|
On August 27 2011 15:45 5unrise wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 21:34 kckkryptonite wrote: Best Zerg Player: DongRaeGu Damn, Artosis would have something to say about that.
8. Naniwa Didn't, uh... CheckPrime just demolish Naniwa?
13. Kas, 14. Stephano, 15. Nerchio Wwwhhhhaaa? Yet HuK is 20th?!
Aside from the rankings, the site looks great! I think you can make a fairly convincing argument that Stephano and Nerchio > Huk in the rankings. If you've been watching their ZvTs, you'll be amazed, they don't seem to lose against Euro Terrans. Checkprime may have beaten Naniwa, but Nani is the more consistent player overall. In my opinion these ratings are accurate. Putting DRG above Nestea is a little questionable though...
It doesn't matter if nerchio and stephano had 99% win rates
Their results have no weight unless they play koreans, which huk does.
|
On August 27 2011 21:48 SafeAsCheese wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 15:45 5unrise wrote:On August 10 2011 21:34 kckkryptonite wrote: Best Zerg Player: DongRaeGu Damn, Artosis would have something to say about that.
8. Naniwa Didn't, uh... CheckPrime just demolish Naniwa?
13. Kas, 14. Stephano, 15. Nerchio Wwwhhhhaaa? Yet HuK is 20th?!
Aside from the rankings, the site looks great! I think you can make a fairly convincing argument that Stephano and Nerchio > Huk in the rankings. If you've been watching their ZvTs, you'll be amazed, they don't seem to lose against Euro Terrans. Checkprime may have beaten Naniwa, but Nani is the more consistent player overall. In my opinion these ratings are accurate. Putting DRG above Nestea is a little questionable though... It doesn't matter if nerchio and stephano had 99% win rates Their results have no weight unless they play koreans, which huk does. Nerchio beat huk 2-0 at IEM and Stephano and Kas both did better than Huk. Maybe this ranking is better than you think.
e: from frontpage: 5. How come some Europeans are ranked so high? Most koreans play in some kind of asian "bubble". They don't face foreigners that often. For this reason it's very hard for an international ranking to compare players from Korea to players from Europe or NA. The same problem occurs when you try to compare the Battle.net Ladder for different servers. This problem will be minimized in time as right now a lot of korean players attend european or american tournaments far more often and players like naniwa and thorzain travel to korea to compete in the korean leagues.
|
Obviously a lot of work has been put into creating this, so thanks for that, a lot of people in this thread are coming off as ungratefully bashing this system which is unfair. But it would be good to address possible sources that may skew results or even modifying the algorithm so that it generates a more accurate view of what can be considered facts (DRG not being the #1 player), for example weighting certain matches / victory more than others (depending on the event / prize money at stake / match-up / more so than just considering who was playing who. The where when and why are very important).
|
What some people don't get at all is that Nestea is not the #1 player in the world only because you would like him to be. This is an objective ranking while your opinions are clearly subjective. I'm not saying Nestea is bad and neither that the algorythm is perfect as of yet. But a lot of people in here have a set opinion and everything that differs from is is "wrong".
[b]@figga[/b}: could you please explain to me why ELO is supposed to be better? If you really spent some time analysing both systems I can't imagine how you'd come to that conclusion. Nestea btw. played MORE(!) games than for example Puma or DRG. And as you might have found out already it's not like players lose 100.000 points if they don't play for a day or two.
@tuk: why is the prize money inaccurate? there might be some tournaments missing right now (our people are still in the process of completing the DB), but even in the current status this should be the most accurate website in terms of this ranking (correct me if I missed something).
Kind regards, Khaldor
PS: I haven't been to Australia actually except for a short stop before I headed to NZ. Right now I'm in Thailand (@StarStruck)
|
On August 29 2011 12:22 Khaldor wrote: What some people don't get at all is that Nestea is not the #1 player in the world only because you would like him to be. This is an objective ranking while your opinions are clearly subjective. I'm not saying Nestea is bad and neither that the algorythm is perfect as of yet. But a lot of people in here have a set opinion and everything that differs from is is "wrong". (@StarStruck)
I love the site, but the rankings are just as subjective as my opinion, i.e. not objective. Why? Since the algorithm is written by someone, that someone needs to adopt their values on what makes a good player into the algorithm, hence making the core of it subjective.
|
On August 29 2011 12:38 Nightbiscuit wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2011 12:22 Khaldor wrote: What some people don't get at all is that Nestea is not the #1 player in the world only because you would like him to be. This is an objective ranking while your opinions are clearly subjective. I'm not saying Nestea is bad and neither that the algorythm is perfect as of yet. But a lot of people in here have a set opinion and everything that differs from is is "wrong". (@StarStruck) I love the site, but the rankings are just as subjective as my opinion, i.e. not objective. Why? Since the algorithm is written by someone, that someone needs to adopt their values on what makes a good player into the algorithm, hence making the core of it subjective.
That's simply tautology. By that definition, no field in Statistics can be objective. Most in statistics accept that an ranking methodology is sufficiently "objective" as long as the input variables are numeric, or at least quantifiable. Of course, an algorithm being objective does not necessarily correlate with being good or correct.
|
|
Best protoss map is with a 49% winrate. Protoss doesn't seem to have any favored maps. I find this interesting, maybe the recent balance issues has to do with mapmaking more than racial characteristics.
Using latest patch as a filter, obviously.
|
Tremendous website. I'm going to be spending a lot of time on this.
|
Interesting money statistics. Yeah I've seen them before, but not in awhile. Not a bad chunk of change MC and Nestea made in only half a year.
|
Wow this is a great website!
|
On August 10 2011 07:24 Chargelot wrote: Your site says that Zerg win 49% of the time on Metalopolis. Blizzard says that's actually 60%+. >.< 5000 games doesn't seem to be a great statistical medium.
remember this accounts for when ZvT was really OP with reapers and 2 rax rush etc. as well.
|
cool website. especially enjoyed the matchup statistics breakdown by patch number
|
@nightbiscuit: if you argue like this you have to admit that the same logic applies to ALL the ranking systems out there. I actually prefer a system that uses the same non-biased logic for every player participating in it than relying on the obviously biased opinion of a single individual.
Some weeks ago everyone was outraged at the idea of DRG even placed in the Top10 of this ranking. Since then he proved in every tournament he participated in (as well as the GSTL) that he definitely belongs there.
And as I already promised in the start: with each major tournament that features koreans as well as foreigners the ranking is getting more accurate. If people have a close look at the opening post I doubt there'll be a lot to argue with most of the ranking positions (once gain: that ranking may not be perfect but is so far the most accurate there is imho).
|
The rankings are a great source of objective comparison between the players that we actually have good info on. Obviously there are many Korean and Chinese pros that we havent really seen much of that, by rights, should be there, but this is easily the best thing we have at the moment.
|
this is so wrong on so many levels
|
Australia8532 Posts
On August 29 2011 15:26 Grampz wrote: this is so wrong on so many levels Don't just spout one liners without any argument
Please go on to list how many "levels" this might be wrong on?
|
Really useful resource! Keep up the good work.
|
Would there be a way to have different tournaments weighted differently based on prestige and difficulty? Kind of like in tennis where the four Grand Slams are given more weight than the lesser tours. I would say maybe the GSL could be considered the equivalent of Wimbledon in the world of SC2.
|
|
|
|
|