::whistles::
Umbreon, I'm going to dissect your post piece by piece. I hope you enjoy it.
Point one: You've greatly exaggerated the "ease" with which the IC grab infinite is executed. You act like grabs just mystically happen.
So let's just examine the very basis of play AGAINST the IC's.
Rule 1: Separate the IC's and kill Nana early. This is considered the most efficient way of fighting the IC's, and guess what, is the obvious counter to a technique that relies on Nana's immediate presence. So you were already fighting the infinite before you knew I planned to do it.
Rule 2: Don't get grabbed. The IC's have a powerful grab game that you are, at any given moment, basing almost your entire game around avoiding.
Rule 3: Shield camping is only effective as long as you can get your opponent to space moves poorly against your shield. Combine the fact that most characters can happily outrange the IC's mediocre grab range with good spacing and the fact that they slide like a ***** when you hit their shield, shieldgrabbing only works against people with bad spacing.
So your basis of play against IC's, if you're playing against them correctly, is the very counter to the infinite. If I'm getting these super easy grabs, then you're fighting me wrong. You would probably lose regardless of the chaingrabs I used.
I'm not disputing that it's powerful, but you act like the IC player gets grabs every time he blinks. He doesn't. At least, not if you're playing against him properly.
So, NEXT point. As for Nakamaru, I was angry that he posts about a technique then decides not to tell people how to do it. If you don't know the easier method of jab canceling, his technique would be absolutely infuriating to perform. He repeatedly said he wouldn't tell anybody.
"Means" of explaining it consisted of a short post that Neal managed in under twenty s. Yet Naka insisted on hiding it, for God knows whatever reason. That's what I attacked.
I don't care if his method is "easier," because it was also ALREADY posted. If I was bitter, I would have attacked the technique. Instead, I targeted the way he posted and hid information from the board. You'll also note that I apologized for my rudeness. Then again, I undid that by being rude again, so I guess I was being something of an ******* again.
Let's move on.
If you knew anything about me, and you obviously DON'T, you'd know that almost all my posts concerning gameplay are lengthy and tailored to conveying as much information as possible. People make fun of me for my sometimes overly lengthy essays.
YOUR post consisted of pointless flaming, repeated sexual slurs, and nothing worth mentioning beyond an example of how not to post in an intelligent forum.
In fact, as long as you're criticizing people for irrelevant personal attacks, consider what YOU just said to ME. Instead of targeting my myriad posts in which I do my best to explain every ounce of knowledge I have, you begin and end your argument with "douchiness." You target my style of play as being "douchy." I'm a "douchebag."
By the way, my style of play is not a post! So saying you'll pass on my style of play has nothing to do with me attacking your worthless wastes of bandwidth.
You shared nothing worthwhile to the topic at hand with YOUR post, however, so I felt absolutely no compunction in calling you out on it. If your previous post is any indication of your posting habits--and from what I've seen in my past three years on the board, it most definitely is--then you are a blight on this community.
By the way, dumb****, since so many tournaments seem to ban my namesake move, wouldn't that mean I'm placing WITHOUT it? DURR, LOGIC IS FOR WINNERS.
The above sentence is incredibly rude, but I think you warranted it.