|
Braavos36362 Posts
1. momentum he can easily build up momentum by beating people that are easier opponents, thats the correct way to build confidence, not play the hardest opponent first.
2. psychological advantage? midas??? are you smoking? no matter how many games he wins hes still a choker, and chokers NEVER have the psychological advantage, no matter how many games they win in the group stage
3. saying midas needs to play savior before savior "build up confidence" is ridiculous and you know it. savior is the cockiest most confident motherfucker out there, playing midas ro16 or finals doesn't change that savior's a champion and will come through in pressure situations.
4. builds. midas plays THE SAME WAY every single time. why would savior need to see more midas games when all he does is FE into tank heavy macro mass move out? its clear whose style has been figured out and whose hasn't, and it's obvious midas is the one benefiting by seeing more builds on these maps. if midas saw the iris fast vessel build vs savior on HH (or hell, ANY build in the iris/savior series) you don't think midas would've learned a few things?
5. midas chokes because of the pressure, not because of the round number. it's crazy to believe the pressure is alleviated simply because its the ro16 instead of semis, like some magic button is pressed. if anything, midas put more pressure ON HIMSELF by picking savior and giving savior motivation, placing so much emphasis on the match, etc. midas sucks under pressure, and he should've played easy opponents because there's no pressure there.
as i said before, it was a stupid decision
|
Bah you're such a hopeless midas fanboy etter
|
On March 07 2007 20:27 Hot_Bid wrote: 1. momentum he can easily build up momentum by beating people that are easier opponents, thats the correct way to build confidence, not play the hardest opponent first.
2. psychological advantage? midas??? are you smoking? no matter how many games he wins hes still a choker, and chokers NEVER have the psychological advantage, no matter how many games they win in the group stage
3. saying midas needs to play savior before savior "build up confidence" is ridiculous and you know it. savior is the cockiest most confident motherfucker out there, playing midas ro16 or finals doesn't change that savior's a champion and will come through in pressure situations.
4. builds. midas plays THE SAME WAY every single time. why would savior need to see more midas games when all he does is FE into tank heavy macro mass move out? its clear whose style has been figured out and whose hasn't, and it's obvious midas is the one benefiting by seeing more builds on these maps. if midas saw the iris fast vessel build vs savior on HH (or hell, ANY build in the iris/savior series) you don't think midas would've learned a few things?
5. midas chokes because of the pressure, not because of the round number. it's crazy to believe the pressure is alleviated simply because its the ro16 instead of semis, like some magic button is pressed. if anything, midas put more pressure ON HIMSELF by picking savior and giving savior motivation, placing so much emphasis on the match, etc. midas sucks under pressure, and he should've played easy opponents because there's no pressure there.
as i said before, it was a stupid decision
Yes Midas gambled and lost. But every progamer gambles, the competition is so tough it often becomes necessary to gain an edge. Savior proved he could adapt to the maps. he said in groupstage that Longinus was really hard ZvT. Lately he hasn't lost a single game on Longinus against players like Nada, Hwasin or Iris. You said so yourself Midas tends to always play the same way, giving players time will always be a disavantage for that kind of player. Progamers will find solutions. When the maps advantage you, playing later is a bad choice.
|
I think it's more something like: - Had Midas won, it would have been a smart move. - Midas lost, therefore it was a stupid move.
Validity of the idea confirmed/infirmed a posteriori.
|
On March 08 2007 03:25 JohnnyCash wrote: I think it's more something like: - Had Midas won, it would have been a smart move. - Midas lost, therefore it was a stupid move.
Validity of the idea confirmed/infirmed a posteriori.
It was retarded move regardless of the result.
|
4492 Posts
Hot_Bid, you're really coming down hard on Midas for no particular reason at all. There's tons of advantages to him choosing sAviOr upfront (Midas just defeated sAviOr in group stage before choosing him again, he HAD the confidence already, how can you not see that?? He also had the psychological advantage vs sAviOr then.). And let me remind you that it was not purely Midas's choice either. Or do you honestly believe he came up with that decision right there on the spot? No consultation with his teammates/manager/coach? It WAS a good decision, and it gave Midas the best chances, people a lot smarter in the mechanics of OSL than you or me made that decision, I suggest you consider that.
sundance: sAviOr is the best mechanic player ATM (NaDa is very close second). NaDa got outplayed? Outplayed yes, but do you mean strategically, or what? Both NaDa and sAviOr came to the game with their most stable builds, most stable plays. sAviOr's was > NaDa's. I was then disappointed by both of them, but especially NaDa, since I expected him to come up with something interesting against sAviOr for the finals. Just like Bisu did. And we all know how well sAviOr countered that situation, don't we? Start making sense please.
-Mynock
|
On March 08 2007 03:25 JohnnyCash wrote: I think it's more something like: - Had Midas won, it would have been a smart move. - Midas lost, therefore it was a stupid move.
Validity of the idea confirmed/infirmed a posteriori.
If by winning it would have been a smart move Then it's not a stupid move it's just a bad move. (and a good move and not a smart move if he would have won).
I see a stupid/smart move as something bad/good regardless of the outcome A bad/good move depending on the outcome (A gamble).
|
On March 08 2007 04:23 Mynock wrote:
sundance: sAviOr is the best mechanic player ATM (NaDa is very close second). NaDa got outplayed? Outplayed yes, but do you mean strategically, or what? Both NaDa and sAviOr came to the game with their most stable builds, most stable plays. sAviOr's was > NaDa's. I was then disappointed by both of them, but especially NaDa, since I expected him to come up with something interesting against sAviOr for the finals. Just like Bisu did. And we all know how well sAviOr countered that situation, don't we? Start making sense please.
-Mynock
Actually Savior's mechanics are not that great. They are pretty average. And ffs since when strategy comes down only to build order.
Start making sense please.
EDIT: Savior is winning games like oov used to.By using their brain while having mechanics that doesn't stood up but at the level where they don't lose them the game.
|
4492 Posts
Oh so sAviOr's using bad-ass strategies each game and wins them not through his outstanding control (which is actually average according to you) but by him surprising his opponent and just being smarter than them?
I think I'm done talking to you.
-Mynock
|
On March 08 2007 04:32 Mynock wrote: Oh so sAviOr's using bad-ass strategies each game and wins them not through his outstanding control (which is actually average according to you) but by him surprising his opponent and just being smarter than them?
I think I'm done talking to you.
-Mynock You don't need to surprise your opponent and you can still out-smart him.
I think I'm done talking to you
-sundance
|
so you are both done with talking each other
perfect
|
4492 Posts
On March 08 2007 05:19 MaGic~PhiL wrote: so you are both done with talking each other
perfect
Haha
I sometimes feel like I'm posting in KindergartenLiquid.net or something. (Kinda difficult to argue against "I am rubber, you are glue".)
I miss the good old TL days when worthy users weren't so far and in between
-Mynock
|
Braavos36362 Posts
i would say that savior lost to bisu part strategically but partly because he was overconfident/didn't practice/looked tired. i'm not making any excuses, i am happy bisu won and we all still picked savior (and were way wrong) but i wouldn't say those 3 games were representative of savior's historically strong strategical side.
mynock, we'll have to agree to disagree on the midas thing, i see your point you see mine etc etc. i also agree with you that nada should be placed higher than midas in the power rank. but i believe it should be savior-bisu-iris #1-3, and i think we'll have to agree to disagree on that too.
|
4492 Posts
Fair enough. I never really tried to convince you otherwise, it was merely for the sake of the argument. Altho if I recall correctly, we didn't even really argue about the #3 spot in terms of IriS vs NaDa. IMO what really made IriS LOOK so strong was his ability to practice with sAviOr any day of the week, and knowing things about him and his builds/timings better than anyone else. I don't think that if that factor was not present IriS would have looked any better than in his games vs Zergman, where it was barely enough to scrap up the win, against a rather meek opponent, especially if compared to the sAviOr-level TvZ.
I believe many people overlook that fact, and that in terms of pure raw skill, NaDa shows a better TvZ performance than IriS (WAY better). I'd also say that had NaDa known all the things IriS knows about sAviOr, he would have won easily. But that of course is a humble guess.
-Mynock
|
Braavos36362 Posts
ignoring TvP (no protosses), i'd say the TvZ was a wash, maybe nada up slightly, maybe iris up slightly
but when you look at TvT, IriS 2-0 GF, then 3-0 Casy horribly one sided (i know you question Casy's motivations, but this was for a seed, so he had to have been trying), while Nada went 2-1 with Up and 3-2 with Casy. i'd say that's a definite edge in TvT for IriS, and one month span is all you need for PR.
This isn't even including IriS 2-0 of Midas and 2-0 of GF (again) in the Pre-Shinhan Masters
Also, Nada had a full week or so to analyze the Iris vs Savior games and what made those builds so good. Yet he did not change his style or BOs to even attempt ONE of the strategies Iris did. The HitchHiker game seemed the most puzzling, as Iris' 1 base fast Vessel raped Savior yet Nada does the standard TvZ FE that Savior is absolutely awesome against.
Raw skillwise of course NaDa is better, he's a machine that has amazing control, macro etc. He's got the whole deal when it comes to mechanics, especially in TvZ. However, the strategy really was the reason Iris was so good against Savior, and yes they are on the same team, but Iris showed adaptability and creativity in his series while Nada just kept doing the same old thing that never worked against Savior (see Superfight3).
Bisu and Iris are examples of players that changed their style and BOs to compensate for their opponent, using excellent decision making and execution rather than relying on mechanics to outplay. Nada did not, and imo that makes him #4 and Iris #3 (add to it the better Iris TvT).
|
I agree with PoP and that's why i didn't understand Mynock stuff about "Savior isn't the most strategic player in osl". I assumed he thought the most strategic player was Nada... But it's clearly not the case.
Anyway, on the Midas/Nada argument, ask yourself who would you choose now if there was something at stake to play for you. I think i'd choose Midas.
|
On March 08 2007 08:58 ~chut~ wrote: I agree with PoP and that's why i didn't understand Mynock stuff about "Savior isn't the most strategic player in osl". I assumed he thought the most strategic player was Nada... But it's clearly not the case.
Anyway, on the Midas/Nada argument, ask yourself who would you choose now if there was something at stake to play for you. I think i'd choose Midas.
you like to lose if something is at stake for you ? ;P Seriously.. Now that iris beat midas he has definitely finally to drop down.. and AT LEAST be behin NaDa, no matter what..
|
4492 Posts
On March 08 2007 07:07 Hot_Bid wrote:Raw skillwise of course NaDa is better, he's a machine that has amazing control, macro etc. He's got the whole deal when it comes to mechanics, especially in TvZ. However, the strategy really was the reason Iris was so good against Savior, and yes they are on the same team, but Iris showed adaptability and creativity in his series while Nada just kept doing the same old thing that never worked against Savior (see Superfight3).
See, I agree on this one, as I said, this is why I was so angry with NaDa (he never really disappoints me, but now he did, in the friggin' finals no less) - he didn't change his style when it was clear that he has a huge disadvantage going into the game the same as he always did.
But does that necessarily make IriS a better player ALL-round, and as for TvT - I believe you'll be surprised at how NaDa will play against IriS upcoming Masters, but whatever... I'm a fanboy, I always BELIEVE
Still, I know we disagree on lots of aspects there (mostly I think we disagree around Terrans from what I've seen), but whatever, you have your reasons, I have mine, and I must say I respect yours, even tho I don't necessarily agree with them.
PS.: (Fuck you man, you spoiled the results of day 2 and 3 for me - was only about to watch them now)
PPS.: I said multiple times already: No, I do not consider NaDa a strategic player, because he isn't. Neither is sAviOr tho. Nal_rA is strategic, BoxeR is, GARIMTO was (is?)... But neither sAviOr nor NaDa AREN'T.
-Mynock
|
I'd just like to say that the recent month or 2 has been an absolute DREAM to settle a lot of debates. Remember when people said Iris's TvT wasn't shit compared to Nada's? And how he played lesser opponents? Well, so far he's dominated everyone with complete shutouts and is going to play Nada.
Likewise we finally get to see if Casy is the Terran that can take out Savior.
Really great matchups lately.
|
Kumbayaaa my lord~ Kumbayaa~ Kumbayaaa my lord.. kumbayaaaa...
|
|
|
|