Character Rankings List - Post-March 2010

[Zankoku]

I still need links god dammit.

 

[Kel]

Morehead tournament
Jan 31st
Morehead. Ky
$5 fee
32 entrants

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=208700&page=18

1: Kel (MK)
2: Overswarm (MK)
3: Y.B.M. (Kirby)
4: Paladin (Fox/MK)
5: Tactical (Lucario)
5: Xisin (Marth)
7: Mr. Eric (ROB)
7: Smash64 (Snake)

sorry ank

In doubles I didn't use MK at all, I went all Snake and Dedede. OS switched from MK to Kirby and ROB in both singles and doubles. Enough to where it would warrant mentioning probably. ROB for sure, I'm not sure about Kirby though. Smash 64 also used GAW, but again, not sure how much exactly.

How much does a person have to use a character to warrant it being mentioned?

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Battlegrounds
January 30th
Mastic, NY
20 Entrants
10$ Entry Fee

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?p=6522405#post6522405

1-Mike G(Jiggz, Bowser)
2-Will(DK, G&W)
3-MarioBlaze(Mario, Falco, Wolf)
4-Kirin(Mario, Link)
5-X-0(Pikachu, Snake, Falco)
5-Cyber(Sonic, Lucario)
7-MTD(Snake)
7-Torgita(Snake)

There is trickery afoot.

THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE MIKE G

 

[Xisin]

In doubles I didn't use MK at all, I went all Snake and Dedede. OS switched from MK to Kirby and ROB in both singles and doubles. Enough to where it would warrant mentioning probably. ROB for sure, I'm not sure about Kirby though. Smash 64 also used GAW, but again, not sure how much exactly.

How much does a person have to use a character to warrant it being mentioned?

to be honest I only listed things in singles. i know you played snake in dubs because welll your team beat my team. But i only thought this was a singles ranking if its doubles than I'll be glad to list the doubles result.

 

[KirinBlaze]

There is trickery afoot.

THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE MIKE G

I lol'd.

He goes by Fyist here on the boards but we all know him as Mike G.

 

[Mith_]

Brawl Tourney
Tournament Center of Augusta
January 10, 2008
Entry Fee: $15.00

Winners 1 v 1

1 Jeremy Scott (Snake, Falco, King D3)
2 John Rinyu (Ike, Falco)
3 Stephen Watkins (Pikachu)
4 TJ Sanders (Ice Climbers)
5 Darious Lester (Falco, Donkey Kong)
5 Darious Green (Toon Link, Wolf)
7 Elijah Willis
7 Alex Maryiweather (Fox, Wolf)
9 Brandon Scott (Donkey Kong) <-Me
9 Chris Andrews
9 Jared Greiner
9 Scott Lambert
13 Brian Archer
13 Glenn Cody
13 Collen Lotz
13 Tina Sanders
17 Alex Baxter
17 Henry Martin
17 Cody Cruse
17 Sean Cruse
17 Daniel Chavous
17 Terrance Darks
17 Caleb Andrews
17 Shawn Holloway

Lemme find the link to the tourney.
Here: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=209685

 

[Charoo]

$15 singles
$5 venue fee
75 entrants
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=203636
southern California
1/31/09

1. DEHF (falco/MK)
2. Fiction (Wario/ics)
3. SK92 (falco/mk/snake)
4. Sean (MK)
5. Leepuff (G&W)
5. Bardull (Marth)
7. MikeHaze (Marth)
7. Teba (King Dedede)
9. Boa (Marth/MK)
9. VANS (Sheik/Fox/Falcon)
9. Tyrant (MK/Snake)

 

[Atomsk_92]

Singles (89 players)
$5 Venue Fee
$10 Singles
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=207627
1/31/09
Jersey City, NJ

1: M2K ($435.00) [MK]
2: Atomsk (217.50) [DDD/Ganondorf]
3: Bum ($130.50) [DK]
4: Forte ($43.50) [MK]
5: Pierce ($21.75) [Marth]
5: ADHD ($21.75) [DiddyKong]
7: DMBrandon [SuperKnight]
7: Jash [Toon Link]
9: Inui [Snake]
9: Pride [Yoshi]
9: Bschung [DDD]
9: Keitaro [Falco]

 

[~ Gheb ~]

wow @ Atomsk repping Ganon in NJ

 

[Atomsk_92]

Edit- Nothing about anything

 

[Pierce7d]

ATOMSK, wtf, you did NOT go Ganondorf in any serious matches (I don't think you went Ganon in ANY tourney matches, but there were a lot of random people, so you might've in early rounds and I missed it).

Stop trying to screw Ankoku's data up.

 

[Atomsk_92]

i used ganon in the first 3 matches


then used ddd my other 3 matches

 

[Gates]

**** YEAH SEAKING GANON!

First Seibrik then Atomsk, it seems like lots of Dededes are drawn to Ganon lol.

 

[AlphaZealot]

I would say a secondary character is a character you had to use to actually make it from one round to the next. So, if you used Ganon is match where you would have likewise won with D3, then it wouldn't count. Conversely, if you use Ganon in a set where you previously lost with D3, and then moved on, I would say it does count.

Here is a good example:
OS vs Samurai Panda at MW Champs Semifinals
OS (MK) vs Panda (Snake): OS wins, very close game
OS (MK) vs Panda (Snake): Panda wins, close but not as close as game 1
OS (ROB) vs Panda (Snake): OS wins

Here I would say RoB is def a secondary because it would appear OS was unsure of if his MK could get the job done, and instead of taking the risk with MK he went with the sure thing of ROB. This, plus he tried ROB versus Anther in the finals.

Basically, if you use a character, any character, in the winners semi's/quarthers/finals, then I would say it is probably a secondary.

 

[Atomsk_92]

Ah, ok then. I'll switch it to just DDD.

 

[Skyshroud]

Singles (89 players)
$5 Venue Fee
$10 Singles
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=207627
1/31/09
Jersey City, NJ

1: M2K ($435.00) [MK]
2: Atomsk (217.50) [DDD]
3: Bum ($130.50) [DK]
4: Forte ($43.50) [MK]
5: Pierce ($21.75) [Marth]
5: ADHD ($21.75) [DiddyKong]
7: DMBrandon [SuperKnight]
7: Jash [Toon Link]
9: Inui [Snake]
9: Pride [Yoshi]
9: Bschung [DDD]
9: Keitaro [Falco]

I'm taking it that this is the same Jash that used Young Link in melee? I'd love to see some vids of him, I remember him having a pretty unique style (tended to be a lot more close combat oriented than most). Any chance?

 

[SkylerOcon]

33 Entrants
$8 Entry Fee
El Paso, Texas

1. Parker (olimar/IC) $159
2. Furiousduffman (G&W/wario/falco) $79
3. Neocell (peach/Snake/MK) $26
4. outlawstar (lucario)
5. Arturito_Burrito(Ike)
5. Skyleroccon(Mario)
7. Hulk(Kirby)
7. Fallenangemon(Jigs/Falco)

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=6527339&postcount=692

 

[Clai]

Battlegrounds
January 30th
Mastic, NY
20 Entrants
10$ Entry Fee

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?p=6522405#post6522405

1-Mike G(Jiggz, Bowser)

I cried a little inside. Especially if this is the first win for Jiggles.

And Atomsk going Ganon? What? What's with all the Brawl pros going Ganondorf in tournaments? Is it the time where people finally see that playing like a man is the real way to go? Manliness is going to go so high up the tier list.

10allybeatssonicwithknees

 

[Ref]

I'm taking it that this is the same Jash that used Young Link in melee? I'd love to see some vids of him, I remember him having a pretty unique style (tended to be a lot more close combat oriented than most). Any chance?

Yep that's the Jash from Melee....

 

[hyperstation]

I would say a secondary character is a character you had to use to actually make it from one round to the next. So, if you used Ganon is match where you would have likewise won with D3, then it wouldn't count. Conversely, if you use Ganon in a set where you previously lost with D3, and then moved on, I would say it does count.

Here is a good example:
OS vs Samurai Panda at MW Champs Semifinals
OS (MK) vs Panda (Snake): OS wins, very close game
OS (MK) vs Panda (Snake): Panda wins, close but not as close as game 1
OS (ROB) vs Panda (Snake): OS wins

Here I would say RoB is def a secondary because it would appear OS was unsure of if his MK could get the job done, and instead of taking the risk with MK he went with the sure thing of ROB. This, plus he tried ROB versus Anther in the finals.

Basically, if you use a character, any character, in the winners semi's/quarthers/finals, then I would say it is probably a secondary.

WTF kind of logic is THIS (in bold above)?!

Here's my logic: The guy played equal sets with Ganon and DDD.

Case closed. Of course he chose his main when he got down to the later matches, but nonetheless, he played Ganon, and as such, the character should be credited. Every time that Ganon has been listed in a results page people write it off as heresy as say it's "screwing up the results". wtf is that? NOT posting the char used, especially when it was used in just as many sets as his other char, is "screwing up the results".

Atomsk, edit that post back. It's this simple: you used the character. You won with him. Consistently. People might just as easily say "he mains Ganon but he counterpicked DDD for matchups he was going to have trouble with." YOU. WON. WITH. GANON. Awesome job! Post it.

People wouldn't flinch if you had Fox or Mario written instead of Ganon, but because it's been pounded into people's heads that he's so unbelievably bad, it's just not allowed.

 

[Atomsk_92]

WTF kind of logic is THIS (in bold above)?!

Here's my logic: The guy played equal sets with Ganon and DDD.

Case closed. Of course he chose his main when he got down to the later matches, but nonetheless, he played Ganon, and as such, the character should be credited. Every time that Ganon has been listed in a results page people write it off as heresy as say it's "screwing up the results". wtf is that? NOT posting the char used, especially when it was used in just as many sets as his other char, is "screwing up the results".

Atomsk, edit that post back. It's this simple: you used the character. You won with him. Consistently. People might just as easily say "he mains Ganon but he counterpicked DDD for matchups he was going to have trouble with." YOU. WON. WITH. GANON. Awesome job! Post it.

People wouldn't flinch if you had Fox or Mario written instead of Ganon, but because it's been pounded into people's heads that he's so unbelievably bad, it's just not allowed.

*Metal Gear Awesome voice*

OKAY!

 

[Ref]

I say the same thing if the person goes a character because they want to, it should be counted.

They won hands down it's like maybe I have a really good dedede but I choose to play captain falcon until half way through. There is no way to tell if I could have ever won those sets as Dedede. Therefore the character should count.

Even if I could... A Win is a Win regardless if or if not I could have done it with another character. For that you might as well say okay everyone go this character because your better. If the person wants to go a different character and they did then they deserve to place as high as they did with that character.


I think even if they lose with the character deep in the tourney it should be counted because they went that character and got second, because they went that character for winners lost then picked him again in losers and lost. 3rd place was granted by both characters regardless of which one got the wins and the loses.


Basically whenever you go a character about halfway or some pretty far distance it should be counted regardless of what other characters you are good with.


And yay Ganondorf got edited in again like he should be in.

 

[hyperstation]

Agreed ^

It's easy to discount the fact that, "well, that dude knows how to play Ganondorf". I mean...he won 3 of his sets with him, and he knew there was a lot of money on the line in doing so. Things get really messy and subjective when you start refereeing results like Alpha Zealot suggested because "well duh, Atomsk's DDD could win those matches." What if he chose Snake for the first three matches? Snake and DDD would split the points and it would just be business as usual.

 

[da K.I.D.]

xiivi did youget our tourney in yet?

 

[Steeler]

iduno. it's an iffy subject.

i honestly don't think the points should count if you beat someone with a strange character that you could have beaten with your main. :\ but it's hard to referee these sorts of things. what if a highly skilled player is trying to test out their new meta knight in the first few rounds against lesser competition, and uses their normal character later on against tougher players? is there even going to be any question about their use of mk?

i'd say just count all mains/secondaries that are used in important matches or are used extensively because there's a lot of gray area that you have to deal with if you start discounting someone's use of a character in tournament. it "skews" the results but it's things like this that make this a good broad view of how well characters are doing in tournament, but not something that is totally accurate and should be taken as how good the characters are right now or anything.

the point is that you are supposed to count all tourney results as long as they fit the simple requirements that ankoku has developed. this includes using captain falcon for round 1 and using mk the rest of the way, and claiming captain falcon on the results list. there's a difference between one early set and three early sets.

this isn't meant to be a perfect science.

 

[Ken Neth]

Why does it matter if they could have beaten them with their main?

That's like saying, "Oh, Ninja Link could have beaten this person with his diddy, so you shouldn't count the wins he got with his ROB." That is just stupid logic.

And to the first round captain, rest MK. There's a part in the OP that says something like "I don't care if you went Captain Falcon for one game in your first round if you went MK the rest of the tourney." If you use a character in important matches it should count.

 

[Steeler]

Why does it matter if they could have beaten them with their main?

That's like saying, "Oh, Ninja Link could have beaten this person with his diddy, so you shouldn't count the wins he got with his ROB." That is just stupid logic.

the point is that it has to be "important". in AZ's example, OS might have beaten Panda with MK that third match, particularly since he had the option of counterpicking a good stage for him. does that mean the ROB doesn't count as being used by OS? of course it does, because it's clear that the match was important (count was 1-1) and ROB was important in securing the win for OS.

And to the first round captain, rest MK. There's a part in the OP that says something like "I don't care if you went Captain Falcon for one game in your first round if you went MK the rest of the tourney." If you use a character in important matches it should count.

you should reread my post, because you are making the same point that i made.

the problem here is that an "important match" or "important use of a character" is a vague term that can be interpreted in a variety of ways. so it's best to just count most character mentions when assigning points, except in the extreme cases like c. falcon in the first round and MK the rest.

 

[Ken Neth]

LOL. The second part of my post was just saying that Ankoku already doesn't count those first round captain rest MK results, so there was no point in posting that as an example. But I think we're both arguing for the same point

 

[hyperstation]

Don't you see the can of worms you're opening?

I have a handful of comments.

First, you're making SUBJECTIVITY the operating logic in a system which attempts to be OBJECTIVE. Though Ankoku's list makes clear that it is in no way a completely accurate representation of the strength of characters, it unarguably charts TRENDS. These trends fall into a number of categories. First, and most obviously, it gives us a holistic view of which characters are performing well and which aren't. In looking at MK, Snake, and Falco in contrast to Link, Samus, and Ganon, we can say, without subjective bias, that the former three are performing universally well, while the latter three are universally struggling.

However, another trend that is (loosely) being charted here is character popularity. We might turn to Diddy as an example. It may not be the perfect example I'm looking for, but bear with me. Diddy's rankings on the results list has climbed consistently since the charts began. This is due to a number of reasons which are part and parcel to the discussion. However, in looking at the data, not only will we see that he's performing BETTER, but that he's performing MORE OFTEN. He saw an increase in popularity.

I won't go so far as to say that Ganon is becoming "popular", but the point is, people are playing him. If you've trolled the boards, he's a character that has a lot of really exciting advancements underway right now, and it's entirely possible he's garnered some attention for himself. There's no sin in playing a character you like to play in a tournament setting even if your other character most likely would have beat your opponent with ease. I refuse to grant guarantees here, because the results are empirical, and they say: "this guy's Ganon was good enough to win not 1, not 2, but 3 sets in a row. He then switched to DDD and finished his last 3 matches thus".

What would you do in a situation where an MK main counterpicks Bowser against some fairly unfavorable match-ups along his path to the top simply because he likes playing those match-ups as Bowser. There's no reason his MK couldn't beat them, but the point is that is MK DIDN'T beat them...his Bowser did. The Bowser shares the points. If you want to get down to specifics and say 2/5 matches were won by Bowser and 3/5 by MK, I'm fine with the idea of breaking down the points as a fraction, but the point is, simply negating deserved points on the grounds of hypotheticals is crazy, IMO.

 

[AlphaZealot]

WTF kind of logic is THIS (in bold above)?!

Here's my logic: The guy played equal sets with Ganon and DDD.

Case closed. Of course he chose his main when he got down to the later matches, but nonetheless, he played Ganon, and as such, the character should be credited. Every time that Ganon has been listed in a results page people write it off as heresy as say it's "screwing up the results". wtf is that? NOT posting the char used, especially when it was used in just as many sets as his other char, is "screwing up the results".

Atomsk, edit that post back. It's this simple: you used the character. You won with him. Consistently. People might just as easily say "he mains Ganon but he counterpicked DDD for matchups he was going to have trouble with." YOU. WON. WITH. GANON. Awesome job! Post it.

People wouldn't flinch if you had Fox or Mario written instead of Ganon, but because it's been pounded into people's heads that he's so unbelievably bad, it's just not allowed.

I'm sorry. There is no anti-Ganon grand conspiracy. If he went Snake rounds 1-3 and then D3 rounds 4-winners finals then I would put him down as just D3.

Here is another great example: PC Chris would often go non-Falco/Fox during pools at tournaments in Melee because he got bored with winning using Falco/Fox and wanted to have more fun (among a few other reasons). When it came time for top 8 matches he went almost exclusively Falco/Fox (and Peach here or there, and yes, I would put Peach as a secondary if it was a top 8 match). If you don't use a character in actual meaningful matches then that character wasn't used as a real secondary. It is that simple. Here is another example: NoJ at MW champs tried using Snake in one of the earlier rounds. His Snake sucks, he lost the match and stayed GW the rest of the tournament. Guess what? In the results, he was just listed as GW. Had he tried Snake in the later rounds that determined top 8 then I would say Snake was a secondary (even if he sucked/lost each time he used Snake), but using the character in an earlier round where he knew he would win regardless (and was basically just testing the character out), does not qualify that character as being a real secondary.

Its about the characters that are used in important matches (ie top 8). If you use the character at some point during the top 8 matches, then put it down, if you used it before that (at least at most tournaments), then don't put it down.

It isn't subjective: use the character in a top 8 match and have that character listed. Don't use that character in the top 8 and don't have the character listed.

Of course, if you want Ganon to seem like he made top 8 and skew the results like that because Atomsk used the character against randomscrub309 in round 1 then cool. I, on the other hand, would at least prefer some semblance of accuracy.

What would you do in a situation where an MK main counterpicks Bowser against some fairly unfavorable match-ups along his path to the top simply because he likes playing those match-ups as Bowser. There's no reason his MK couldn't beat them, but the point is that is MK DIDN'T beat them...his Bowser did. The Bowser shares the points. If you want to get down to specifics and say 2/5 matches were won by Bowser and 3/5 by MK, I'm fine with the idea of breaking down the points as a fraction, but the point is, simply negating deserved points on the grounds of hypotheticals is crazy, IMO.

If it was in the top 8 then Bowser was used as a secondary. If it was before the top 8, then the quality of the opponent is questionable and the results/validity of the character usage are in turn unreliable.

 

[TP]

One small note: Sandbagging. If I knew I was going to be facing someone later in a tourney and that person was watching my matches, I would not use my main. That is a legit, albeit unlikely, reason for him to use Ganon. In that case, I think it should count, since Ganon theoretically was a factoy in him placing so high.

 

[hyperstation]

I'm sorry. There is no anti-Ganon grand conspiracy. If he went Snake rounds 1-3 and then D3 rounds 4-winners finals then I would put him down as just D3.

Show me in the rules of posting results here where it says these are the rules. You're making the rash assumption that any match before the top 8 is a throw away. That's crazy. It was a large tournament and the point is, he repped Ganon for HALF of it. PS - I know there's no grand conspiracy. I gotta watch my boy's back though, you know?

Here is another great example: PC Chris would often go non-Falco/Fox during pools at tournaments in Melee because he got bored with winning using Falco/Fox and wanted to have more fun (among a few other reasons). When it came time for top 8 matches he went almost exclusively Falco/Fox (and Peach here or there, and yes, I would put Peach as a secondary if it was a top 8 match). If you don't use a character in actual meaningful matches then that character wasn't used as a real secondary. It is that simple. Here is another example: NoJ at MW champs tried using Snake in one of the earlier rounds. His Snake sucks, he lost the match and stayed GW the rest of the tournament. Guess what? In the results, he was just listed as GW. Had he tried Snake in the later rounds that determined top 8 then I would say Snake was a secondary (even if he sucked/lost each time he used Snake), but using the character in an earlier round where he knew he would win regardless (and was basically just testing the character out), does not qualify that character as being a real secondary.

Its about the characters that are used in important matches (ie top 8). If you use the character at some point during the top 8 matches, then put it down, if you used it before that (at least at most tournaments), then don't put it down.

It isn't subjective: use the character in a top 8 match and have that character listed. Don't use that character in the top 8 and don't have the character listed.

I need you to reassess the flow of your thinking in the lines above. You make a multiparagraph assessment of what makes a match important or not. You hypothesize on the very qualifications required to achieve importance which is, in itself, a qualification. You subjectively analyze this issue and arrive at the conclusion that top 8 encompasses the realm of importance. You immediately thereafter claim that it isn't subjective? How does this happen? My brain fried at that point while I was reading. The very notion that you believe that top 8 is the only part of the tourny that matters for character choice would, in my opinion, GROSSLY skew the results being posted here.

The reasons for which I am taking my stance contrary to yours are to, in my opinion, maintain the accuracy of the institution of the tournament as a whole and the accuracy of it's charting. To skim off the top 10% of the tournament for results and throw away the remaining 90% - ALL of which contributed to the creation of that distilled 10% - is to abominate the very concept of a tournament, which places equal emphasis on EVERY match. That is, if you win match 1, you move on, and if you loose, you don't. If you win the Grand Finals, you move on (or become champion, as it were), and if you loose, you don't (or take second place, as it were).

 

[Zankoku]

Here's how important a match is - did Atomsk NEED the character to win, or did he just do it because he had LITTLE, if any chances of losing? If you answer the former, then add the character. If you answer the latter, rethink the significance of using Ganondorf.

 

[hyperstation]

Here's how important a match is - did Atomsk NEED the character to win, or did he just do it because he had LITTLE, if any chances of losing? If you answer the former, then add the character. If you answer the latter, rethink the significance of using Ganondorf.

I don't get it...how can you make this argument? You're allowing the skill of Atomsk, a well known brawler, to overshadow any significance his character choice might play. Every tournament I GO to I play exclusively Ganon, but I could probably place a lot better with some of my other chars. In this specific case, you're allowing Atomsk's reputation to precede the actuality. He beat dudes with Ganon. Doing so got him to a certain point in the tournament. Then he beat some dudes with DDD. Doing so got him to 2nd place. A pretty sound strategy which seems really fun and worked out well for himself.

You're allowing tier lists and general stereotypes about Ganon to inform your thinking far too much. I could flip the situation and say "why did he CP DDD when he could have ***** with Ganon?" Who knows? Maybe Atomsk's Ganon is JUST THAT GOOD. People won't allow that type of hypothesizing, so why are you allowing the inverse?

Kosk took 2nd in a tournament recently using only Ganon. He CPed with Wolf a couple times, but there's no doubt he could have won those sets with Ganon. He still listed wolf as a CP. I know this is slightly different, but I'm just trying to throw examples out there. You can't allow tier lists and general assumptions (which are often inaccurate) about a character facilitate grand leaps in logic such as "If he did it with his Ganon, he could do it with his DDD". In all likelihood, this may be the case, but the facts state differently.

 

[Kyari]

I think you should only pay attention to matches that would decide some position in the top8. I dunno if that would have any bearing on this situation though. Also I think if you only lost with a character then it shouldn't count.

 

[Levitas]

hyper, Ankoku's statement could easily be generalized to exclude any names whatsoever. Player or character.

Therefore, this is neither a comment on Atomsk nor Ganon.

A better way for Ankoku to word it might have been "did Atomsk use the character because he NEEDED to in order to win, or did he do it because he had LITTLE, if any chances of losing?"

 

[Shaya]

Your last paragraph on Kosk is almost biased within the situation. He CP'd Wolf. "Counter-picked", as in he required himself to use Wolf to continue within the tournament.

Ankoku's stance is valid and well placed within an idealistic LOGIC. I could play random the entire tournament, but then in the top 8 matches OR SO just start playing Metaknight. Yeah, I'm good enough to beat the horde of scrubs with the random character of choice, but not good enough to progress through the higher echelon of players. So just because lets say I played 6 rounds before bringing out my main, and then got 5th? or so within another 2 other rounds using my main, realistically thinking to myself I wouldn't have even gotten top 8 using random (unless I was lucky), does random - or the list of characters I randomly received, worth giving a ranking to?

**** that example was extremely long-winded and almost wasteful...

Yes, mains of a certain character without much representation -need- points, but I'd hope the listing of such characters are 'valid'.
If he used Ganon to actually COUNTERPICK a matchup, hell yeah, give him points, but if that 'role' was solely given to D3 to a point that use of Ganon was redundant, why does he [ganon] deserve points?

I'm not sure of the bracket, but if Atomsk used ganon for 3 rounds, the 3rd knocking him into losers then bringing out d3 coz its no longer "lol just sandbarrggging" and never use Ganon past that point, how is it valid that Ganon was USEFUL in him placing top 8.

 

[gantrain05]

only problem with that theory is how do you even know your not going to get one of those top tier level players early in the tournament? you can't just say because it wasn't top 8 it doesn't count, that logic is flawed.

 

[SCOTU]

Ankoku is doing in right.

I also felt it requisite for me to post on page 422, as that's my birthday and i happen to like that number a lot.

 

[AlphaZealot]

I don't get it...how can you make this argument? You're allowing the skill of Atomsk, a well known brawler, to overshadow any significance his character choice might play. Every tournament I GO to I play exclusively Ganon, but I could probably place a lot better with some of my other chars. In this specific case, you're allowing Atomsk's reputation to precede the actuality. He beat dudes with Ganon. Doing so got him to a certain point in the tournament. Then he beat some dudes with DDD. Doing so got him to 2nd place. A pretty sound strategy which seems really fun and worked out well for himself.

Playing Ganon got him top 13. Playing D3 got him top 8 (well top 2-3 or whatever it was).

Ganon did not actually have a showing in the top 8. Simple.

You still seem to believe that there is some anti-Ganon conspiracy. There isn't. All characters are viable in the early rounds of a tournament (usually). We aren't focusing on the early rounds of a tournament though, we are looking at the later, more meaningful, rounds of a tournament. In the end its Ankoku's project and his call, but I think he would agree winning match ups in round 1 with any character, regardless of tiers, does not hold the same weight as winning the quarter/semi/finals of a tournament.

What you are saying is that R1 should have the same weight as Winner's finals. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that that isn't the case.

Ganon did not win Atomsk any top 8 matches. D3 did.