effects and Zealot war cries. + Show Spoiler +
My life for Aiur!
We've had the giant Shinee and the tiny Cola. We've seen the funny Zeus, the Pig Terran Mong, Britney and his girlfriend, the funky Fishiking with his fake six-pack as well as all the elegant gentlemen. Only JangBi couldn't make it to the event but with everything that was going on, I highly doubt many people cared or even noticed. Sea and Bisu shared they were extremely pleased with the ceremony and have never before seen so many people attend one. All in all, the event was a blast and it is highly recommended you go through the LR thread and the photo report if you missed it.
It’s been exactly one year, five months and seven days since the last BW OSL. 525 days since Jangbi’s stellar run that lead him to defeat Zero in one of the greatest and emotional PvZ series, and then lay waste to SKT’s Crown Prince in the finals for a second time to retain his OSL championship. A lot has changed since then and with the disappearance of the OSL, another league has risen and taken its place.
With only one day remaining, the lights will run hot as players take to the stage in front of hundreds and do battle in Sonic’s ninth iteration of what is now the most important individual tournament in BW, and questions about whether Jangbi still has what it takes to become a champion overhang.
Had Jangbi returned a year ago speculation about how well he would perform may not have been as high, even upon his arrival people in the forums were already heralding him as the next SSL champion but in the last few months the competitive terrain has rapidly changed. Unlike the previous SSL where the cast had a slew of amateurs and semi-pros that would’ve given Jangbi an easy pass into the deeper rounds, this SSL saw the return of several ex-progamers making this potentially the toughest Sonic individual league we’ve seen to date, and while Jangbi has been slotted into an easy Ro32 group and is the favourite to advance, that may be about as far as he goes.
Upon Jangbi’s return a little over four months ago his form had not greatly deteriorated as some would have anticipated, due in no small part to his then on-going SC2 career. And despite some on-stream grumblings about his hand not being able to keep up with his mind, Jangbi was showing on the Fish ladder that he could still handle and win intense, long-drawn games.
Frequent watchers of Jangbi’s stream would’ve noticed that for quite some time he was whisked away to attend to family matters, leaving him very little time to practice. While not all returning progamers have hit the ladder extremely hard in preparation for this tournament there are a few who are showing determination and furthering the gap, like Piano who’s clocking double digits most days in practice and Bisu who streams very regularly and according to one source even has a winning record against almost all the big names. Although Jangbi’s results in the latest KoTH team tournament have been quite good they’re not entirely indicative that he’d do well in this tournament given that it’s BoX orientated. Earlier unofficial series on Fish between Jangbi and names like Pusan, Hiya, Killer and even Best would suggest he’s not quite ready to take on players in more than one game.
But heck, this is all speculation, and when I thought all seemed lost in the fourth game against Zero in the semi-finals of the last OSL, embers from the ashes of Jangbi’s natural sparked a blaze that then went on to carry him right through the finals and etch him in history forever. There’s no doubt that Jangbi still holds that potential, and perhaps being on the brink of elimination is just what Jangbi needs to win this tournament.
This season of Sonic Starleague proves to be the most exciting and anticipated one yet. An updated prize pool where the winner brings home more and fourth place gets relatively little, an even more dynamic player pool and the best one yet - not one but two new maps to welcome the new year and a new beginning. To help you understand and enjoy the extent of what the new maps may offer, we bring you an in-depth analysis of the new maps, brought to creation by famed mapmaker Earthattack, who also made legendary classics like Destination, Blue Storm and great modern maps like Circuit Breaker, Match Point and of course, Outsider (one of my personal favourite maps!). This week, we'll start off with my choice between the two maps - Mist.
(Note: The map versions are not finalized and hence, may differ from the actual maps used in the league)
Mist - v0.90
Finally, a new two player map! After Steel Wall (created by Rose.of.Dream, yet another famed mapmaker) did not make the cut, many were left to enjoy two player maps from the pre-SSL era, such as Blue Storm, Bloody Ridge and Heartbreak Ridge. While they are not entirely boring maps, I felt that the league needed more than just macro maps to spice up some games and stir some imbalance whines. I messaged Sonic two weeks ago to suggest new maps, and he said that there will be good things to come. Well, he certainly did not disappoint.
The first new map we have opens up potential for games on both ends of the game pace spectrum - fast, intense never-ending engagements or macro slug-fests. This give players temptation to go all-in, be it early game or some 14 CC-ish shenanigans. Risk and reward has never been higher than on any other recent map.
Starting off, the resource layout in this map is very similar to some old maps, most noticeably being reminiscent El Niño (or the more long-lived Great Barrier Reef) and Outsider. The mains start off with the standard nine minerals one gas, but the natural and the "backyard expo", per se, has seven standard 1500 value minerals and one 40 value mineral field. This allows for an El Niño-style macro-centric expansion where the path to an easy third is quickly opened up, but with an ultimatum. To go "safe" greedy at the cost of a gas geyser, or be ultra greedy and go for a three-gas base but opening up to spreading your army thinner. For certain match-ups, neither the players nor I should think that this is a problem, as I will explain further below in our racial match-up explanations, but for the most part I believe this will be a crucial turning point as to how the game will play out. This resource distribution/pathing mechanic further plays out at the rest of the expansions, which has six 1500 value mineral fields and two 749 value mineral fields, which will open up the paths quicker for more Outsider-esque plays as the game progresses. To elaborate, this means that the battles will no longer be restricted to the central area of the map, as ground units will be able to maneuver around the map. This may potentially accelerate the aggressive flow of the map and reward the one who multitasks better.
The second feature of this map is how easy it is to flank. This may at first entice players to play in a way that reminds me slightly of Destination, where if you are closed in to your base because you are afraid to push out in fear of getting flanked, you still are able to somehow expand around your base, though the potential to turtle safely is not as high in this case as none of the expansions aside from the main are protected by the outer limits of the map. This means turtling may actually not be the right answer if the opponent plays his card right, such as tank/vulture drops, reaver/storm drops and muta harass, which I foresee to be very deadly on this map. However, the right expansion path still allows for some leniency towards players that favor macro games, which is basically expanding in a clockwise direction, where eventually the map should be split 50/50 between north and south, where there are less chances of your army getting flanked by the multiple bridges should one decide to push out through mid (yet another dangerous area, which I will explain below) or in a counter-clockwise direction around the main. I foresee the central area and the six/twelve o'clock areas to be the hot-spots.
As mentioned above, the central bridge is quite a deceptively dangerous one. This is because the bridge is supposed to be the namesake "mist", where units have near-zero vision once on the bridge (unless you still have units not yet on the bridge). This may allow for easy flanking or storm/lurker/mine traps, and especially towards late game where the whole map is a battlefield, players may simply forget about this feature and may lose units unnecessarily on this bridge, which may prove to be fatal.
Last but not least, the five/eleven o'clock expansions are made such that units are not able to building-push their way over the map, such as pylon hopping or building-land glitching (the most famous being the NaDa barracks hop below). Only way to hop across this wall is via worker glitching. Not a huge deal, but yet a small detail that may matter.
The small things in Brood War that really spice things up.
The odds in favor:
Terran vs Zerg The first noticeable feature that plays into this match-up is how short the air distances are between the two maps. Shorter than Match Point, in fact, and we have seen Zerg wreck havoc on that map already. With such a short air distance between the two mains, as well as so many narrow bridges (not to mention the high ground cliffs beside every single one of them) may very well spell doom for Terran in the early to mid game if they are not able to hold their own, especially if facing against a Zerg of say, Killer's caliber. This is further made worse by the fact that the natural is not the easiest to defend in the early game, with wide natural openings and unbuildable terrain behind the natural (RIP turrets). Mutas are definitely going to have a field day here.
The early to mid game will mostly dictate how the game will end.. or so I would say for most maps. But for this map, there are so many opportunities for players to shut down and harass the expansions, as well as to flank armies and buy time just by constant rotation and holding bridges around the map that this really could provide us with some of the most dynamic TvZs we've yet to see. With so many exposed expansions across the map, the one to win in this match-up will be the one who is truly able to multitask and bring out their inner S-Class here.
Terran vs Protoss Ah, the never ending whines between "Protoss/DT/arbiters/HT/speedlots imba" (sorry, dragoon) and "tanks OP nerf please". Personal bias aside (no, really), I have to say Protoss has it hard on this map. With very easy third initial-mineral-only base that can easily transit into a third gas base for the Terran (lift OP?), I expect Terrans to have a very easy start on this map. The only timing window I see Protoss to make some plays is when the Terran tries to push out to secure their third, while crossing the bridge right next to the natural. Late game becomes more balanced, and even in favor of Protoss I must say, as the map opens up a bit more and the Protoss starts to secure more air advantage, thus making way for shuttle drops and recalls and maybe even carriers. This map is not the easiest for the Terran to start moving around, especially when it's a mech composition that is a huge slow clunky blob. To elaborate why this may not be the easiest for the Terran once game starts going late (even against Zerg, in fact), let me bring in an example:
Circuit Breaker, yet another Earthattack masterpiece
Circuit Breaker was a very deceptive macro map that was heavily against anything not Terran. The Terran mech army decimated armies and eradicated bases on this map in such speed never seen before on any other maps. This is because the Terran mech army goes by one rule: united we stand. While bio army thrives on multi-pronged skirmishes and Zerg-esque replenishment of units, the Terran mech army just charges in as one huge blob of steel, destroying everything in its path. On Circuit Breaker, it was not uncommon to see players of any race lose three or four bases in one push. This is due to the layout of the expansions and bases, where once the mech army has reached the doorsteps of your base, you are boxed in and bound to lose all your bases in that corner of the map should you lose an engagement.
Coming back to Mist, however, this is not the case. The expansions can vary in distances, there are no more than two expansions in one corner of the map, and the unique layout of the map forces Terran to spread the army very thin should they try to push while defending all their bases. This means either the push will be weak, or the defenses will be thin. Terrans can no longer go greedy and try to push three bases or so without putting themselves at a huge risk of an open, undefended base themselves. The multiple chokes and bridges also mean that Terrans will be taking such a long time to push across the other half of the map that the enemy, if played smart, can buy more than enough time to run a cycle or two off the gateways and have their arbiters/storms ready. To me, this is one of the best modern maps to come out that will really test the understanding the players have of the game flow and the map.
Protoss vs Zerg
PvZ, at the very least, seems like it will stay relatively normal. The short air distances will prove to be a key role in this match-up as well, as there will be lots of shuttle and overlord drop plays. The multiple ground paths also mean that the Zerg will not be able to defend all routes easily with a small group of units that comprise of a lurker or two, as speedlots will start to run around everywhere and mess up the Zerg's plans. Due to the third being on the high ground as well as the narrow bridges and chokes on all other expansions, the corsair + reaver combination may actually be a viable option on this map. Air dominance as well as holding the chokes will be the game deciding factors. With an easy fourth that can be defended by a small handful of units, however, late game should be a much easier task for the Zerg player, not to mention the short air distances (once again, air dominance will be very important) means that it will not be just the main that will be at risk of overlord drops, but also because of the way the expansions are laid out, the Zerg can make quick work of the expansions via the overlords, in stark contrast to the much more immobile Terran mech army, Expect a slow mid game with very exciting late game scenarios, a la Jaedong vs Stork on Match Point!
Group A
Group B
Group C
Group D
Killer
HiyA
sSak
hero
Mong
Sky
Shinee
Kwanro
Britney
PianO
Modesty
Pusan
ZerO
Midas
ZergMaN
Terror
Unlike normal Sonic group procedures we have ended up with groups that the players themselves have picked and got shuffled around in. This usually leads to two things, either a player knows exactly what he is doing and is prepared to practice against a very specific thing to take a convincing win, or the player is just cocky and is going to lose horribly. This leads to amazing upsets, nobodies playing amazing and fan favourites getting overwhelmed. Most known by the name Curse of the OSL Champion. The shuffling has also led to very skewed racial balances in the groups. This has led to a practice paradise for players that only have to focus on one match-up, increasing their chances to advance.
Group A This is the group that I considered the hardest along with Sea's group. Killer is the undisputed best Zerg in the world. This is his group, Mong has taken games off of him but has only ever won a series against Killer once, and that was back in March last year. Britney is the Protoss reincarnation of StarCue, this guy doesn't stand a chance. ZerO is the odd one out. Considered widely to have been the second best Zerg after Jaedong at the end of professional Brood War. His return has been a painful run so far. ZerO has been constantly seen having troubles in most match-ups and having almost cringe worthy moments, it has been frustrating for both him and his watching fans.
It's frustrating because we know he can do better.
In Proleague, ZerO showed that his best match-up is still ZvP. Fortunately for him, his opponent is both Protoss and terrible. I have no doubt that ZerO will make it to the winners' match. The question is, can he beat Killer? ZerO lost to Killer pretty badly in Proleague, he did however manage to win against self-proclaimed ZvZ master Modesty. It's a ZvZ, and it's a best of one. Anything can happen. If ZerO lose against Killer, he is probably out of the tournament as Mong will eat any Zerg that isn't tip-top in ZvT. Odds are against everyone's beloved cutie Zerg. Hopefully ZerO is in better shape next time around!
Group B This group starts out with two old schoolers in the SOSPA scene. These two have a long rivalry, peaking at the final of SSL6 at the start of 2012. That time Sky came out ahead from a best of seven where HiyA got crushed. Sky has fallen ever since. After SRT17 in August, Sky went quiet. He was announced to be on the Hwaseung roster but didn't play until very late in the tournament, and he only appeared twice. Judging by his games, he is about where he was when he left for three months. Losing to good ex-progamers and winning against lesser players with abusive play. HiyA is the clear favourite in this group, the only trouble I see him having is possibly losing a best of one TvT against PianO or just being himself and ruining everything.
The other starting match is a fun one. Midas retired in 2011 after a long career and hasn't played a competitive game of Brood War for over almost three years. Unlike other high profile progamers like NaDa, XellOs, YellOw, and Reach, Midas has not appeared in showmatches, or shown any interest in playing. I was mighty surprised when Baby Bear was announced to play in SSL9. As soon as he was featured on snipealot I tuned in. It wasn't surprising to see the level of play Midas was at. Much like Iris participation in SSL8, I do not expect much of him. Iris did however bring some pretty sexy play. Hopefully Midas can do the same, but as far as advancing goes, I'll just say that you shouldn't get your hopes up.
Please cheer for me, I will not disappoint.
The deciding game here is going to be PianO against Sky. If PianO can put his thirteen hours a day practice into his games, Sky is toast. Who advances alongside HiyA is almost impossible to say. This day is definitely worth watching.
Group C This is by far the weakest group. sSak has an easy time to the round of 16 as the three remaining players in his group are some of the least skilled players in SSL9. The group starts off with sSak with Shinee. Shinee will win the game on Fighting Spirit but unfortunately for him, there are two more maps in a best of three. And in these days you can't even be sure of Shinee winning on Fighting Spirit either. The next game is Modesty vs. ZergMaN. Modesty himself claimed he was a master at ZvZ on his stream, he proceeded to lose to ZerO, and everything went down the drain. Fortunately for him, ZergMaN is not Killer exactly. If Modesty wants to claim anything he better win.
I'm the best at ZvZ. huehue.
Either way both the TvZs will be stomps. sSak is just too good at everything while Shinee went on a Zerg slaughter fest in Proleague. Shinee won against both Killer and hero (Fighting Spirit #1). Zerg like Modesty and ZergMaN stands no chance against someone that can take games off of the top Zerg duo.
Group D Oh boy, so many upsets can happen in this group. Kwanro and Terror? If you are a fan of hero and Pusan, things can go really bad in this group. The first match is hero vs. Kwanro. Initially you would think: "Hey, that's a great match-up! Kwanro is super fun when he early pools and makes everyone tear their hair out!" When Kwanro was first announced to play in SSL9 I was overjoyed. With the loss of a very special amateur, a quirky Zerg that stirred up the pot was exactly what we needed. Unfortunately, ever since he returned, Kwanro's play has been poor, uninspired, and unoriginal. The ridiculous cheeses and early pool shenanigans are nowhere to be found. And without his signature play, Kwanro is actually a pretty bad player. Unless Kwanro can bring some Zelot inspired cheeses, I don't see him winning a single game.
Kwanro needs to follow his own flowchart.
Pusan and Terror has been at each others throats for a while now, calling each other stream-cheaters. Finally they get to duke it out in an offline setting. This match will include manner pylons, manner hatches, dancing units, and most of all; a bunch of trash talk. Terror wanted this match to happen badly during the group selection ceremony, and he got what he wished for. I imagine Terror preparing like mad for this. I'll tell you what will happen. Terror will absolutely destroy Pusan in the first series. Pusan will go down to the losers' and crawl his way back to the final match. There they will be meeting each other again as hero will demolish Terror in the winners' match. Terror will be so overconfident after winning the first series and will spend more time trash talking in chat than actually playing the game. Pusan will advance. I will have faith, I believe in the Spirit!
Wow I didnt watch the group selections but that was a great recap by Stratos. I cant believe that bitch dared to challenge Bisu's looks. Terror stole the show, I was seriously cringing at that youtube video the entire time but could not look away. Awesome stuff!! cant wait for the fucking games and first one is less then 12 hours away!!!
Waking up early saturday with coffee and Sayle as company. I need to get with Klazarts wife. Seeing zero macro hatch the map and drown out the opponent. Jangbi with the sick momentum of a 2 time OSL champion. All the other cute and deadly gamers coming to prove themselves. Killer let's do this! Maybe now is the time for Bisu to advance to Ro16? I'm sure the LR thread will have the answer. I hope we get to see a lot of these guys and that they enjoy themselves.
Excellent article! I'm certain SSL9 will be amazing tournament worth all the hype. Now let me quickly be a jerk
Had JangBi returned a year ago speculation about how well he would do may not have been as high, even upon his arrival people in the forums were already heralding him as the next SSL champion but in the last few months the competitive terrain has rapidly changed.
This sentence is so confusing T_T If I'm to make quick adjustment...
Had JangBi returned a year ago, speculation about how well he would do may not have been as high - people in the forums were already heralding him as the next SSL champion even upon his arrival. However, in the last few months the competitive terrain has rapidly changed.
Most known by the name Curse of the OSL Champion. ZerO lost to Killer pretty badly in Proleague, he did however manage to win against self-proclaimed ZvZ master Modesty. I will have faith, I believe in the Spirit!
Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
On January 09 2014 11:39 Hesmyrr wrote: Excellent article! I'm certain SSL9 will be amazing tournament worth all the hype. Now let me quickly be a jerk
Had JangBi returned a year ago speculation about how well he would do may not have been as high, even upon his arrival people in the forums were already heralding him as the next SSL champion but in the last few months the competitive terrain has rapidly changed.
This sentence is so confusing T_T If I'm to make quick adjustment...
Had JangBi returned a year ago, speculation about how well he would do may not have been as high - people in the forums were already heralding him as the next SSL champion even upon his arrival. However, in the last few months the competitive terrain has rapidly changed.
Most known by the name Curse of the OSL Champion. ZerO lost to Killer pretty badly in Proleague, he did however manage to win against self-proclaimed ZvZ master Modesty. I will have faith, I believe in the Spirit!
meeeeeeehhhhh
Yeah... While the write-up was generally pretty good, smb should have spell checked it.
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
To borrow Kim Carrier's words, "Someone who did not win a championship but worthy of one". ZerO was kind of awesome. He was responsible for some goose bump moments. Soulkey was a good player (a good comparison might be Sea?) but not a championship class player in Brood War.
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
Individual League performance may be in Zero's favor. But unless I am mistaken, I remember a period in time when Soulkey was considered a favorite against every player in the world except Flash. On the other hand, Zero would have, at all points in time, been considered an underdog to quite a number of players (including many Terran players). Based on overall statistics, and the players Soulkey was defeating, and the style in which he was doing so, it seems like he reached the higher "peak" of performance. And probably at one point he was playing the second highest level of ZvT ever (after Jaedong).
Soulkey has a much better overall winrate, a much better ZvP winrate, and a much better ZvZ, winrate, and a better, although misleadingly low overall ZvT winrate (given that he improved his ZvT winrate SO dramatically in the last couple years).Soulkey had significantly less experience than Zero, and yet already significantly better statistics in all matchups. Nevermind just ZvT, I think there is compelling evidence that Soulkey was significantly better in every single matchup - by statistics, but also by directly observing quality of games. At one point, Soulkey was on the verge of being S-Class (or potentially even S-Class), Zero was having some decent success in individual leagues, but his overall play ranged from mediocre - to very good, but never really near S-Class. I would be interested however, in knowing what the Professional Korean commentators had to say about the topic.
To me it feels like the reverse lol I never had the feeling that Soulkey was considered a favourite against every player in the world except Flash or on the verge of being S-Class.
How odd... Based on the overall statistics and performance against high calibre players, it didn't seem like much of a stretch at all, to say that Soulkey was a much better player in every single matchup. But like I said, I would be very interested to know what the Korean's said on the issue, I'm sure it was discussed at one point or another, and they would likely know better than anyone.
On January 09 2014 16:17 Harem wrote: Zero said on other stream that Soulkey was better ie won more inhouse ranking tourneys and stuff.
In house training like that is funny, I recall an interview with a joint Jaedong/Bisu interview a while ago where Bisu kept encountering Jaedong's alt on iCup I believe. He was consistently losing to him and at that stage Bisu has won seven of the past eight televised matches against the Dong.
On January 09 2014 16:17 Harem wrote: Zero said on other stream that Soulkey was better ie won more inhouse ranking tourneys and stuff.
In house training like that is funny, I recall an interview with a joint Jaedong/Bisu interview a while ago where Bisu kept encountering Jaedong's alt on iCup I believe. He was consistently losing to him and at that stage Bisu has won seven of the past eight televised matches against the Dong.
Playing ladder games !=In house training imo. Harem was referring to ranking tourneys which are usually round robin format where they go around and play everyone and the person with the most wins comes out on top. Zero said before that he used to be better but towards the end Soulkey was more consistently finishing first. I really don't think its fair to count a lot of the towards the end of BW stats though. Teams tend to have their better players focus on what they believe is more important. A lot of different afreeca streamers said people like Flash and Jaedong were put on much more SC2 practice than BW. As a result their BW peformance suffered. Apparently, it was almost always like these Kwanro mentioned before that when PL still had 2v2s the team's best players would practice 1v1 because it was more important and the rest were put on 2v2 practice (with exceptions).
On January 09 2014 16:17 Harem wrote: Zero said on other stream that Soulkey was better ie won more inhouse ranking tourneys and stuff.
In house training like that is funny, I recall an interview with a joint Jaedong/Bisu interview a while ago where Bisu kept encountering Jaedong's alt on iCup I believe. He was consistently losing to him and at that stage Bisu has won seven of the past eight televised matches against the Dong.
Playing ladder games !=In house training imo. Harem was referring to ranking tourneys which are usually round robin format where they go around and play everyone and the person with the most wins comes out on top. Zero said before that he used to be better but towards the end Soulkey was more consistently finishing first. I really don't think its fair to count a lot of the towards the end of BW stats though. Teams tend to have their better players focus on what they believe is more important. A lot of different afreeca streamers said people like Flash and Jaedong were put on much more SC2 practice than BW. As a result their BW peformance suffered. Apparently, it was almost always like these Kwanro mentioned before that when PL still had 2v2s the team's best players would practice 1v1 because it was more important and the rest were put on 2v2 practice (with exceptions).
I can see and definitely agree with your point, the interview was around the time of the second last BW only proleague.
On January 10 2014 03:15 prOPOns wrote: Any links for the stream, I am new to BW scene from today (I watched some years ago) and I want to watch it tbh!!!
TL's BW articles are always top notch. I don't even follow BW but they're good and I appreciate the links to games worth watching and all fun Korean stuff.
On January 10 2014 03:26 nojok wrote: TL's BW articles are always top notch. I don't even follow BW but they're good and I appreciate the links to games worth watching and all fun Korean stuff.
On January 10 2014 03:26 nojok wrote: TL's BW articles are always top notch. I don't even follow BW but they're good and I appreciate the links to games worth watching and all fun Korean stuff.
Maybe that's something you think of doing
I will give it a shot I think now that the Korean scene seems to improve recently. I was disappointed overall by the last matches I watch compared to the OSL/MSL era, though it was mostly foreigner matches.
On January 10 2014 03:26 nojok wrote: TL's BW articles are always top notch. I don't even follow BW but they're good and I appreciate the links to games worth watching and all fun Korean stuff.
Maybe that's something you think of doing
I will give it a shot I think now that the Korean scene seems to improve recently. I was disappointed overall by the last matches I watch compared to the OSL/MSL era, though it was mostly foreigner matches.
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
Individual League performance may be in Zero's favor. But unless I am mistaken, I remember a period in time when Soulkey was considered a favorite against every player in the world except Flash. On the other hand, Zero would have, at all points in time, been considered an underdog to quite a number of players (including many Terran players). Based on overall statistics, and the players Soulkey was defeating, and the style in which he was doing so, it seems like he reached the higher "peak" of performance. And probably at one point he was playing the second highest level of ZvT ever (after Jaedong).
Soulkey has a much better overall winrate, a much better ZvP winrate, and a much better ZvZ, winrate, and a better, although misleadingly low overall ZvT winrate (given that he improved his ZvT winrate SO dramatically in the last couple years).Soulkey had significantly less experience than Zero, and yet already significantly better statistics in all matchups. Nevermind just ZvT, I think there is compelling evidence that Soulkey was significantly better in every single matchup - by statistics, but also by directly observing quality of games. At one point, Soulkey was on the verge of being S-Class (or potentially even S-Class), Zero was having some decent success in individual leagues, but his overall play ranged from mediocre - to very good, but never really near S-Class. I would be interested however, in knowing what the Professional Korean commentators had to say about the topic.
I think that these numbers tell a partial story. As you say, ZerO's win rate is better in individual leagues. How one rates these two players might be a matter of how much weight is given to ProLeague performance. I think the common (but not universal) Korean view is that OSL > MSL > ProLeague. ProLeague performance can sometimes depend a lot on how the player is used and whether targeted sniping occurs and other randomness. Under that view, the following list would tell a different story. ZerO was consistently within sniffing distance of winning individual titles. He was having a lot more than decent success.
Soulkey Round of 36(1): Bacchus OSL Round of 16(3): PD POP MSL, ABC Mart MSL, tving OSL
ZerO Round of 32(4): GOM TV MSL, Club Day MSL, Hana MSL, Big File MSL Round of 16(1): Nate MSL, Quarterfinal(5): Avalon MSL, Bacchus OSL, EVER OSL, Korean Air OSL 1, Korean Air OSL 2 Semifinal(3): Lost Saga MSL, PD POP MSL, Tving OSL Runner-Up(2): ABC Mart MSL, Blizzcon 2009
Final thought: The people who rank JangBi high on the Protoss hierarchy probably rate ZerO highly as well. That's just a guess. What do you think? I am really excited about JangBi in this tournament.
On January 10 2014 03:26 nojok wrote: TL's BW articles are always top notch. I don't even follow BW but they're good and I appreciate the links to games worth watching and all fun Korean stuff.
Maybe that's something you think of doing
I will give it a shot I think now that the Korean scene seems to improve recently. I was disappointed overall by the last matches I watch compared to the OSL/MSL era, though it was mostly foreigner matches.
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
Individual League performance may be in Zero's favor. But unless I am mistaken, I remember a period in time when Soulkey was considered a favorite against every player in the world except Flash. On the other hand, Zero would have, at all points in time, been considered an underdog to quite a number of players (including many Terran players). Based on overall statistics, and the players Soulkey was defeating, and the style in which he was doing so, it seems like he reached the higher "peak" of performance. And probably at one point he was playing the second highest level of ZvT ever (after Jaedong).
Soulkey has a much better overall winrate, a much better ZvP winrate, and a much better ZvZ, winrate, and a better, although misleadingly low overall ZvT winrate (given that he improved his ZvT winrate SO dramatically in the last couple years).Soulkey had significantly less experience than Zero, and yet already significantly better statistics in all matchups. Nevermind just ZvT, I think there is compelling evidence that Soulkey was significantly better in every single matchup - by statistics, but also by directly observing quality of games. At one point, Soulkey was on the verge of being S-Class (or potentially even S-Class), Zero was having some decent success in individual leagues, but his overall play ranged from mediocre - to very good, but never really near S-Class. I would be interested however, in knowing what the Professional Korean commentators had to say about the topic.
I think that these numbers tell a partial story. As you say, ZerO's win rate is better in individual leagues. How one rates these two players might be a matter of how much weight is given to ProLeague performance. I think the common (but not universal) Korean view is that OSL > MSL > ProLeague. ProLeague performance can sometimes depend a lot on how the player is used and whether targeted sniping occurs and other randomness. Under that view, the following list would tell a different story. ZerO was consistently within sniffing distance of winning individual titles. He was having a lot more than decent success.
Soulkey Round of 36(1): Bacchus OSL Round of 16(3): PD POP MSL, ABC Mart MSL, tving OSL
ZerO Round of 32(4): GOM TV MSL, Club Day MSL, Hana MSL, Big File MSL Round of 16(1): Nate MSL, Quarterfinal(5): Avalon MSL, Bacchus OSL, EVER OSL, Korean Air OSL 1, Korean Air OSL 2 Semifinal(3): Lost Saga MSL, PD POP MSL, Tving OSL Runner-Up(2): ABC Mart MSL, Blizzcon 2009
Final thought: The people who rank JangBi high on the Protoss hierarchy probably rate ZerO highly as well. That's just a guess. What do you think? I am really excited about JangBi in this tournament.
I already conceded that Zero has done better in Individual Leagues, in my previous assessment. Taking that into account, along with all the other factors, I think its still clear that Soulkey was the much better player in every single matchup. The statistical advantage (e.g. 4%, 7%, 6%) is absolutely huge, and along with Soulkey's superior performance against higher level players in general (along with potentially the 2nd highest level of ZvT ever), these facts are just simply too powerful to be discounted by results in Individual Leagues - maybe if the all the relative differences were smaller, but certainly not in this case.
And again, on a qualitative level, Zero may have had some "goosebumps" moments, but Soulkey had a consistently much more compelling and impressive style of play, against high level competition, and a higher peak of performance. Zero was not near the same level.
Honestly, I was surprised there was any argument at all. It really wasn't even close (based on watching all the relevant Pro BW games, among other things). I am not sure how in depth you were following BW at the time, but maybe you missed many of the games I saw, or other such things...
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
Individual League performance may be in Zero's favor. But unless I am mistaken, I remember a period in time when Soulkey was considered a favorite against every player in the world except Flash. On the other hand, Zero would have, at all points in time, been considered an underdog to quite a number of players (including many Terran players). Based on overall statistics, and the players Soulkey was defeating, and the style in which he was doing so, it seems like he reached the higher "peak" of performance. And probably at one point he was playing the second highest level of ZvT ever (after Jaedong).
Soulkey has a much better overall winrate, a much better ZvP winrate, and a much better ZvZ, winrate, and a better, although misleadingly low overall ZvT winrate (given that he improved his ZvT winrate SO dramatically in the last couple years).Soulkey had significantly less experience than Zero, and yet already significantly better statistics in all matchups. Nevermind just ZvT, I think there is compelling evidence that Soulkey was significantly better in every single matchup - by statistics, but also by directly observing quality of games. At one point, Soulkey was on the verge of being S-Class (or potentially even S-Class), Zero was having some decent success in individual leagues, but his overall play ranged from mediocre - to very good, but never really near S-Class. I would be interested however, in knowing what the Professional Korean commentators had to say about the topic.
I think that these numbers tell a partial story. As you say, ZerO's win rate is better in individual leagues. How one rates these two players might be a matter of how much weight is given to ProLeague performance. I think the common (but not universal) Korean view is that OSL > MSL > ProLeague. ProLeague performance can sometimes depend a lot on how the player is used and whether targeted sniping occurs and other randomness. Under that view, the following list would tell a different story. ZerO was consistently within sniffing distance of winning individual titles. He was having a lot more than decent success.
Soulkey Round of 36(1): Bacchus OSL Round of 16(3): PD POP MSL, ABC Mart MSL, tving OSL
ZerO Round of 32(4): GOM TV MSL, Club Day MSL, Hana MSL, Big File MSL Round of 16(1): Nate MSL, Quarterfinal(5): Avalon MSL, Bacchus OSL, EVER OSL, Korean Air OSL 1, Korean Air OSL 2 Semifinal(3): Lost Saga MSL, PD POP MSL, Tving OSL Runner-Up(2): ABC Mart MSL, Blizzcon 2009
Final thought: The people who rank JangBi high on the Protoss hierarchy probably rate ZerO highly as well. That's just a guess. What do you think? I am really excited about JangBi in this tournament.
I already conceded that Zero has done better in Individual Leagues, in my previous assessment. Taking that into account, along with all the other factors, I think its still clear that Soulkey was the much better player in every single matchup. The statistical advantage (e.g. 4%, 7%, 6%) is absolutely huge, and along with Soulkey's superior performance against higher level players in general (along with potentially the 2nd highest level of ZvT ever), these facts are just simply too powerful to be discounted by results in Individual Leagues - maybe if the all the relative differences were smaller, but certainly not in this case.
And again, on a qualitative level, Zero may have had some "goosebumps" moments, but Soulkey had a consistently much more compelling and impressive style of play, against high level competition, and a higher peak of performance. Zero was not near the same level.
Honestly, I was surprised there was any argument at all. It really wasn't even close (based on watching all the relevant Pro BW games, among other things). I am not sure how in depth you were following BW at the time, but maybe you missed many of the games I saw, or other such things...
Two people can watch the same game and arrive at different conclusions. I think we'll leave it at that. I do think that my opinion is the far more common one in the Korean community, which doesn't make it right (after all, experts are always smaller in number!) but I think you should at least consider the possibility that your opinion is too strong.
Also, the difference between ZerO and Soulkey against top Terrans mostly boils down to the fact that Soulkey owns Fantasy and Fantasy owns ZerO.
Meanwhile, I will take your view seriously and consider the possibility that Soulkey had terrible luck in individual leagues. It's not an unrealistic hypothesis in terms of the small numbers (<1000) involved. EDIT: I guess I never compared Soulkey to Sea. I thought I had.
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
Individual League performance may be in Zero's favor. But unless I am mistaken, I remember a period in time when Soulkey was considered a favorite against every player in the world except Flash. On the other hand, Zero would have, at all points in time, been considered an underdog to quite a number of players (including many Terran players). Based on overall statistics, and the players Soulkey was defeating, and the style in which he was doing so, it seems like he reached the higher "peak" of performance. And probably at one point he was playing the second highest level of ZvT ever (after Jaedong).
Soulkey has a much better overall winrate, a much better ZvP winrate, and a much better ZvZ, winrate, and a better, although misleadingly low overall ZvT winrate (given that he improved his ZvT winrate SO dramatically in the last couple years).Soulkey had significantly less experience than Zero, and yet already significantly better statistics in all matchups. Nevermind just ZvT, I think there is compelling evidence that Soulkey was significantly better in every single matchup - by statistics, but also by directly observing quality of games. At one point, Soulkey was on the verge of being S-Class (or potentially even S-Class), Zero was having some decent success in individual leagues, but his overall play ranged from mediocre - to very good, but never really near S-Class. I would be interested however, in knowing what the Professional Korean commentators had to say about the topic.
I think that these numbers tell a partial story. As you say, ZerO's win rate is better in individual leagues. How one rates these two players might be a matter of how much weight is given to ProLeague performance. I think the common (but not universal) Korean view is that OSL > MSL > ProLeague. ProLeague performance can sometimes depend a lot on how the player is used and whether targeted sniping occurs and other randomness. Under that view, the following list would tell a different story. ZerO was consistently within sniffing distance of winning individual titles. He was having a lot more than decent success.
Soulkey Round of 36(1): Bacchus OSL Round of 16(3): PD POP MSL, ABC Mart MSL, tving OSL
ZerO Round of 32(4): GOM TV MSL, Club Day MSL, Hana MSL, Big File MSL Round of 16(1): Nate MSL, Quarterfinal(5): Avalon MSL, Bacchus OSL, EVER OSL, Korean Air OSL 1, Korean Air OSL 2 Semifinal(3): Lost Saga MSL, PD POP MSL, Tving OSL Runner-Up(2): ABC Mart MSL, Blizzcon 2009
Final thought: The people who rank JangBi high on the Protoss hierarchy probably rate ZerO highly as well. That's just a guess. What do you think? I am really excited about JangBi in this tournament.
I already conceded that Zero has done better in Individual Leagues, in my previous assessment. Taking that into account, along with all the other factors, I think its still clear that Soulkey was the much better player in every single matchup. The statistical advantage (e.g. 4%, 7%, 6%) is absolutely huge, and along with Soulkey's superior performance against higher level players in general (along with potentially the 2nd highest level of ZvT ever), these facts are just simply too powerful to be discounted by results in Individual Leagues - maybe if the all the relative differences were smaller, but certainly not in this case.
And again, on a qualitative level, Zero may have had some "goosebumps" moments, but Soulkey had a consistently much more compelling and impressive style of play, against high level competition, and a higher peak of performance. Zero was not near the same level.
Honestly, I was surprised there was any argument at all. It really wasn't even close (based on watching all the relevant Pro BW games, among other things). I am not sure how in depth you were following BW at the time, but maybe you missed many of the games I saw, or other such things...
Two people can watch the same game and arrive at different conclusions. I think we'll leave it at that. I do think that my opinion is the far more common one in the Korean community, which doesn't make it right (after all, experts are always smaller in number!) but I think you should at least consider the possibility that your opinion is too strong.
Also, the difference between ZerO and Soulkey against top Terrans mostly boils down to the fact that Soulkey owns Fantasy and Fantasy owns ZerO.
Meanwhile, I will take your view seriously and consider the possibility that Soulkey had terrible luck in individual leagues. While I compared him to Sea, Soulkey was a level above Sea at the end of BW.
Certainly I think there is at least a small possibility that my opinion is too strong. It would be quite disturbing (and probably unlikely) if it was however, based on how accurate my memory usually is for this type of information, and based on the large sample sizes (games, and other info), gathered over a relatively significant timeframe, that I am basing this opinion on.
Regarding Fantasy: top level Terrans, perhaps. But more to the point, I think it was evidenced that Soulkey's ZvT was at a much higher level than any zerg except Jaedong(based on the statistics, and by observing quality/style of ZvT wins). Other than Soulkey, no other Zerg was favorite against every Terran except Flash (Soulkey once stated in interview that he was confident against every Terran except Flash - I think he demonstrated it in practical terms as well). And I would actually put a number of Zergs ahead of Zero in ZvT ability. Despite showing a number of notable ZvT games, I don't think he was generally very strong in ZvT e.g. 57-51 (52.78%).
I am curious however, specifically what Korean opinions you are referring to. Certainly I wouldn't disagree Zero was at times a very good Zerg player with decent League results - and perhaps deservingly so, but specifically comparing Soulkey's peak performance in terms of skill, to Zero's would be most specifically relevant to the current discussion. I am quite sure that they would have specifically referenced this exact thing at some point, especially considering they were on the same team, and that they were being constantly compared. The fact that Zero thought Soulkey was better is certainly notable, and I have not heard any Korean comments specifically stating that Zero was better than Soulkey, regarding the time period in question.
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
Individual League performance may be in Zero's favor. But unless I am mistaken, I remember a period in time when Soulkey was considered a favorite against every player in the world except Flash. On the other hand, Zero would have, at all points in time, been considered an underdog to quite a number of players (including many Terran players). Based on overall statistics, and the players Soulkey was defeating, and the style in which he was doing so, it seems like he reached the higher "peak" of performance. And probably at one point he was playing the second highest level of ZvT ever (after Jaedong).
Soulkey has a much better overall winrate, a much better ZvP winrate, and a much better ZvZ, winrate, and a better, although misleadingly low overall ZvT winrate (given that he improved his ZvT winrate SO dramatically in the last couple years).Soulkey had significantly less experience than Zero, and yet already significantly better statistics in all matchups. Nevermind just ZvT, I think there is compelling evidence that Soulkey was significantly better in every single matchup - by statistics, but also by directly observing quality of games. At one point, Soulkey was on the verge of being S-Class (or potentially even S-Class), Zero was having some decent success in individual leagues, but his overall play ranged from mediocre - to very good, but never really near S-Class. I would be interested however, in knowing what the Professional Korean commentators had to say about the topic.
I think that these numbers tell a partial story. As you say, ZerO's win rate is better in individual leagues. How one rates these two players might be a matter of how much weight is given to ProLeague performance. I think the common (but not universal) Korean view is that OSL > MSL > ProLeague. ProLeague performance can sometimes depend a lot on how the player is used and whether targeted sniping occurs and other randomness. Under that view, the following list would tell a different story. ZerO was consistently within sniffing distance of winning individual titles. He was having a lot more than decent success.
Soulkey Round of 36(1): Bacchus OSL Round of 16(3): PD POP MSL, ABC Mart MSL, tving OSL
ZerO Round of 32(4): GOM TV MSL, Club Day MSL, Hana MSL, Big File MSL Round of 16(1): Nate MSL, Quarterfinal(5): Avalon MSL, Bacchus OSL, EVER OSL, Korean Air OSL 1, Korean Air OSL 2 Semifinal(3): Lost Saga MSL, PD POP MSL, Tving OSL Runner-Up(2): ABC Mart MSL, Blizzcon 2009
Final thought: The people who rank JangBi high on the Protoss hierarchy probably rate ZerO highly as well. That's just a guess. What do you think? I am really excited about JangBi in this tournament.
I already conceded that Zero has done better in Individual Leagues, in my previous assessment. Taking that into account, along with all the other factors, I think its still clear that Soulkey was the much better player in every single matchup. The statistical advantage (e.g. 4%, 7%, 6%) is absolutely huge, and along with Soulkey's superior performance against higher level players in general (along with potentially the 2nd highest level of ZvT ever), these facts are just simply too powerful to be discounted by results in Individual Leagues - maybe if the all the relative differences were smaller, but certainly not in this case.
And again, on a qualitative level, Zero may have had some "goosebumps" moments, but Soulkey had a consistently much more compelling and impressive style of play, against high level competition, and a higher peak of performance. Zero was not near the same level.
Honestly, I was surprised there was any argument at all. It really wasn't even close (based on watching all the relevant Pro BW games, among other things). I am not sure how in depth you were following BW at the time, but maybe you missed many of the games I saw, or other such things...
Two people can watch the same game and arrive at different conclusions. I think we'll leave it at that. I do think that my opinion is the far more common one in the Korean community, which doesn't make it right (after all, experts are always smaller in number!) but I think you should at least consider the possibility that your opinion is too strong.
Also, the difference between ZerO and Soulkey against top Terrans mostly boils down to the fact that Soulkey owns Fantasy and Fantasy owns ZerO.
Meanwhile, I will take your view seriously and consider the possibility that Soulkey had terrible luck in individual leagues. While I compared him to Sea, Soulkey was a level above Sea at the end of BW.
Certainly I think there is at least a small possibility that my opinion is too strong. It would be quite disturbing (and probably unlikely) if it was however, based on how accurate my memory usually is for this type of information, and based on the large sample sizes (games, and other info), gathered over a relatively significant timeframe, that I am basing this opinion on.
Regarding Fantasy: top level Terrans, perhaps. But more to the point, I think it was evidenced that Soulkey's ZvT was at a much higher level than any zerg except Jaedong(based on the statistics, and by observing quality/style of ZvT wins). Other than Soulkey, no other Zerg was favorite against every Terran except Flash (Soulkey once stated in interview that he was confident against every Terran except Flash - I think he demonstrated it in practical terms as well). And I would actually put a number of Zergs ahead of Zero in ZvT ability. Despite showing a number of notable ZvT games, I don't think he was generally very strong in ZvT e.g. 57-51 (52.78%).
I am curious however, specifically what Korean opinions you are referring to. Certainly I wouldn't disagree Zero was at times a very good Zerg player with decent League results - and perhaps deservingly so, but specifically comparing Soulkey's peak performance in terms of skill, to Zero's would be most specifically relevant to the current discussion. I am quite sure that they would have specifically referenced this exact thing at some point, especially considering they were on the same team, and that they were being constantly compared. The fact that Zero thought Soulkey was better is certainly notable, and I have not heard any Korean comments specifically stating that Zero was better than Soulkey, regarding the time period in question.
Let's set aside the quality of play for a second, because that can be subjective. I don't think you have any reason to be disturbed. I do not think that your excellent memory is incorrect. But aside from the results, your perception of them are subjective even if they are correct. I won't even disagree that ZvT is not ZerO's best match up. ZerO was known more for his ZvP.
For both players, their games with Fantasy makes up a large portion of their ZvT record (14 games for ZerO and 7 games for Soulkey). For Soulkey in particular, his dominance against Fantasy is one of the first things that are brought up when people discuss his predator-prey relationships with other players.
ZerO vs Terran in standard leagues: 57W 51L (52.78%) ZerO vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 52W 42L (55.3%)
Soulkey vs Terran in standard leagues: 36W 31L (52.73%) Soulkey vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 30W 30L (50%)
As far as the Korean comments, I am Korean so I am just speaking about discussions with other Koreans plus my perception of how each player was pumped up to the viewer by the Korean commentators (rather than a direct comparison).
Finally, speaking as a professional mathematician, I think that it is strange for 1) these number of games to be considered a large sample for statistical evaluation and 2) for a 5~7% difference in winning percentages to be considered meaningful over 100 games. However, this is also why I am willing to accept that I could be wrong and Soulkey could have been just unlucky in individual leagues.
EDIT: One area of disagreement: I don't think it is fair to describe ZerO's results in individual leagues as merely decent.
PS: I will say that I am a little biased because ZerO was my favorite Zerg at the end of BW. Even though Jaedong was obviously the best Zerg by far, I just liked ZerO more for reasons I can't really explain.
EDIT: "End of BW" obviously never happened since we're here! Man, that makes me feel good.
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
Individual League performance may be in Zero's favor. But unless I am mistaken, I remember a period in time when Soulkey was considered a favorite against every player in the world except Flash. On the other hand, Zero would have, at all points in time, been considered an underdog to quite a number of players (including many Terran players). Based on overall statistics, and the players Soulkey was defeating, and the style in which he was doing so, it seems like he reached the higher "peak" of performance. And probably at one point he was playing the second highest level of ZvT ever (after Jaedong).
Soulkey has a much better overall winrate, a much better ZvP winrate, and a much better ZvZ, winrate, and a better, although misleadingly low overall ZvT winrate (given that he improved his ZvT winrate SO dramatically in the last couple years).Soulkey had significantly less experience than Zero, and yet already significantly better statistics in all matchups. Nevermind just ZvT, I think there is compelling evidence that Soulkey was significantly better in every single matchup - by statistics, but also by directly observing quality of games. At one point, Soulkey was on the verge of being S-Class (or potentially even S-Class), Zero was having some decent success in individual leagues, but his overall play ranged from mediocre - to very good, but never really near S-Class. I would be interested however, in knowing what the Professional Korean commentators had to say about the topic.
I think that these numbers tell a partial story. As you say, ZerO's win rate is better in individual leagues. How one rates these two players might be a matter of how much weight is given to ProLeague performance. I think the common (but not universal) Korean view is that OSL > MSL > ProLeague. ProLeague performance can sometimes depend a lot on how the player is used and whether targeted sniping occurs and other randomness. Under that view, the following list would tell a different story. ZerO was consistently within sniffing distance of winning individual titles. He was having a lot more than decent success.
Soulkey Round of 36(1): Bacchus OSL Round of 16(3): PD POP MSL, ABC Mart MSL, tving OSL
ZerO Round of 32(4): GOM TV MSL, Club Day MSL, Hana MSL, Big File MSL Round of 16(1): Nate MSL, Quarterfinal(5): Avalon MSL, Bacchus OSL, EVER OSL, Korean Air OSL 1, Korean Air OSL 2 Semifinal(3): Lost Saga MSL, PD POP MSL, Tving OSL Runner-Up(2): ABC Mart MSL, Blizzcon 2009
Final thought: The people who rank JangBi high on the Protoss hierarchy probably rate ZerO highly as well. That's just a guess. What do you think? I am really excited about JangBi in this tournament.
I already conceded that Zero has done better in Individual Leagues, in my previous assessment. Taking that into account, along with all the other factors, I think its still clear that Soulkey was the much better player in every single matchup. The statistical advantage (e.g. 4%, 7%, 6%) is absolutely huge, and along with Soulkey's superior performance against higher level players in general (along with potentially the 2nd highest level of ZvT ever), these facts are just simply too powerful to be discounted by results in Individual Leagues - maybe if the all the relative differences were smaller, but certainly not in this case.
And again, on a qualitative level, Zero may have had some "goosebumps" moments, but Soulkey had a consistently much more compelling and impressive style of play, against high level competition, and a higher peak of performance. Zero was not near the same level.
Honestly, I was surprised there was any argument at all. It really wasn't even close (based on watching all the relevant Pro BW games, among other things). I am not sure how in depth you were following BW at the time, but maybe you missed many of the games I saw, or other such things...
Two people can watch the same game and arrive at different conclusions. I think we'll leave it at that. I do think that my opinion is the far more common one in the Korean community, which doesn't make it right (after all, experts are always smaller in number!) but I think you should at least consider the possibility that your opinion is too strong.
Also, the difference between ZerO and Soulkey against top Terrans mostly boils down to the fact that Soulkey owns Fantasy and Fantasy owns ZerO.
Meanwhile, I will take your view seriously and consider the possibility that Soulkey had terrible luck in individual leagues. While I compared him to Sea, Soulkey was a level above Sea at the end of BW.
Certainly I think there is at least a small possibility that my opinion is too strong. It would be quite disturbing (and probably unlikely) if it was however, based on how accurate my memory usually is for this type of information, and based on the large sample sizes (games, and other info), gathered over a relatively significant timeframe, that I am basing this opinion on.
Regarding Fantasy: top level Terrans, perhaps. But more to the point, I think it was evidenced that Soulkey's ZvT was at a much higher level than any zerg except Jaedong(based on the statistics, and by observing quality/style of ZvT wins). Other than Soulkey, no other Zerg was favorite against every Terran except Flash (Soulkey once stated in interview that he was confident against every Terran except Flash - I think he demonstrated it in practical terms as well). And I would actually put a number of Zergs ahead of Zero in ZvT ability. Despite showing a number of notable ZvT games, I don't think he was generally very strong in ZvT e.g. 57-51 (52.78%).
I am curious however, specifically what Korean opinions you are referring to. Certainly I wouldn't disagree Zero was at times a very good Zerg player with decent League results - and perhaps deservingly so, but specifically comparing Soulkey's peak performance in terms of skill, to Zero's would be most specifically relevant to the current discussion. I am quite sure that they would have specifically referenced this exact thing at some point, especially considering they were on the same team, and that they were being constantly compared. The fact that Zero thought Soulkey was better is certainly notable, and I have not heard any Korean comments specifically stating that Zero was better than Soulkey, regarding the time period in question.
Let's set aside the quality of play for a second, because that can be subjective. I don't think you have any reason to be disturbed. I do not think that your excellent memory is incorrect. But aside from the results, your perception of them are subjective even if they are correct. I won't even disagree that ZvT is not ZerO's best match up. ZerO was known more for his ZvP.
For both players, their games with Fantasy makes up a large portion of their ZvT record (14 games for ZerO and 7 games for Soulkey). For Soulkey in particular, his dominance against Fantasy is one of the first things that are brought up when people discuss his predator-prey relationships with other players.
ZerO vs Terran in standard leagues: 57W 51L (52.78%) ZerO vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 52W 42L (55.3%)
Soulkey vs Terran in standard leagues: 36W 31L (52.73%) Soulkey vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 30W 30L (50%)
As far as the Korean comments, I am Korean so I am just speaking about discussions with other Koreans plus my perception of how each player was pumped up to the viewer by the Korean commentators (rather than a direct comparison).
Finally, speaking as a professional mathematician, I think that it is strange for 1) these number of games to be considered a large sample for statistical evaluation and 2) for a 5~7% difference in winning percentages to be considered meaningful over 100 games. However, this is also why I am willing to accept that I could be wrong and Soulkey could have been just unlucky in individual leagues.
EDIT: One area of disagreement: I don't think it is fair to describe ZerO's results in individual leagues as merely decent.
PS: I will say that I am a little biased because ZerO was my favorite Zerg at the end of BW. Even though Jaedong was obviously the best Zerg by far, I just liked ZerO more for reasons I can't really explain.
Yes, I did actually did previously consider perception as of primary importance, in addition to accurate memory, and likely should have mentioned it as well. And yes judgement of quality would be subjective to some extent, even if nevertheless accurate. Specifically the item of accurate "objective" perception (probably of both quantitative/qualitative factors) is likely the primary factor at this point, based on the progression of the discussion. (We can set aside quality for the most part, I will however, add one relevant point: some particular aspects regarding game quality, while not being especially concrete, are not necessarily necessarily completely subjective either: For example, does the player control the game from start to finish (e.g. better than other players would be able to in the same situations), or was there the potential or actual occurence of counterplay from the opponent. How fast/accurate were certain executions in situations where the optimal response is known, etc. There may be better examples actually. But anyways, in this type of assessments, over a number of games, there are a considerable number of data (per game), and I would say, in many of these such aspects I noticed Soulkey had a distinct edge. Obviously perception will still apply to some extent - specific significance questionable.)
Regarding the sample size: yes, from a general statistical standpoint, the number of games in question, is not exceedingly large. But in this specific circumstance (e.g. BW, the time period/players in question) they may retain meaningful value.
1) value of statistics regarding Fantasy: Having a relatively large sample size against Fantasy is not necessarily bad in a sense, and retains some measure of value. 1) Fantasy is one of the best Terrans overall, and has pretty good ZvT results, including good performances against a high level Zerg like Jaedong. Based on this fact, a very good showing against Fantasy - even in a smallish ~7 game sample is indicative of very good ZvT ability (possibly, but unlikely to be completely specific to playing Fantasy) - even in complete isolation. ie. the expectation that any zerg, nevermind one who is not especially skilled at ZvT, would beat Fantasy 6-1 in a 7 game series, is essentially 0. Sure the large sample size vs. one player is not necessarily optimal, but in this specific situation (i.e. who was better player/ZvT) I don't know if is necessarily too damaging.
2) regarding Soulkey's ZvT winrate: I think it would be agreeable to say that Soulkey was a comparatively inexperienced player, who was showing relatively dramatic and continuous improvement over time until 2012, so his overall (ZvT) results are less meaningful than for someone like Zero (who has a lot more experience, and who's ZvT winrate stats have been relatively consistent) - Soulkey overall ZvT winrate is something like 53%, but if you look at his last 33 games (arbitrary sure) Record: 22 wins - 11 losses (66.67%). I think this is really more of a relevant indication of his ability, than Fantasy/non-fantasy distinction.I don't think it's necessarily reasonable to say that the 66% is a statistical outlier (perhaps qualitative input would be required, or perhaps not), or that fantasy/non-fantasy is necessarily very meaningful in comparison. Hence, why I originally thought it would be more to the point to go down different lines of discussion.
3) Regarding the significance of 5-7% winrate differentials: Just to establish some context: The 5% for some reason seems to have significance in BW - e.g. difference between B - A - S class player. So theoretically if there is a objective 5-7%+ differential in skill;- I am assuming it is agreeable to say that this would be indicative of a significant difference in skill (e.g. potentially even B, A, or S, depending on the situation). Anyways, for the same reasons mentioned before e.g. the possibility of a player attaining the winrate statistics that Soulkey achieved, but not having the requisite skills seems fairly low percentagewise. Also consider that while Soulkey is not a particularly an experienced player, he is not particularly inexperienced either, especially given the quality of competition he has faced. If anything, a newer player who does not have the requisite skills to achieve/maintain a very high winrate, is probably going to get crunched pretty badly over a 100 game sample, and certainly you would not expect such a player to dramatically improve winrate with time (obviously a factor would be the magnitude of the difference). I guess the other side of the coin is, how often will it be accurate to say that a player who is 5-7%+ better over a 100 game sample, is actually the worse player,.. So how exactly meaningful/accurate are the 100 game winrate statistics specifically in this context (and perhaps in other 100 game samples)? I'm not sure, but my initial feeling was that they generally will be meaningful. Obviously the # of tournament games will be a fraction of 100, whatever the implications.
Perhaps if there is no specific comparison, regarding Korean commentary, then this could be put aside. Although I am still interested in knowing what the direct comparison would have yielded, in that time period, if something comes up.
If Zero's Individual League accomplishments were not merely decent, I won't argue that point.
It's interesting you mention that Zero is your favorite player - I admit I found the initial characterization you posed of Zero and Soulkey and Sea, and the subsequent response pattern slightly notable for some reason I could not immediately identify. But that is not necessarily here or there. I don't think I have any significant personal bias in this case. Soulkey was not originally a notable player to me. But after watching him improve so much - especially vs T, I became a fan - for some reason I like players that have high ZvT skill. Look up Yellow[arnc]s record against every TvZ "specialist" you can think of - he has a positive record against essentially every one. I wouldn't say Soulkey was ever became of my top favorite players (he may have eventually but who knows), but essentially by force of play I came to see him as the best Zerg in the world at one point.
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
Individual League performance may be in Zero's favor. But unless I am mistaken, I remember a period in time when Soulkey was considered a favorite against every player in the world except Flash. On the other hand, Zero would have, at all points in time, been considered an underdog to quite a number of players (including many Terran players). Based on overall statistics, and the players Soulkey was defeating, and the style in which he was doing so, it seems like he reached the higher "peak" of performance. And probably at one point he was playing the second highest level of ZvT ever (after Jaedong).
Soulkey has a much better overall winrate, a much better ZvP winrate, and a much better ZvZ, winrate, and a better, although misleadingly low overall ZvT winrate (given that he improved his ZvT winrate SO dramatically in the last couple years).Soulkey had significantly less experience than Zero, and yet already significantly better statistics in all matchups. Nevermind just ZvT, I think there is compelling evidence that Soulkey was significantly better in every single matchup - by statistics, but also by directly observing quality of games. At one point, Soulkey was on the verge of being S-Class (or potentially even S-Class), Zero was having some decent success in individual leagues, but his overall play ranged from mediocre - to very good, but never really near S-Class. I would be interested however, in knowing what the Professional Korean commentators had to say about the topic.
I think that these numbers tell a partial story. As you say, ZerO's win rate is better in individual leagues. How one rates these two players might be a matter of how much weight is given to ProLeague performance. I think the common (but not universal) Korean view is that OSL > MSL > ProLeague. ProLeague performance can sometimes depend a lot on how the player is used and whether targeted sniping occurs and other randomness. Under that view, the following list would tell a different story. ZerO was consistently within sniffing distance of winning individual titles. He was having a lot more than decent success.
Soulkey Round of 36(1): Bacchus OSL Round of 16(3): PD POP MSL, ABC Mart MSL, tving OSL
ZerO Round of 32(4): GOM TV MSL, Club Day MSL, Hana MSL, Big File MSL Round of 16(1): Nate MSL, Quarterfinal(5): Avalon MSL, Bacchus OSL, EVER OSL, Korean Air OSL 1, Korean Air OSL 2 Semifinal(3): Lost Saga MSL, PD POP MSL, Tving OSL Runner-Up(2): ABC Mart MSL, Blizzcon 2009
Final thought: The people who rank JangBi high on the Protoss hierarchy probably rate ZerO highly as well. That's just a guess. What do you think? I am really excited about JangBi in this tournament.
I already conceded that Zero has done better in Individual Leagues, in my previous assessment. Taking that into account, along with all the other factors, I think its still clear that Soulkey was the much better player in every single matchup. The statistical advantage (e.g. 4%, 7%, 6%) is absolutely huge, and along with Soulkey's superior performance against higher level players in general (along with potentially the 2nd highest level of ZvT ever), these facts are just simply too powerful to be discounted by results in Individual Leagues - maybe if the all the relative differences were smaller, but certainly not in this case.
And again, on a qualitative level, Zero may have had some "goosebumps" moments, but Soulkey had a consistently much more compelling and impressive style of play, against high level competition, and a higher peak of performance. Zero was not near the same level.
Honestly, I was surprised there was any argument at all. It really wasn't even close (based on watching all the relevant Pro BW games, among other things). I am not sure how in depth you were following BW at the time, but maybe you missed many of the games I saw, or other such things...
Two people can watch the same game and arrive at different conclusions. I think we'll leave it at that. I do think that my opinion is the far more common one in the Korean community, which doesn't make it right (after all, experts are always smaller in number!) but I think you should at least consider the possibility that your opinion is too strong.
Also, the difference between ZerO and Soulkey against top Terrans mostly boils down to the fact that Soulkey owns Fantasy and Fantasy owns ZerO.
Meanwhile, I will take your view seriously and consider the possibility that Soulkey had terrible luck in individual leagues. While I compared him to Sea, Soulkey was a level above Sea at the end of BW.
Certainly I think there is at least a small possibility that my opinion is too strong. It would be quite disturbing (and probably unlikely) if it was however, based on how accurate my memory usually is for this type of information, and based on the large sample sizes (games, and other info), gathered over a relatively significant timeframe, that I am basing this opinion on.
Regarding Fantasy: top level Terrans, perhaps. But more to the point, I think it was evidenced that Soulkey's ZvT was at a much higher level than any zerg except Jaedong(based on the statistics, and by observing quality/style of ZvT wins). Other than Soulkey, no other Zerg was favorite against every Terran except Flash (Soulkey once stated in interview that he was confident against every Terran except Flash - I think he demonstrated it in practical terms as well). And I would actually put a number of Zergs ahead of Zero in ZvT ability. Despite showing a number of notable ZvT games, I don't think he was generally very strong in ZvT e.g. 57-51 (52.78%).
I am curious however, specifically what Korean opinions you are referring to. Certainly I wouldn't disagree Zero was at times a very good Zerg player with decent League results - and perhaps deservingly so, but specifically comparing Soulkey's peak performance in terms of skill, to Zero's would be most specifically relevant to the current discussion. I am quite sure that they would have specifically referenced this exact thing at some point, especially considering they were on the same team, and that they were being constantly compared. The fact that Zero thought Soulkey was better is certainly notable, and I have not heard any Korean comments specifically stating that Zero was better than Soulkey, regarding the time period in question.
Let's set aside the quality of play for a second, because that can be subjective. I don't think you have any reason to be disturbed. I do not think that your excellent memory is incorrect. But aside from the results, your perception of them are subjective even if they are correct. I won't even disagree that ZvT is not ZerO's best match up. ZerO was known more for his ZvP.
For both players, their games with Fantasy makes up a large portion of their ZvT record (14 games for ZerO and 7 games for Soulkey). For Soulkey in particular, his dominance against Fantasy is one of the first things that are brought up when people discuss his predator-prey relationships with other players.
ZerO vs Terran in standard leagues: 57W 51L (52.78%) ZerO vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 52W 42L (55.3%)
Soulkey vs Terran in standard leagues: 36W 31L (52.73%) Soulkey vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 30W 30L (50%)
As far as the Korean comments, I am Korean so I am just speaking about discussions with other Koreans plus my perception of how each player was pumped up to the viewer by the Korean commentators (rather than a direct comparison).
Finally, speaking as a professional mathematician, I think that it is strange for 1) these number of games to be considered a large sample for statistical evaluation and 2) for a 5~7% difference in winning percentages to be considered meaningful over 100 games. However, this is also why I am willing to accept that I could be wrong and Soulkey could have been just unlucky in individual leagues.
EDIT: One area of disagreement: I don't think it is fair to describe ZerO's results in individual leagues as merely decent.
PS: I will say that I am a little biased because ZerO was my favorite Zerg at the end of BW. Even though Jaedong was obviously the best Zerg by far, I just liked ZerO more for reasons I can't really explain.
Yes, I did actually did previously consider perception as of primary importance, in addition to accurate memory, and likely should have mentioned it as well. And yes judgement of quality would be subjective to some extent, even if nevertheless accurate. Specifically the item of accurate "objective" perception (probably of both quantitative/qualitative factors) is likely the primary factor at this point, based on the progression of the discussion. (We can set aside quality for the most part, I will however, add one relevant point: some particular aspects regarding game quality, while not being especially concrete, are not necessarily necessarily completely subjective either: For example, does the player control the game from start to finish (e.g. better than other players would be able to in the same situations), or was there the potential or actual occurence of counterplay from the opponent. How fast/accurate were certain executions in situations where the optimal response is known, etc. There may be better examples actually. But anyways, in this type of assessments, over a number of games, there are a considerable number of data (per game), and I would say, in many of these such aspects I noticed Soulkey had a distinct edge. Obviously perception will still apply to some extent - specific significance questionable.)
Regarding the sample size: yes, from a general statistical standpoint, the number of games in question, is not exceedingly large. But in this specific circumstance (e.g. BW, the time period/players in question) they may retain meaningful value.
1) value of statistics regarding Fantasy: Having a relatively large sample size against Fantasy is not necessarily bad in a sense, and retains some measure of value. 1) Fantasy is one of the best Terrans overall, and has pretty good ZvT results, including good performances against a high level Zerg like Jaedong. Based on this fact, a very good showing against Fantasy - even in a smallish ~7 game sample is indicative of very good ZvT ability (possibly, but unlikely to be completely specific to playing Fantasy) - even in complete isolation. ie. the expectation that any zerg, nevermind one who is not especially skilled at ZvT, would beat Fantasy 6-1 in a 7 game series, is essentially 0. Sure the large sample size vs. one player is not necessarily optimal, but in this specific situation (i.e. who was better player/ZvT) I don't know if is necessarily too damaging.
2) regarding Soulkey's ZvT winrate: I think it would be agreeable to say that Soulkey was a comparatively inexperienced player, who was showing relatively dramatic and continuous improvement over time until 2012, so his overall (ZvT) results are less meaningful than for someone like Zero (who has a lot more experience, and who's ZvT winrate stats have been relatively consistent) - Soulkey overall ZvT winrate is something like 53%, but if you look at his last 33 games (arbitrary sure) Record: 22 wins - 11 losses (66.67%). I think this is really more of a relevant indication of his ability, than Fantasy/non-fantasy distinction.I don't think it's necessarily reasonable to say that the 66% is a statistical outlier (perhaps qualitative input would be required, or perhaps not), or that fantasy/non-fantasy is necessarily very meaningful in comparison. Hence, why I originally thought it would be more to the point to go down different lines of discussion.
3) Regarding the significance of 5-7% winrate differentials: Just to establish some context: The 5% for some reason seems to have significance in BW - e.g. difference between B - A - S class player. So theoretically if there is a objective 5-7%+ differential in skill;- I am assuming it is agreeable to say that this would be indicative of a significant difference in skill (e.g. potentially even B, A, or S, depending on the situation). Anyways, for the same reasons mentioned before e.g. the possibility of a player attaining the winrate statistics that Soulkey achieved, but not having the requisite skills seems fairly low percentagewise. Also consider that while Soulkey is not a particularly an experienced player, he is not particularly inexperienced either, especially given the quality of competition he has faced. If anything, a newer player who does not have the requisite skills to achieve/maintain a very high winrate, is probably going to get crunched pretty badly over a 100 game sample, and certainly you would not expect such a player to dramatically improve winrate with time (obviously a factor would be the magnitude of the difference). I guess the other side of the coin is, how often will it be accurate to say that a player who is 5-7%+ better over a 100 game sample, is actually the worse player,.. So how exactly meaningful/accurate are the 100 game winrate statistics specifically in this context (and perhaps in other 100 game samples)? I'm not sure, but my initial feeling was that they generally will be meaningful. Obviously the # of tournament games will be a fraction of 100, whatever the implications.
Perhaps if there is no specific comparison, regarding Korean commentary, then this could be put aside. Although I am still interested in knowing what the direct comparison would have yielded, in that time period, if something comes up.
If Zero's Individual League accomplishments were not merely decent, I won't argue that point.
It's interesting you mention that Zero is your favorite player - I admit I found the initial characterization you posed of Zero and Soulkey and Sea, and the subsequent response pattern slightly notable for some reason I could not immediately identify. But that is not necessarily here or there. I don't think I have any significant personal bias in this case. Soulkey was not originally a notable player to me. But after watching him improve so much - especially vs T, I became a fan - for some reason I like players that have high ZvT skill. Look up Yellow[arnc]s record against every TvZ "specialist" you can think of - he has a positive record against essentially every one. I wouldn't say Soulkey was ever became of my top favorite players (he may have eventually but who knows), but essentially by force of play I came to see him as the best Zerg in the world at one point.
I will start with the conclusion: There's no way you can actually prove the claim that Soulkey was a class above ZerO. There's no way that I can prove the opposite. I don't think you disagree based on what I've read---unless you think that 33 games can prove someone's skill in objective terms. What follows is just bar talk.
You can make the case that the majority perception and their criteria are wrong. That may all be true. However, you shouldn't be surprised that ZerO was considered an S-class player because most people go by OSL/MSL performance when they rate players. In terms of OSL/MSL performance, Soulkey barely has a leg to stand on, while ZerO has a long list of accomplishments beyond anything Soulkey achieved in those leagues. Again, that's unfair, but you can't be surprised about the perception itself even if you disagree with its conclusion.
The reason I chose to go by individual tournament records is because that is what the players themselves care about the most. When SKT made Bisu focus on ProLeague practice he even took the unprecedented step of complaining publicly that it was hurting his individual league performance. I've already indicated that considering individual league performance is not somehow more scientific. It's just that I've chosen to focus on the games that mattered the most. That doesn't make it right, but this is what people do when the numbers don't yield a clear answer. There are also BOx type matches in individual leagues, which requires an interesting extra layer of planning.
About Korean commentary, the most specific quote I can remember is the one I included in my earlier post. Kim Carry said that "ZerO is a player who never won a championship, but was worthy of one." That's pretty much the highest compliment you can give someone who did not win either league. My perception comes from statements of that kind often being made about ZerO but never about Soulkey. I noticed your comment about ZerO never being S-class, but he was actually the one being referred to as S-class on TV. Most of this is really just due to the aforementioned Korean bias in favor of individual leagues---which might be unfair, but it is what it is. Sea had a higher peak ELO than both ZerO and Soulkey, but he was never considered S-class precisely because of his individual league performance. Even now Kim Carry will point out that Sea was always missing that extra 2% needed to become a champion.
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
Individual League performance may be in Zero's favor. But unless I am mistaken, I remember a period in time when Soulkey was considered a favorite against every player in the world except Flash. On the other hand, Zero would have, at all points in time, been considered an underdog to quite a number of players (including many Terran players). Based on overall statistics, and the players Soulkey was defeating, and the style in which he was doing so, it seems like he reached the higher "peak" of performance. And probably at one point he was playing the second highest level of ZvT ever (after Jaedong).
Soulkey has a much better overall winrate, a much better ZvP winrate, and a much better ZvZ, winrate, and a better, although misleadingly low overall ZvT winrate (given that he improved his ZvT winrate SO dramatically in the last couple years).Soulkey had significantly less experience than Zero, and yet already significantly better statistics in all matchups. Nevermind just ZvT, I think there is compelling evidence that Soulkey was significantly better in every single matchup - by statistics, but also by directly observing quality of games. At one point, Soulkey was on the verge of being S-Class (or potentially even S-Class), Zero was having some decent success in individual leagues, but his overall play ranged from mediocre - to very good, but never really near S-Class. I would be interested however, in knowing what the Professional Korean commentators had to say about the topic.
I think that these numbers tell a partial story. As you say, ZerO's win rate is better in individual leagues. How one rates these two players might be a matter of how much weight is given to ProLeague performance. I think the common (but not universal) Korean view is that OSL > MSL > ProLeague. ProLeague performance can sometimes depend a lot on how the player is used and whether targeted sniping occurs and other randomness. Under that view, the following list would tell a different story. ZerO was consistently within sniffing distance of winning individual titles. He was having a lot more than decent success.
Soulkey Round of 36(1): Bacchus OSL Round of 16(3): PD POP MSL, ABC Mart MSL, tving OSL
ZerO Round of 32(4): GOM TV MSL, Club Day MSL, Hana MSL, Big File MSL Round of 16(1): Nate MSL, Quarterfinal(5): Avalon MSL, Bacchus OSL, EVER OSL, Korean Air OSL 1, Korean Air OSL 2 Semifinal(3): Lost Saga MSL, PD POP MSL, Tving OSL Runner-Up(2): ABC Mart MSL, Blizzcon 2009
Final thought: The people who rank JangBi high on the Protoss hierarchy probably rate ZerO highly as well. That's just a guess. What do you think? I am really excited about JangBi in this tournament.
I already conceded that Zero has done better in Individual Leagues, in my previous assessment. Taking that into account, along with all the other factors, I think its still clear that Soulkey was the much better player in every single matchup. The statistical advantage (e.g. 4%, 7%, 6%) is absolutely huge, and along with Soulkey's superior performance against higher level players in general (along with potentially the 2nd highest level of ZvT ever), these facts are just simply too powerful to be discounted by results in Individual Leagues - maybe if the all the relative differences were smaller, but certainly not in this case.
And again, on a qualitative level, Zero may have had some "goosebumps" moments, but Soulkey had a consistently much more compelling and impressive style of play, against high level competition, and a higher peak of performance. Zero was not near the same level.
Honestly, I was surprised there was any argument at all. It really wasn't even close (based on watching all the relevant Pro BW games, among other things). I am not sure how in depth you were following BW at the time, but maybe you missed many of the games I saw, or other such things...
Two people can watch the same game and arrive at different conclusions. I think we'll leave it at that. I do think that my opinion is the far more common one in the Korean community, which doesn't make it right (after all, experts are always smaller in number!) but I think you should at least consider the possibility that your opinion is too strong.
Also, the difference between ZerO and Soulkey against top Terrans mostly boils down to the fact that Soulkey owns Fantasy and Fantasy owns ZerO.
Meanwhile, I will take your view seriously and consider the possibility that Soulkey had terrible luck in individual leagues. While I compared him to Sea, Soulkey was a level above Sea at the end of BW.
Certainly I think there is at least a small possibility that my opinion is too strong. It would be quite disturbing (and probably unlikely) if it was however, based on how accurate my memory usually is for this type of information, and based on the large sample sizes (games, and other info), gathered over a relatively significant timeframe, that I am basing this opinion on.
Regarding Fantasy: top level Terrans, perhaps. But more to the point, I think it was evidenced that Soulkey's ZvT was at a much higher level than any zerg except Jaedong(based on the statistics, and by observing quality/style of ZvT wins). Other than Soulkey, no other Zerg was favorite against every Terran except Flash (Soulkey once stated in interview that he was confident against every Terran except Flash - I think he demonstrated it in practical terms as well). And I would actually put a number of Zergs ahead of Zero in ZvT ability. Despite showing a number of notable ZvT games, I don't think he was generally very strong in ZvT e.g. 57-51 (52.78%).
I am curious however, specifically what Korean opinions you are referring to. Certainly I wouldn't disagree Zero was at times a very good Zerg player with decent League results - and perhaps deservingly so, but specifically comparing Soulkey's peak performance in terms of skill, to Zero's would be most specifically relevant to the current discussion. I am quite sure that they would have specifically referenced this exact thing at some point, especially considering they were on the same team, and that they were being constantly compared. The fact that Zero thought Soulkey was better is certainly notable, and I have not heard any Korean comments specifically stating that Zero was better than Soulkey, regarding the time period in question.
Let's set aside the quality of play for a second, because that can be subjective. I don't think you have any reason to be disturbed. I do not think that your excellent memory is incorrect. But aside from the results, your perception of them are subjective even if they are correct. I won't even disagree that ZvT is not ZerO's best match up. ZerO was known more for his ZvP.
For both players, their games with Fantasy makes up a large portion of their ZvT record (14 games for ZerO and 7 games for Soulkey). For Soulkey in particular, his dominance against Fantasy is one of the first things that are brought up when people discuss his predator-prey relationships with other players.
ZerO vs Terran in standard leagues: 57W 51L (52.78%) ZerO vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 52W 42L (55.3%)
Soulkey vs Terran in standard leagues: 36W 31L (52.73%) Soulkey vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 30W 30L (50%)
As far as the Korean comments, I am Korean so I am just speaking about discussions with other Koreans plus my perception of how each player was pumped up to the viewer by the Korean commentators (rather than a direct comparison).
Finally, speaking as a professional mathematician, I think that it is strange for 1) these number of games to be considered a large sample for statistical evaluation and 2) for a 5~7% difference in winning percentages to be considered meaningful over 100 games. However, this is also why I am willing to accept that I could be wrong and Soulkey could have been just unlucky in individual leagues.
EDIT: One area of disagreement: I don't think it is fair to describe ZerO's results in individual leagues as merely decent.
PS: I will say that I am a little biased because ZerO was my favorite Zerg at the end of BW. Even though Jaedong was obviously the best Zerg by far, I just liked ZerO more for reasons I can't really explain.
Yes, I did actually did previously consider perception as of primary importance, in addition to accurate memory, and likely should have mentioned it as well. And yes judgement of quality would be subjective to some extent, even if nevertheless accurate. Specifically the item of accurate "objective" perception (probably of both quantitative/qualitative factors) is likely the primary factor at this point, based on the progression of the discussion. (We can set aside quality for the most part, I will however, add one relevant point: some particular aspects regarding game quality, while not being especially concrete, are not necessarily completely subjective either: For example, does the player control the game from start to finish (e.g. better than other players would be able to in the same situations), or was there the potential or actual occurence of counterplay from the opponent. How fast/accurate were certain executions in situations where the optimal response is known, etc. There may be better examples actually. But anyways, in this type of assessments, over a number of games, there are a considerable number of data (per game), and I would say, in many of these such aspects I noticed Soulkey had a distinct edge. Obviously perception will still apply to some extent - specific significance questionable.)
Regarding the sample size: yes, from a general statistical standpoint, the number of games in question, is not exceedingly large. But in this specific circumstance (e.g. BW, the time period/players in question) they may retain meaningful value.
1) value of statistics regarding Fantasy: Having a relatively large sample size against Fantasy is not necessarily bad in a sense, and retains some measure of value. 1) Fantasy is one of the best Terrans overall, and has pretty good ZvT results, including good performances against a high level Zerg like Jaedong. Based on this fact, a very good showing against Fantasy - even in a smallish ~7 game sample is indicative of very good ZvT ability (possibly, but unlikely to be completely specific to playing Fantasy) - even in complete isolation. ie. the expectation that any zerg, nevermind one who is not especially skilled at ZvT, would beat Fantasy 6-1 in a 7 game series, is essentially 0. Sure the large sample size vs. one player is not necessarily optimal, but in this specific situation (i.e. who was better player/ZvT) I don't know if is necessarily too damaging.
2) regarding Soulkey's ZvT winrate: I think it would be agreeable to say that Soulkey was a comparatively inexperienced player, who was showing relatively dramatic and continuous improvement over time until 2012, so his overall (ZvT) results are less meaningful than for someone like Zero (who has a lot more experience, and who's ZvT winrate stats have been relatively consistent) - Soulkey overall ZvT winrate is something like 53%, but if you look at his last 33 games (arbitrary sure) Record: 22 wins - 11 losses (66.67%). I think this is really more of a relevant indication of his ability, than Fantasy/non-fantasy distinction.I don't think it's necessarily reasonable to say that the 66% is a statistical outlier (perhaps qualitative input would be required, or perhaps not), or that fantasy/non-fantasy is necessarily very meaningful in comparison. Hence, why I originally thought it would be more to the point to go down different lines of discussion.
3) Regarding the significance of 5-7% winrate differentials: Just to establish some context: The 5% for some reason seems to have significance in BW - e.g. difference between B - A - S class player. So theoretically if there is a objective 5-7%+ differential in skill;- I am assuming it is agreeable to say that this would be indicative of a significant difference in skill (e.g. potentially even B, A, or S, depending on the situation). Anyways, for the same reasons mentioned before e.g. the possibility of a player attaining the winrate statistics that Soulkey achieved, but not having the requisite skills seems fairly low percentagewise. Also consider that while Soulkey is not a particularly an experienced player, he is not particularly inexperienced either, especially given the quality of competition he has faced. If anything, a newer player who does not have the requisite skills to achieve/maintain a very high winrate, is probably going to get crunched pretty badly over a 100 game sample, and certainly you would not expect such a player to dramatically improve winrate with time (obviously a factor would be the magnitude of the difference). I guess the other side of the coin is, how often will it be accurate to say that a player who is 5-7%+ better over a 100 game sample, is actually the worse player,.. So how exactly meaningful/accurate are the 100 game winrate statistics specifically in this context (and perhaps in other 100 game samples)? I'm not sure, but my initial feeling was that they generally will be meaningful. Obviously the # of tournament games will be a fraction of 100, whatever the implications.
Perhaps if there is no specific comparison, regarding Korean commentary, then this could be put aside. Although I am still interested in knowing what the direct comparison would have yielded, in that time period, if something comes up.
If Zero's Individual League accomplishments were not merely decent, I won't argue that point.
It's interesting you mention that Zero is your favorite player - I admit I found the initial characterization you posed of Zero and Soulkey and Sea, and the subsequent response pattern slightly notable for some reason I could not immediately identify. But that is not necessarily here or there. I don't think I have any significant personal bias in this case. Soulkey was not originally a notable player to me. But after watching him improve so much - especially vs T, I became a fan - for some reason I like players that have high ZvT skill. Look up Yellow[arnc]s record against every TvZ "specialist" you can think of - he has a positive record against essentially every one. I wouldn't say Soulkey was ever became of my top favorite players (he may have eventually but who knows), but essentially by force of play I came to see him as the best Zerg in the world at one point.
I will start with the conclusion: There's no way you can actually prove the claim that Soulkey was a class above ZerO. There's no way that I can prove the opposite. I don't think you disagree based on what I've read---unless you think that 33 games can prove someone's skill in objective terms. What follows is just bar talk.
You can make the case that the majority perception and their criteria are wrong. That may all be true. However, you shouldn't be surprised that ZerO was considered an S-class player because most people go by OSL/MSL performance when they rate players. In terms of OSL/MSL performance, Soulkey barely has a leg to stand on, while ZerO has a long list of accomplishments beyond anything Soulkey achieved in those leagues. Again, that's unfair, but you can't be surprised about the perception itself even if you disagree with its conclusion.
The reason I chose to go by individual tournament records is because that is what the players themselves care about the most. When SKT made Bisu focus on ProLeague practice he even took the unprecedented step of complaining publicly that it was hurting his individual league performance. I've already indicated that considering individual league performance is not somehow more scientific. It's just that I've chosen to focus on the games that mattered the most. That doesn't make it right, but this is what people do when the numbers don't yield a clear answer. There are also BOx type matches in individual leagues, which requires an interesting extra layer of planning.
About Korean commentary, the most specific quote I can remember is the one I included in my earlier post. Kim Carry said that "ZerO is a player who never won a championship, but was worthy of one." That's pretty much the highest compliment you can give someone who did not win either league. My perception comes from statements of that kind often being made about ZerO but never about Soulkey. I noticed your comment about ZerO never being S-class, but he was actually the one being referred to as S-class on TV. Most of this is really just due to the aforementioned Korean bias in favor of individual leagues---which might be unfair, but it is what it is. Sea had a higher peak ELO than both ZerO and Soulkey, but he was never considered S-class precisely because of his individual league performance. Even now Kim Carry will point out that Sea was always missing that extra 2% needed to become a champion.
That specific conclusion is not particularly relevant. To clarify: I wasn't necessarily claiming Soulkey was class above Zero, but rather that even a seemingly small difference (assuming it's valid) of 5-7%, would actually be quite significant in terms of relative skill difference - whether it is specifically a class above, was not particularly important. (I did mention that the statement regarding class- was just to establish context)
Regarding the sample size, in certain cases, a smaller and/or more recent, sample size can actually be more meaningful, than larger more lengthy ones. Perhaps the relevant one is Soulkey's mediocre ZvT overall record ~53%, in comparison with the most recent run of 22-11 66%. No one can reasonably claim that Soulkey in the last couple years was playing at a 53% ZvT skill level. Sure if he was somehow luckboxing/cheesing/playing bad players, etc. maybe the validity of his skill could be questioned, but given the fact that he was a relatively young, constantly improving player, the recent run of 66%, it's pretty clear that considering the larger, more lengthy sample size was actually less meaningful - in fact, highly inaccurate for the discussion at hand.
Perhaps it is true that players care more about Individual League. But think about the context. These players are practicing 12 hours a day, often with Proleague success prioritized over Individual League, and they get to play on televised games very rarely compared to the amount of practice they are putting in. They are going to play at a very high level (or try to) whenever it is an official match. It is not wrong to put some degree more importance on Individual results, but I don't think that in light of all the facts, that Individual results retain so much importance in this case: If anything the most accurate way of determining player skill - is the series of inhouse ranking tournies, etc. This is often the primary measure of skill with regards to those directly involved in the Pro Scene. Consider cases, like Jaehoon - most people think he is a terrible player, but the fact is he regularly did exceptionally well in inhouse ranking tournies - indicating very high skill - which is why the coach often put him in ace match situations, even though his results were very poor officially. Additionally, many players highly respect Jaehoon's ability (mentioned in interviews). This is not even an issue with Soulkey - He is consistently winning more inouse tournies than Zero, Zero thinks Soulkey is better, Soulkey has much better statistics in every matchup ----buut Zero better Invididual League results - It's not really a hard computation - I am not discriminating against "popular opinion," more so the goal is just to get an objective view of who the best player is. Again, even if you want to perhaps correctly prioritize Individual League games, and assign more weight to them - it is still not nearly enough to discount all the other significant factors in play here (regarding who is the better player).
I don't speak Korean, but this is the first time I have heard anyone imply that Zero was an S-Class Player. Obviously I don't know the specific TV quote you were referring to: maybe it was just an incidental discussion of S-class and Zero, without a direct assertion that Zero was in fact S-Class (which is completely different). But truly, that would be absolutely ridiculous. I fear the discussion is starting to devolve significantly at this point. Let me get to the point. Even if you want to arbitrarily focus on Starleague results, here is what S-Class level results look like:
Jaedong: Winner: 2010 WCG Korea Finals 10 games Runner-Up: 2010 Korean Air OnGameNet Starleague Season 2 18 games Runner-Up: 2010 Bigfile MBCGame StarCraft League 19 games Runner-Up: 2010 Hana Daetoo Securities MBCGame StarCraft League 16 games Winner: 2009-2010 NATE MBCGame StarCraft League 14 games Third: 2009 WCG Korea Finals 10 games Winner: 2009 Bacchus OnGameNet Starleague 12 games Winner: 2009 Averatec-Intel Classic Special Match 5 games Winner: 2008-2009 Batoo OnGameNet Starleague 19 games Winner: 2008 WCG Korea Finals 9 games Winner: 2008 GOMTV TG-Intel Classic Season 1 17 games Runner-Up: 2008 Arena MBCGame StarCraft League 15 games Winner: 2008 GOMTV MBCGame StarCraft League Season 4 16 games Winner: 2007 EVER OnGameNet Starleague 13 games Winner: 2007 Seoul International e-Sports Festival 19 games
Refer to also: Flash, Bisu, Stork, etc.
Here is what S-class Tourny results don't look like:
Zero: Runner-Up: 2011 ABC Mart MBCGame StarCraft League 16 games
It's such a ridiculous comparison, I don't even wan't to comment on it much further. But suffice to say, I think that anyone could legitimately be surprised that Zero was supposedly considered S-Class(which really I still doubt specifically happened), even if you only want to only look at Starleague results.
Again on the balance of all the information provided (including potentially accurate higher weighting of Starleague games), I think the position that Soulkey was the better player (whether it is specifically a class or more or less is not too important), is much stronger. I think I have provided most of the strongest/relevant arguments already, and I don't really think there are many more relevant/significant points to add (to further the discussion), or that there is the need to do so.
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
Individual League performance may be in Zero's favor. But unless I am mistaken, I remember a period in time when Soulkey was considered a favorite against every player in the world except Flash. On the other hand, Zero would have, at all points in time, been considered an underdog to quite a number of players (including many Terran players). Based on overall statistics, and the players Soulkey was defeating, and the style in which he was doing so, it seems like he reached the higher "peak" of performance. And probably at one point he was playing the second highest level of ZvT ever (after Jaedong).
Soulkey has a much better overall winrate, a much better ZvP winrate, and a much better ZvZ, winrate, and a better, although misleadingly low overall ZvT winrate (given that he improved his ZvT winrate SO dramatically in the last couple years).Soulkey had significantly less experience than Zero, and yet already significantly better statistics in all matchups. Nevermind just ZvT, I think there is compelling evidence that Soulkey was significantly better in every single matchup - by statistics, but also by directly observing quality of games. At one point, Soulkey was on the verge of being S-Class (or potentially even S-Class), Zero was having some decent success in individual leagues, but his overall play ranged from mediocre - to very good, but never really near S-Class. I would be interested however, in knowing what the Professional Korean commentators had to say about the topic.
I think that these numbers tell a partial story. As you say, ZerO's win rate is better in individual leagues. How one rates these two players might be a matter of how much weight is given to ProLeague performance. I think the common (but not universal) Korean view is that OSL > MSL > ProLeague. ProLeague performance can sometimes depend a lot on how the player is used and whether targeted sniping occurs and other randomness. Under that view, the following list would tell a different story. ZerO was consistently within sniffing distance of winning individual titles. He was having a lot more than decent success.
Soulkey Round of 36(1): Bacchus OSL Round of 16(3): PD POP MSL, ABC Mart MSL, tving OSL
ZerO Round of 32(4): GOM TV MSL, Club Day MSL, Hana MSL, Big File MSL Round of 16(1): Nate MSL, Quarterfinal(5): Avalon MSL, Bacchus OSL, EVER OSL, Korean Air OSL 1, Korean Air OSL 2 Semifinal(3): Lost Saga MSL, PD POP MSL, Tving OSL Runner-Up(2): ABC Mart MSL, Blizzcon 2009
Final thought: The people who rank JangBi high on the Protoss hierarchy probably rate ZerO highly as well. That's just a guess. What do you think? I am really excited about JangBi in this tournament.
I already conceded that Zero has done better in Individual Leagues, in my previous assessment. Taking that into account, along with all the other factors, I think its still clear that Soulkey was the much better player in every single matchup. The statistical advantage (e.g. 4%, 7%, 6%) is absolutely huge, and along with Soulkey's superior performance against higher level players in general (along with potentially the 2nd highest level of ZvT ever), these facts are just simply too powerful to be discounted by results in Individual Leagues - maybe if the all the relative differences were smaller, but certainly not in this case.
And again, on a qualitative level, Zero may have had some "goosebumps" moments, but Soulkey had a consistently much more compelling and impressive style of play, against high level competition, and a higher peak of performance. Zero was not near the same level.
Honestly, I was surprised there was any argument at all. It really wasn't even close (based on watching all the relevant Pro BW games, among other things). I am not sure how in depth you were following BW at the time, but maybe you missed many of the games I saw, or other such things...
Two people can watch the same game and arrive at different conclusions. I think we'll leave it at that. I do think that my opinion is the far more common one in the Korean community, which doesn't make it right (after all, experts are always smaller in number!) but I think you should at least consider the possibility that your opinion is too strong.
Also, the difference between ZerO and Soulkey against top Terrans mostly boils down to the fact that Soulkey owns Fantasy and Fantasy owns ZerO.
Meanwhile, I will take your view seriously and consider the possibility that Soulkey had terrible luck in individual leagues. While I compared him to Sea, Soulkey was a level above Sea at the end of BW.
Certainly I think there is at least a small possibility that my opinion is too strong. It would be quite disturbing (and probably unlikely) if it was however, based on how accurate my memory usually is for this type of information, and based on the large sample sizes (games, and other info), gathered over a relatively significant timeframe, that I am basing this opinion on.
Regarding Fantasy: top level Terrans, perhaps. But more to the point, I think it was evidenced that Soulkey's ZvT was at a much higher level than any zerg except Jaedong(based on the statistics, and by observing quality/style of ZvT wins). Other than Soulkey, no other Zerg was favorite against every Terran except Flash (Soulkey once stated in interview that he was confident against every Terran except Flash - I think he demonstrated it in practical terms as well). And I would actually put a number of Zergs ahead of Zero in ZvT ability. Despite showing a number of notable ZvT games, I don't think he was generally very strong in ZvT e.g. 57-51 (52.78%).
I am curious however, specifically what Korean opinions you are referring to. Certainly I wouldn't disagree Zero was at times a very good Zerg player with decent League results - and perhaps deservingly so, but specifically comparing Soulkey's peak performance in terms of skill, to Zero's would be most specifically relevant to the current discussion. I am quite sure that they would have specifically referenced this exact thing at some point, especially considering they were on the same team, and that they were being constantly compared. The fact that Zero thought Soulkey was better is certainly notable, and I have not heard any Korean comments specifically stating that Zero was better than Soulkey, regarding the time period in question.
Let's set aside the quality of play for a second, because that can be subjective. I don't think you have any reason to be disturbed. I do not think that your excellent memory is incorrect. But aside from the results, your perception of them are subjective even if they are correct. I won't even disagree that ZvT is not ZerO's best match up. ZerO was known more for his ZvP.
For both players, their games with Fantasy makes up a large portion of their ZvT record (14 games for ZerO and 7 games for Soulkey). For Soulkey in particular, his dominance against Fantasy is one of the first things that are brought up when people discuss his predator-prey relationships with other players.
ZerO vs Terran in standard leagues: 57W 51L (52.78%) ZerO vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 52W 42L (55.3%)
Soulkey vs Terran in standard leagues: 36W 31L (52.73%) Soulkey vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 30W 30L (50%)
As far as the Korean comments, I am Korean so I am just speaking about discussions with other Koreans plus my perception of how each player was pumped up to the viewer by the Korean commentators (rather than a direct comparison).
Finally, speaking as a professional mathematician, I think that it is strange for 1) these number of games to be considered a large sample for statistical evaluation and 2) for a 5~7% difference in winning percentages to be considered meaningful over 100 games. However, this is also why I am willing to accept that I could be wrong and Soulkey could have been just unlucky in individual leagues.
EDIT: One area of disagreement: I don't think it is fair to describe ZerO's results in individual leagues as merely decent.
PS: I will say that I am a little biased because ZerO was my favorite Zerg at the end of BW. Even though Jaedong was obviously the best Zerg by far, I just liked ZerO more for reasons I can't really explain.
Yes, I did actually did previously consider perception as of primary importance, in addition to accurate memory, and likely should have mentioned it as well. And yes judgement of quality would be subjective to some extent, even if nevertheless accurate. Specifically the item of accurate "objective" perception (probably of both quantitative/qualitative factors) is likely the primary factor at this point, based on the progression of the discussion. (We can set aside quality for the most part, I will however, add one relevant point: some particular aspects regarding game quality, while not being especially concrete, are not necessarily completely subjective either: For example, does the player control the game from start to finish (e.g. better than other players would be able to in the same situations), or was there the potential or actual occurence of counterplay from the opponent. How fast/accurate were certain executions in situations where the optimal response is known, etc. There may be better examples actually. But anyways, in this type of assessments, over a number of games, there are a considerable number of data (per game), and I would say, in many of these such aspects I noticed Soulkey had a distinct edge. Obviously perception will still apply to some extent - specific significance questionable.)
Regarding the sample size: yes, from a general statistical standpoint, the number of games in question, is not exceedingly large. But in this specific circumstance (e.g. BW, the time period/players in question) they may retain meaningful value.
1) value of statistics regarding Fantasy: Having a relatively large sample size against Fantasy is not necessarily bad in a sense, and retains some measure of value. 1) Fantasy is one of the best Terrans overall, and has pretty good ZvT results, including good performances against a high level Zerg like Jaedong. Based on this fact, a very good showing against Fantasy - even in a smallish ~7 game sample is indicative of very good ZvT ability (possibly, but unlikely to be completely specific to playing Fantasy) - even in complete isolation. ie. the expectation that any zerg, nevermind one who is not especially skilled at ZvT, would beat Fantasy 6-1 in a 7 game series, is essentially 0. Sure the large sample size vs. one player is not necessarily optimal, but in this specific situation (i.e. who was better player/ZvT) I don't know if is necessarily too damaging.
2) regarding Soulkey's ZvT winrate: I think it would be agreeable to say that Soulkey was a comparatively inexperienced player, who was showing relatively dramatic and continuous improvement over time until 2012, so his overall (ZvT) results are less meaningful than for someone like Zero (who has a lot more experience, and who's ZvT winrate stats have been relatively consistent) - Soulkey overall ZvT winrate is something like 53%, but if you look at his last 33 games (arbitrary sure) Record: 22 wins - 11 losses (66.67%). I think this is really more of a relevant indication of his ability, than Fantasy/non-fantasy distinction.I don't think it's necessarily reasonable to say that the 66% is a statistical outlier (perhaps qualitative input would be required, or perhaps not), or that fantasy/non-fantasy is necessarily very meaningful in comparison. Hence, why I originally thought it would be more to the point to go down different lines of discussion.
3) Regarding the significance of 5-7% winrate differentials: Just to establish some context: The 5% for some reason seems to have significance in BW - e.g. difference between B - A - S class player. So theoretically if there is a objective 5-7%+ differential in skill;- I am assuming it is agreeable to say that this would be indicative of a significant difference in skill (e.g. potentially even B, A, or S, depending on the situation). Anyways, for the same reasons mentioned before e.g. the possibility of a player attaining the winrate statistics that Soulkey achieved, but not having the requisite skills seems fairly low percentagewise. Also consider that while Soulkey is not a particularly an experienced player, he is not particularly inexperienced either, especially given the quality of competition he has faced. If anything, a newer player who does not have the requisite skills to achieve/maintain a very high winrate, is probably going to get crunched pretty badly over a 100 game sample, and certainly you would not expect such a player to dramatically improve winrate with time (obviously a factor would be the magnitude of the difference). I guess the other side of the coin is, how often will it be accurate to say that a player who is 5-7%+ better over a 100 game sample, is actually the worse player,.. So how exactly meaningful/accurate are the 100 game winrate statistics specifically in this context (and perhaps in other 100 game samples)? I'm not sure, but my initial feeling was that they generally will be meaningful. Obviously the # of tournament games will be a fraction of 100, whatever the implications.
Perhaps if there is no specific comparison, regarding Korean commentary, then this could be put aside. Although I am still interested in knowing what the direct comparison would have yielded, in that time period, if something comes up.
If Zero's Individual League accomplishments were not merely decent, I won't argue that point.
It's interesting you mention that Zero is your favorite player - I admit I found the initial characterization you posed of Zero and Soulkey and Sea, and the subsequent response pattern slightly notable for some reason I could not immediately identify. But that is not necessarily here or there. I don't think I have any significant personal bias in this case. Soulkey was not originally a notable player to me. But after watching him improve so much - especially vs T, I became a fan - for some reason I like players that have high ZvT skill. Look up Yellow[arnc]s record against every TvZ "specialist" you can think of - he has a positive record against essentially every one. I wouldn't say Soulkey was ever became of my top favorite players (he may have eventually but who knows), but essentially by force of play I came to see him as the best Zerg in the world at one point.
I will start with the conclusion: There's no way you can actually prove the claim that Soulkey was a class above ZerO. There's no way that I can prove the opposite. I don't think you disagree based on what I've read---unless you think that 33 games can prove someone's skill in objective terms. What follows is just bar talk.
You can make the case that the majority perception and their criteria are wrong. That may all be true. However, you shouldn't be surprised that ZerO was considered an S-class player because most people go by OSL/MSL performance when they rate players. In terms of OSL/MSL performance, Soulkey barely has a leg to stand on, while ZerO has a long list of accomplishments beyond anything Soulkey achieved in those leagues. Again, that's unfair, but you can't be surprised about the perception itself even if you disagree with its conclusion.
The reason I chose to go by individual tournament records is because that is what the players themselves care about the most. When SKT made Bisu focus on ProLeague practice he even took the unprecedented step of complaining publicly that it was hurting his individual league performance. I've already indicated that considering individual league performance is not somehow more scientific. It's just that I've chosen to focus on the games that mattered the most. That doesn't make it right, but this is what people do when the numbers don't yield a clear answer. There are also BOx type matches in individual leagues, which requires an interesting extra layer of planning.
About Korean commentary, the most specific quote I can remember is the one I included in my earlier post. Kim Carry said that "ZerO is a player who never won a championship, but was worthy of one." That's pretty much the highest compliment you can give someone who did not win either league. My perception comes from statements of that kind often being made about ZerO but never about Soulkey. I noticed your comment about ZerO never being S-class, but he was actually the one being referred to as S-class on TV. Most of this is really just due to the aforementioned Korean bias in favor of individual leagues---which might be unfair, but it is what it is. Sea had a higher peak ELO than both ZerO and Soulkey, but he was never considered S-class precisely because of his individual league performance. Even now Kim Carry will point out that Sea was always missing that extra 2% needed to become a champion.
That specific conclusion is not particularly relevant. To clarify: I wasn't necessarily claiming Soulkey was class above Zero, but rather that even a seemingly small difference (assuming it's valid) of 5-7%, would actually be quite significant in terms of relative skill difference - whether it is specifically a class above, was not particularly important. (I did mention that the statement regarding class- was just to establish context)
Regarding the sample size, in certain cases, a smaller and/or more recent, sample size can actually be more meaningful, than larger more lengthy ones. Perhaps the relevant one is Soulkey's mediocre ZvT overall record ~53%, in comparison with the most recent run of 22-11 66%. No one can reasonably claim that Soulkey in the last couple years was playing at a 53% ZvT skill level. Sure if he was somehow luckboxing/cheesing/playing bad players, etc. maybe the validity of his skill could be questioned, but given the fact that he was a relatively young, constantly improving player, the recent run of 66%, it's pretty clear that considering the larger, more lengthy sample size was actually less meaningful - in fact, highly inaccurate for the discussion at hand.
Perhaps it is true that players care more about Individual League. But think about the context. These players are practicing 12 hours a day, often with Proleague success prioritized over Individual League, and they get to play on televised games very rarely compared to the amount of practice they are putting in. They are going to play at a very high level (or try to) whenever it is an official match. It is not wrong to put some degree more importance on Individual results, but I don't think that in light of all the facts, that Individual results retain so much importance in this case: If anything the most accurate way of determining player skill - is the series of inhouse ranking tournies, etc. This is often the primary measure of skill with regards to those directly involved in the Pro Scene. Consider cases, like Jaehoon - most people think he is a terrible player, but the fact is he regularly did exceptionally well in inhouse ranking tournies - indicating very high skill - which is why the coach often put him in ace match situations, even though his results were very poor officially. Additionally, many players highly respect Jaehoon's ability (mentioned in interviews). This is not even an issue with Soulkey - He is consistently winning more inouse tournies than Zero, Zero thinks Soulkey is better, Soulkey has much better statistics in every matchup ----buut Zero better Invididual League results - It's not really a hard computation - I am not discriminating against "popular opinion," more so the goal is just to get an objective view of who the best player is. Again, even if you want to perhaps correctly prioritize Individual League games, and assign more weight to them - it is still not nearly enough to discount all the other significant factors in play here (regarding who is the better player).
I don't speak Korean, but this is the first time I have heard anyone imply that Zero was an S-Class Player. Obviously I don't know the specific TV quote you were referring to: maybe it was just an incidental discussion of S-class and Zero, without a direct assertion that Zero was in fact S-Class (which is completely different). But truly, that would be absolutely ridiculous. I fear the discussion is starting to devolve significantly at this point. Let me get to the point. Even if you want to arbitrarily focus on Starleague results, here is what S-Class level results look like:
Jaedong: Winner: 2010 WCG Korea Finals 10 games Runner-Up: 2010 Korean Air OnGameNet Starleague Season 2 18 games Runner-Up: 2010 Bigfile MBCGame StarCraft League 19 games Runner-Up: 2010 Hana Daetoo Securities MBCGame StarCraft League 16 games Winner: 2009-2010 NATE MBCGame StarCraft League 14 games Third: 2009 WCG Korea Finals 10 games Winner: 2009 Bacchus OnGameNet Starleague 12 games Winner: 2009 Averatec-Intel Classic Special Match 5 games Winner: 2008-2009 Batoo OnGameNet Starleague 19 games Winner: 2008 WCG Korea Finals 9 games Winner: 2008 GOMTV TG-Intel Classic Season 1 17 games Runner-Up: 2008 Arena MBCGame StarCraft League 15 games Winner: 2008 GOMTV MBCGame StarCraft League Season 4 16 games Winner: 2007 EVER OnGameNet Starleague 13 games Winner: 2007 Seoul International e-Sports Festival 19 games
Refer to also: Flash, Bisu, Stork, etc.
Here is what S-class Tourny results don't look like:
Zero: Runner-Up: 2011 ABC Mart MBCGame StarCraft League 16 games
It's such a ridiculous comparison, I don't even wan't to comment on it much further. But suffice to say, I think that anyone could legitimately be surprised that Zero was supposedly considered S-Class(which really I still doubt specifically happened), even if you only want to only look at Starleague results.
Again on the balance of all the information provided (including potentially accurate higher weighting of Starleague games), I think the position that Soulkey was the better player (whether it is specifically a class or more or less is not too important), is much stronger. I think I have provided most of the strongest/relevant arguments already, and I don't really think there are many more relevant/significant points to add (to further the discussion), or that there is the need to do so.
LOL. Maybe the difference comes down to the fact that I consider Jaedong God-class, which is beyond S-class. :-) Definitions, definitions... Jaedong is the greatest Zerg of all time...kind of an unfair comparison. Also, let's not boil down Zero's resume to that one line from Liquipedia when I've already given a more complete list.
I am not saying that you can't argue for Soulkey. I don't disagree that you're making a case. It's just not an objective logical proof of anything, although you are somehow beginning to convince me of the conclusion regardless. PM me if you want to talk some more. I don't want to keep bumping the thread with what's turning into a two-person discussion. Having this kind of conversation again really brings back memories. Who do I need to thank for this? Sonic or FIX?
On January 09 2014 13:46 miercat wrote: Yes, for some reason I found it very interesting watching the Juice micro during the Group Ceremony. There were at least 6 different movements applied to the various juices (not drinking, just moving), by Sonic and LSW primarily, throughout the night. I never actually saw them drink any juice..
On a different topic, I don't recall Zero being considered at all - nevermind "widely considered" the best Zerg after Jaedong, in the most recent Proleague years. If anything Jaedong was slumping pretty hard, and it was actually Soulkey who was essentially destroying everybody (even Terrans) except Flash, and was considered pretty clearly the best Zerg in the world. Zero never reached the same level that Soulkey did.
Do you not think that ZerO's second place finish in ABC Mart, and consistent semifinals appearances in tving and PDPop trumps Souley's round of 16 appearances? Perhaps Soulkey was considered better in ZvT, but I do think that ZerO should be called the better overall player.
Individual League performance may be in Zero's favor. But unless I am mistaken, I remember a period in time when Soulkey was considered a favorite against every player in the world except Flash. On the other hand, Zero would have, at all points in time, been considered an underdog to quite a number of players (including many Terran players). Based on overall statistics, and the players Soulkey was defeating, and the style in which he was doing so, it seems like he reached the higher "peak" of performance. And probably at one point he was playing the second highest level of ZvT ever (after Jaedong).
Soulkey has a much better overall winrate, a much better ZvP winrate, and a much better ZvZ, winrate, and a better, although misleadingly low overall ZvT winrate (given that he improved his ZvT winrate SO dramatically in the last couple years).Soulkey had significantly less experience than Zero, and yet already significantly better statistics in all matchups. Nevermind just ZvT, I think there is compelling evidence that Soulkey was significantly better in every single matchup - by statistics, but also by directly observing quality of games. At one point, Soulkey was on the verge of being S-Class (or potentially even S-Class), Zero was having some decent success in individual leagues, but his overall play ranged from mediocre - to very good, but never really near S-Class. I would be interested however, in knowing what the Professional Korean commentators had to say about the topic.
I think that these numbers tell a partial story. As you say, ZerO's win rate is better in individual leagues. How one rates these two players might be a matter of how much weight is given to ProLeague performance. I think the common (but not universal) Korean view is that OSL > MSL > ProLeague. ProLeague performance can sometimes depend a lot on how the player is used and whether targeted sniping occurs and other randomness. Under that view, the following list would tell a different story. ZerO was consistently within sniffing distance of winning individual titles. He was having a lot more than decent success.
Soulkey Round of 36(1): Bacchus OSL Round of 16(3): PD POP MSL, ABC Mart MSL, tving OSL
ZerO Round of 32(4): GOM TV MSL, Club Day MSL, Hana MSL, Big File MSL Round of 16(1): Nate MSL, Quarterfinal(5): Avalon MSL, Bacchus OSL, EVER OSL, Korean Air OSL 1, Korean Air OSL 2 Semifinal(3): Lost Saga MSL, PD POP MSL, Tving OSL Runner-Up(2): ABC Mart MSL, Blizzcon 2009
Final thought: The people who rank JangBi high on the Protoss hierarchy probably rate ZerO highly as well. That's just a guess. What do you think? I am really excited about JangBi in this tournament.
I already conceded that Zero has done better in Individual Leagues, in my previous assessment. Taking that into account, along with all the other factors, I think its still clear that Soulkey was the much better player in every single matchup. The statistical advantage (e.g. 4%, 7%, 6%) is absolutely huge, and along with Soulkey's superior performance against higher level players in general (along with potentially the 2nd highest level of ZvT ever), these facts are just simply too powerful to be discounted by results in Individual Leagues - maybe if the all the relative differences were smaller, but certainly not in this case.
And again, on a qualitative level, Zero may have had some "goosebumps" moments, but Soulkey had a consistently much more compelling and impressive style of play, against high level competition, and a higher peak of performance. Zero was not near the same level.
Honestly, I was surprised there was any argument at all. It really wasn't even close (based on watching all the relevant Pro BW games, among other things). I am not sure how in depth you were following BW at the time, but maybe you missed many of the games I saw, or other such things...
Two people can watch the same game and arrive at different conclusions. I think we'll leave it at that. I do think that my opinion is the far more common one in the Korean community, which doesn't make it right (after all, experts are always smaller in number!) but I think you should at least consider the possibility that your opinion is too strong.
Also, the difference between ZerO and Soulkey against top Terrans mostly boils down to the fact that Soulkey owns Fantasy and Fantasy owns ZerO.
Meanwhile, I will take your view seriously and consider the possibility that Soulkey had terrible luck in individual leagues. While I compared him to Sea, Soulkey was a level above Sea at the end of BW.
Certainly I think there is at least a small possibility that my opinion is too strong. It would be quite disturbing (and probably unlikely) if it was however, based on how accurate my memory usually is for this type of information, and based on the large sample sizes (games, and other info), gathered over a relatively significant timeframe, that I am basing this opinion on.
Regarding Fantasy: top level Terrans, perhaps. But more to the point, I think it was evidenced that Soulkey's ZvT was at a much higher level than any zerg except Jaedong(based on the statistics, and by observing quality/style of ZvT wins). Other than Soulkey, no other Zerg was favorite against every Terran except Flash (Soulkey once stated in interview that he was confident against every Terran except Flash - I think he demonstrated it in practical terms as well). And I would actually put a number of Zergs ahead of Zero in ZvT ability. Despite showing a number of notable ZvT games, I don't think he was generally very strong in ZvT e.g. 57-51 (52.78%).
I am curious however, specifically what Korean opinions you are referring to. Certainly I wouldn't disagree Zero was at times a very good Zerg player with decent League results - and perhaps deservingly so, but specifically comparing Soulkey's peak performance in terms of skill, to Zero's would be most specifically relevant to the current discussion. I am quite sure that they would have specifically referenced this exact thing at some point, especially considering they were on the same team, and that they were being constantly compared. The fact that Zero thought Soulkey was better is certainly notable, and I have not heard any Korean comments specifically stating that Zero was better than Soulkey, regarding the time period in question.
Let's set aside the quality of play for a second, because that can be subjective. I don't think you have any reason to be disturbed. I do not think that your excellent memory is incorrect. But aside from the results, your perception of them are subjective even if they are correct. I won't even disagree that ZvT is not ZerO's best match up. ZerO was known more for his ZvP.
For both players, their games with Fantasy makes up a large portion of their ZvT record (14 games for ZerO and 7 games for Soulkey). For Soulkey in particular, his dominance against Fantasy is one of the first things that are brought up when people discuss his predator-prey relationships with other players.
ZerO vs Terran in standard leagues: 57W 51L (52.78%) ZerO vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 52W 42L (55.3%)
Soulkey vs Terran in standard leagues: 36W 31L (52.73%) Soulkey vs Non-Fantasy Terran in standard leagues: 30W 30L (50%)
As far as the Korean comments, I am Korean so I am just speaking about discussions with other Koreans plus my perception of how each player was pumped up to the viewer by the Korean commentators (rather than a direct comparison).
Finally, speaking as a professional mathematician, I think that it is strange for 1) these number of games to be considered a large sample for statistical evaluation and 2) for a 5~7% difference in winning percentages to be considered meaningful over 100 games. However, this is also why I am willing to accept that I could be wrong and Soulkey could have been just unlucky in individual leagues.
EDIT: One area of disagreement: I don't think it is fair to describe ZerO's results in individual leagues as merely decent.
PS: I will say that I am a little biased because ZerO was my favorite Zerg at the end of BW. Even though Jaedong was obviously the best Zerg by far, I just liked ZerO more for reasons I can't really explain.
Yes, I did actually did previously consider perception as of primary importance, in addition to accurate memory, and likely should have mentioned it as well. And yes judgement of quality would be subjective to some extent, even if nevertheless accurate. Specifically the item of accurate "objective" perception (probably of both quantitative/qualitative factors) is likely the primary factor at this point, based on the progression of the discussion. (We can set aside quality for the most part, I will however, add one relevant point: some particular aspects regarding game quality, while not being especially concrete, are not necessarily completely subjective either: For example, does the player control the game from start to finish (e.g. better than other players would be able to in the same situations), or was there the potential or actual occurence of counterplay from the opponent. How fast/accurate were certain executions in situations where the optimal response is known, etc. There may be better examples actually. But anyways, in this type of assessments, over a number of games, there are a considerable number of data (per game), and I would say, in many of these such aspects I noticed Soulkey had a distinct edge. Obviously perception will still apply to some extent - specific significance questionable.)
Regarding the sample size: yes, from a general statistical standpoint, the number of games in question, is not exceedingly large. But in this specific circumstance (e.g. BW, the time period/players in question) they may retain meaningful value.
1) value of statistics regarding Fantasy: Having a relatively large sample size against Fantasy is not necessarily bad in a sense, and retains some measure of value. 1) Fantasy is one of the best Terrans overall, and has pretty good ZvT results, including good performances against a high level Zerg like Jaedong. Based on this fact, a very good showing against Fantasy - even in a smallish ~7 game sample is indicative of very good ZvT ability (possibly, but unlikely to be completely specific to playing Fantasy) - even in complete isolation. ie. the expectation that any zerg, nevermind one who is not especially skilled at ZvT, would beat Fantasy 6-1 in a 7 game series, is essentially 0. Sure the large sample size vs. one player is not necessarily optimal, but in this specific situation (i.e. who was better player/ZvT) I don't know if is necessarily too damaging.
2) regarding Soulkey's ZvT winrate: I think it would be agreeable to say that Soulkey was a comparatively inexperienced player, who was showing relatively dramatic and continuous improvement over time until 2012, so his overall (ZvT) results are less meaningful than for someone like Zero (who has a lot more experience, and who's ZvT winrate stats have been relatively consistent) - Soulkey overall ZvT winrate is something like 53%, but if you look at his last 33 games (arbitrary sure) Record: 22 wins - 11 losses (66.67%). I think this is really more of a relevant indication of his ability, than Fantasy/non-fantasy distinction.I don't think it's necessarily reasonable to say that the 66% is a statistical outlier (perhaps qualitative input would be required, or perhaps not), or that fantasy/non-fantasy is necessarily very meaningful in comparison. Hence, why I originally thought it would be more to the point to go down different lines of discussion.
3) Regarding the significance of 5-7% winrate differentials: Just to establish some context: The 5% for some reason seems to have significance in BW - e.g. difference between B - A - S class player. So theoretically if there is a objective 5-7%+ differential in skill;- I am assuming it is agreeable to say that this would be indicative of a significant difference in skill (e.g. potentially even B, A, or S, depending on the situation). Anyways, for the same reasons mentioned before e.g. the possibility of a player attaining the winrate statistics that Soulkey achieved, but not having the requisite skills seems fairly low percentagewise. Also consider that while Soulkey is not a particularly an experienced player, he is not particularly inexperienced either, especially given the quality of competition he has faced. If anything, a newer player who does not have the requisite skills to achieve/maintain a very high winrate, is probably going to get crunched pretty badly over a 100 game sample, and certainly you would not expect such a player to dramatically improve winrate with time (obviously a factor would be the magnitude of the difference). I guess the other side of the coin is, how often will it be accurate to say that a player who is 5-7%+ better over a 100 game sample, is actually the worse player,.. So how exactly meaningful/accurate are the 100 game winrate statistics specifically in this context (and perhaps in other 100 game samples)? I'm not sure, but my initial feeling was that they generally will be meaningful. Obviously the # of tournament games will be a fraction of 100, whatever the implications.
Perhaps if there is no specific comparison, regarding Korean commentary, then this could be put aside. Although I am still interested in knowing what the direct comparison would have yielded, in that time period, if something comes up.
If Zero's Individual League accomplishments were not merely decent, I won't argue that point.
It's interesting you mention that Zero is your favorite player - I admit I found the initial characterization you posed of Zero and Soulkey and Sea, and the subsequent response pattern slightly notable for some reason I could not immediately identify. But that is not necessarily here or there. I don't think I have any significant personal bias in this case. Soulkey was not originally a notable player to me. But after watching him improve so much - especially vs T, I became a fan - for some reason I like players that have high ZvT skill. Look up Yellow[arnc]s record against every TvZ "specialist" you can think of - he has a positive record against essentially every one. I wouldn't say Soulkey was ever became of my top favorite players (he may have eventually but who knows), but essentially by force of play I came to see him as the best Zerg in the world at one point.
I will start with the conclusion: There's no way you can actually prove the claim that Soulkey was a class above ZerO. There's no way that I can prove the opposite. I don't think you disagree based on what I've read---unless you think that 33 games can prove someone's skill in objective terms. What follows is just bar talk.
You can make the case that the majority perception and their criteria are wrong. That may all be true. However, you shouldn't be surprised that ZerO was considered an S-class player because most people go by OSL/MSL performance when they rate players. In terms of OSL/MSL performance, Soulkey barely has a leg to stand on, while ZerO has a long list of accomplishments beyond anything Soulkey achieved in those leagues. Again, that's unfair, but you can't be surprised about the perception itself even if you disagree with its conclusion.
The reason I chose to go by individual tournament records is because that is what the players themselves care about the most. When SKT made Bisu focus on ProLeague practice he even took the unprecedented step of complaining publicly that it was hurting his individual league performance. I've already indicated that considering individual league performance is not somehow more scientific. It's just that I've chosen to focus on the games that mattered the most. That doesn't make it right, but this is what people do when the numbers don't yield a clear answer. There are also BOx type matches in individual leagues, which requires an interesting extra layer of planning.
About Korean commentary, the most specific quote I can remember is the one I included in my earlier post. Kim Carry said that "ZerO is a player who never won a championship, but was worthy of one." That's pretty much the highest compliment you can give someone who did not win either league. My perception comes from statements of that kind often being made about ZerO but never about Soulkey. I noticed your comment about ZerO never being S-class, but he was actually the one being referred to as S-class on TV. Most of this is really just due to the aforementioned Korean bias in favor of individual leagues---which might be unfair, but it is what it is. Sea had a higher peak ELO than both ZerO and Soulkey, but he was never considered S-class precisely because of his individual league performance. Even now Kim Carry will point out that Sea was always missing that extra 2% needed to become a champion.
That specific conclusion is not particularly relevant. To clarify: I wasn't necessarily claiming Soulkey was class above Zero, but rather that even a seemingly small difference (assuming it's valid) of 5-7%, would actually be quite significant in terms of relative skill difference - whether it is specifically a class above, was not particularly important. (I did mention that the statement regarding class- was just to establish context)
Regarding the sample size, in certain cases, a smaller and/or more recent, sample size can actually be more meaningful, than larger more lengthy ones. Perhaps the relevant one is Soulkey's mediocre ZvT overall record ~53%, in comparison with the most recent run of 22-11 66%. No one can reasonably claim that Soulkey in the last couple years was playing at a 53% ZvT skill level. Sure if he was somehow luckboxing/cheesing/playing bad players, etc. maybe the validity of his skill could be questioned, but given the fact that he was a relatively young, constantly improving player, the recent run of 66%, it's pretty clear that considering the larger, more lengthy sample size was actually less meaningful - in fact, highly inaccurate for the discussion at hand.
Perhaps it is true that players care more about Individual League. But think about the context. These players are practicing 12 hours a day, often with Proleague success prioritized over Individual League, and they get to play on televised games very rarely compared to the amount of practice they are putting in. They are going to play at a very high level (or try to) whenever it is an official match. It is not wrong to put some degree more importance on Individual results, but I don't think that in light of all the facts, that Individual results retain so much importance in this case: If anything the most accurate way of determining player skill - is the series of inhouse ranking tournies, etc. This is often the primary measure of skill with regards to those directly involved in the Pro Scene. Consider cases, like Jaehoon - most people think he is a terrible player, but the fact is he regularly did exceptionally well in inhouse ranking tournies - indicating very high skill - which is why the coach often put him in ace match situations, even though his results were very poor officially. Additionally, many players highly respect Jaehoon's ability (mentioned in interviews). This is not even an issue with Soulkey - He is consistently winning more inouse tournies than Zero, Zero thinks Soulkey is better, Soulkey has much better statistics in every matchup ----buut Zero better Invididual League results - It's not really a hard computation - I am not discriminating against "popular opinion," more so the goal is just to get an objective view of who the best player is. Again, even if you want to perhaps correctly prioritize Individual League games, and assign more weight to them - it is still not nearly enough to discount all the other significant factors in play here (regarding who is the better player).
I don't speak Korean, but this is the first time I have heard anyone imply that Zero was an S-Class Player. Obviously I don't know the specific TV quote you were referring to: maybe it was just an incidental discussion of S-class and Zero, without a direct assertion that Zero was in fact S-Class (which is completely different). But truly, that would be absolutely ridiculous. I fear the discussion is starting to devolve significantly at this point. Let me get to the point. Even if you want to arbitrarily focus on Starleague results, here is what S-Class level results look like:
Jaedong: Winner: 2010 WCG Korea Finals 10 games Runner-Up: 2010 Korean Air OnGameNet Starleague Season 2 18 games Runner-Up: 2010 Bigfile MBCGame StarCraft League 19 games Runner-Up: 2010 Hana Daetoo Securities MBCGame StarCraft League 16 games Winner: 2009-2010 NATE MBCGame StarCraft League 14 games Third: 2009 WCG Korea Finals 10 games Winner: 2009 Bacchus OnGameNet Starleague 12 games Winner: 2009 Averatec-Intel Classic Special Match 5 games Winner: 2008-2009 Batoo OnGameNet Starleague 19 games Winner: 2008 WCG Korea Finals 9 games Winner: 2008 GOMTV TG-Intel Classic Season 1 17 games Runner-Up: 2008 Arena MBCGame StarCraft League 15 games Winner: 2008 GOMTV MBCGame StarCraft League Season 4 16 games Winner: 2007 EVER OnGameNet Starleague 13 games Winner: 2007 Seoul International e-Sports Festival 19 games
Refer to also: Flash, Bisu, Stork, etc.
Here is what S-class Tourny results don't look like:
Zero: Runner-Up: 2011 ABC Mart MBCGame StarCraft League 16 games
It's such a ridiculous comparison, I don't even wan't to comment on it much further. But suffice to say, I think that anyone could legitimately be surprised that Zero was supposedly considered S-Class(which really I still doubt specifically happened), even if you only want to only look at Starleague results.
Again on the balance of all the information provided (including potentially accurate higher weighting of Starleague games), I think the position that Soulkey was the better player (whether it is specifically a class or more or less is not too important), is much stronger. I think I have provided most of the strongest/relevant arguments already, and I don't really think there are many more relevant/significant points to add (to further the discussion), or that there is the need to do so.
LOL. Maybe the difference comes down to the fact that I consider Jaedong God-class, which is beyond S-class. :-) Definitions, definitions... Jaedong is the greatest Zerg of all time...kind of an unfair comparison. Also, let's not boil down Zero's resume to that one line from Liquipedia when I've already given a more complete list.
I am not saying that you can't argue for Soulkey. I don't disagree that you're making a case. It's just not an objective logical proof of anything, although you are somehow beginning to convince me of the conclusion regardless. PM me if you want to talk some more. I don't want to keep bumping the thread with what's turning into a two-person discussion. Having this kind of conversation again really brings back memories. Who do I need to thank for this? Sonic or FIX?
EDIT: long quote spoilered
To be fair, I referenced a number of other players who would be considered S-Class, (and there are even a large number of players never considered as S-Class, who would have much better Starleague results than Zero as well) and the comparative difference to Zero, would be roughly the same. And a complete list of Starleague results, regarding the players I just referenced, in comparison to a complete list regarding Zero, would additionally yield roughly same difference (i.e. top 3 finishes, or # of round of X finishes, respectively) so I did not see any inconsistency with the data used. Although I would have no problem referencing the complete lists of data for each player - except for the extra effort.
I think with essentially any proof, there are degrees of objectivity - ranging from low to high. Certainly the discussion at hand is not one of the highest objective discussions ever, but it retains enough objectivity for me to feel confident that the conclusion I reached is reasonable and accurate.
Like I said, I'm not sure if there is much more from my end, that I could necessarily provide, to further the position, at the moment. If something additional comes up- maybe fine, if not, also fine.
I am so happy, translated pictures and articles from my blog are spreaded to people who love Starcraft in the world. I am proud of myself and I sholud repaid for better quality of pictures and postscript. thank you so much.
On January 16 2014 09:35 rebehayan wrote: I am so happy, translated pictures and articles from my blog are spreaded to people who love Starcraft in the world. I am proud of myself and I sholud repaid for better quality of pictures and postscript. thank you so much.
On January 16 2014 09:35 rebehayan wrote: I am so happy, translated pictures and articles from my blog are spreaded to people who love Starcraft in the world. I am proud of myself and I sholud repaid for better quality of pictures and postscript. thank you so much.
OMG its rebehayan! Thank you for the pictures they are beautiful!
On January 16 2014 09:35 rebehayan wrote: I am so happy, translated pictures and articles from my blog are spreaded to people who love Starcraft in the world. I am proud of myself and I sholud repaid for better quality of pictures and postscript. thank you so much.
On February 03 2014 22:21 boxerfred wrote: Seeing the decation that was put in this preview makes me want to watch SSL. And I am a stupid sc2 guy with the brood war filter turned on :/