• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Official Metaknight Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Judo777

Smash Master
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
3,627
CP system barely even exists at high levels of play.
Thats not true. Again M2Ks only win the last set was on Delfino which was his CP. Also Im convinced that the only reason Cable didnt beat AZ was because he chose brinstar which (although its a good stage for DK normally) did not suit the matchup against Diddy in which DK needs his space. Had he have maybe gone to maybe YI or Delfino ( i am aware that was AZ's ban) it might have completely turned the tide of the outcome. At th highest levels of play people should be of close to equal skill so the stages should matter quite a bit cause every little advantage matters
 

RDK

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
6,390
But the BBR still went out of their way to establish rules for it. Maybe counter-picking doesn't make too much difference at the highest level of play, but the BBR made rules to accommodate the average competitive player. Which is also who the MK ban would affect the most.
How does the counterpick system benefit the average player more than it does top players? This doesn't even make sense.
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
8,905
Location
Vinyl Scratch's Party Bungalo
NNID
Budget_Player
I've been lurking on these forums forever and this topic is one that I'd like to chime in on. For the record, I'm first and foremost a Street Fighter player, but I recently bout a Wii because I loved playing Smash so much. It's the only wii game i own. In essence, I'm a newb and don't know much. Normally, I'd keep quiet but in a case the problem extends beyond game play. What I say is assuming that MK is indeed decreasing attendence.

The one thing I want to say is this: Don't take for granted the popularity of smash and keeping its community, including the scrubs/average/non-elite players happy. Brawl outsold Street fighter4 3-1. The SF tournamnet scene is largely a niche scene and it in general struggles for attendence . Trust me, you do not want to be in the same boat as other fighters. Use the fact that Smash appeals to the masses to your advantage.

People before me have already said this, but have been largely ignored. Scrubs/avg smashers/are not irrelevant in this discussion. Elite players are but a fraction of the entire player base, but are reliant on smashers not as skilled as them to pad the cash pools. Try to see this situation from an avg joe perspective because without them, say good by to $$. If it affects them, it affects the elite as well.

Honestly, it really is that simple. Even if changes make absolutely no sense, if it is causing the scene to die, then action needs to be taken. I see people going on for pages talking about frame data and tournament results when the most important part of the MK issue is largely ignored.
Good post is good
 

Chuee

Smash Hero
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
6,002
Location
Kentucky
Thats not true. Again M2Ks only win the last set was on Delfino which was his CP. Also Im convinced that the only reason Cable didnt beat AZ was because he chose brinstar which (although its a good stage for DK normally) did not suit the matchup against Diddy in which DK needs his space. Had he have maybe gone to maybe YI or Delfino ( i am aware that was AZ's ban) it might have completely turned the tide of the outcome. At th highest levels of play people should be of close to equal skill so the stages should matter quite a bit cause every little advantage matters
I was talking about character CPing
 

loki15

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
53
Location
WI
How does the counterpick system benefit the average player more than it does top players? This doesn't even make sense.

Sure it does. At the apparent "highest level of play", the elements of stages and character choices should make little difference. That's one of the arguments of anti-ban, is it not? That to defeat MK, players just need to get better and character choice should make little difference? Under that mentality, CPing doesn't make much difference. But to the average player, stage and character elements can and do make a huge difference.
 

CRASHiC

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Messages
7,267
Location
Haiti Gonna Hait
Well, you had to determine how much a difference each stage actually makes. How much does it effect the actual match. I mean, let's face it, if it was C018 versus Ally, Snake Versus DDD, C018 would win, but still, on Island Cruise, it is almost a given that C018 will win hands down. The stage is just TOO MUCH in favor of DDD.
 

Judo777

Smash Master
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
3,627
I was talking about character CPing
OK thats fair but MK also makes stage counter picking much less viable because he is better than most of the cast on almost every stage (slight exagerration but not too far from being accurate).
 

Black Marf

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
89
CP system barely even exists at high levels of play.
Because MK destroys it! =D

Ban MK.


But seriously, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a certain amount of CPing going on at top level play for Melee? M2K and a few other players seem to switch which character they're using depending on the situation.
 

loki15

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
53
Location
WI
I don't think anyone is stupid enough to say character choice makes little difference to beat a competent MK.
I overgeneralized a bit, but with a character like MK, there are a few characters that are considered to go "even" with him (Snake Diddy Falco and ICs, at different times) but even those aren't agreed on with good consistency, and aside from them, matchups with MK are bad, worse, or unwinnable. Having a few characters that are dominated by another is okay; every game has bad matchups for a couple characters, but to have it so that it's impossible to put yourself in an advantage should not happen.

Well, you had to determine how much a difference each stage actually makes. How much does it effect the actual match. I mean, let's face it, if it was C018 versus Ally, Snake Versus DDD, C018 would win, but still, on Island Cruise, it is almost a given that C018 will win hands down. The stage is just TOO MUCH in favor of DDD.
And this applies to stages as well. With DDD, depending on your region and tournament-specific stage rules, you can avoid walk-off stages, or find a stage (like Castle Seige) where the walk-off exists but is far harder to accomplish. Against MK, it's nearly if not impossible to gain an advantage through stage picks.
 

Chuee

Smash Hero
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
6,002
Location
Kentucky
*sigh*
People don't CP at high levels not because of mk.
Also, mk goes 6-4 with over half of the cast. If the player can't win, it's their fault, not mks.
 

¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯

Smash Legend
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
12,115
Location
Chicago, IL
Where are you even getting this from? People definitely CP at top levels. It just has more to do with what the top players prefer as opposed to what theoretically benefits their character.
 

Overswarm

is laughing at you
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
21,181
*sigh*
People don't CP at high levels not because of mk.
Also, mk goes 6-4 with over half of the cast. If the player can't win, it's their fault, not mks.
Ally recently picked up MK almost specifically due to getting countered by Dedede.

To claim that MK has 6-4 with over half the cast and simultaneously say that the 4 player should just tough it up and beat the 6 player is a bit silly. The correct solution is to pick the same character so you can go 5-5 or to pick a matchup he doesn't know and hope to get lucky.
 

Chuee

Smash Hero
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
6,002
Location
Kentucky
No, Ally picked up mk because he thought he was the only reason snake was so high on the tier list.
6-4 MU's are definitely winnable on the 4 side, you can't blame your lose on the MU. If you lose it's most likely because of MU inexperience or them being a better player.
 

Overswarm

is laughing at you
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
21,181
No, Ally picked up mk because he thought he was the only reason snake was so high on the tier list.
6-4 MU's are definitely winnable on the 4 side, you can't blame your lose on the MU. If you lose it's most likely because of MU inexperience or them being a better player.
It's 60/40 and not 50/50 for a reason. The "40" is at a disadvantage, and has a less likely chance to succeed.


And according to Ally's posts in the SBR, he was "tired of getting gayed". I believe he made an AiB blog to the same effect after losing to CO18.
 

loki15

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
53
Location
WI
To claim that MK has 6-4 with over half the cast and simultaneously say that the 4 player should just tough it up and beat the 6 player is a bit silly. The correct solution is to pick the same character so you can go 5-5 or to pick a matchup he doesn't know and hope to get lucky.
Exactly. Not even if both players play perfectly, but in a standard game with both players around the same level of playing and match-up knowledge, barring a new gimmick or AT or luck with a stage element, the 6 player should almost always win. A mirror match is a much better bet.

@OS- any ideas on compiling a pro-ban, ban criteria list? I think that could really help the debate. At the very least, it would be more organized.
 

Overswarm

is laughing at you
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
21,181
@OS- any ideas on compiling a pro-ban, ban criteria list? I think that could really help the debate. At the very least, it would be more organized
There is no criteria, and it varies from person to person. Most of the anti-ban's most vehement supporters literally want a consistent top 4 of all MKs at a national level and the like. The stuff most of us take to heart as common sense like "there's no logical reason to play anyone but MK" or "MK is played more and wins more at every level of gameplay than any other character and has a points total that takes several characters combined to get close to; that's bad" isn't seen as a bad thing by the other side. They see other fighters with strong characters and just say "So? Only one character is really viable, big whoop". You can't really argue with lowered standards.
 

Chuee

Smash Hero
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
6,002
Location
Kentucky
Why should we ban a character when about 20 of his MU's are 60-40?
Of course 60-40 means one player is at an advantage, but it's not like the other player has slim chances of winning. I've seen plenty of people beat top mks in 60-40 MU's.
 

Dark.Pch

Smash Legend
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
16,918
Location
Manhattan, New York
NNID
Dark.Pch
3DS FC
5413-0118-3799
Ally recently picked up MK almost specifically due to getting countered by Dedede.

To claim that MK has 6-4 with over half the cast and simultaneously say that the 4 player should just tough it up and beat the 6 player is a bit silly. The correct solution is to pick the same character so you can go 5-5 or to pick a matchup he doesn't know and hope to get lucky.
Sounds like a tournament that will be just meta dittos all day. I mean it's not like we see that alot right? Oh wait...........
 

Sorto

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
409
Ally recently picked up MK almost specifically due to getting countered by Dedede.

To claim that MK has 6-4 with over half the cast and simultaneously say that the 4 player should just tough it up and beat the 6 player is a bit silly. The correct solution is to pick the same character so you can go 5-5 or to pick a matchup he doesn't know and hope to get lucky.
Overswarm, I think your incorrect. I heard that ALLY picked up MK to prove Snake didnt disserve second on the tier list. He felt that his use of Snake, have scewed Snake tourney results so much, that if he didn't use him, Snake would drop in the ranking list and later tierlist. He chose MK as to not raise any other character, since MK is King and will most likely remain king.
Source: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=261439

2. Matchup ratio are opinion based. They can misrepresent matchups. Also many boards vary in percentages of 10% between each other in regards to the same match up. 10% is a large enough variation and can be use to change a soft counter into decent counter or a decent counter into a hard one. At this moment in time they are very unreliable. There is always room to change. If you believe 4's can never toughen up and beat 6's, then why bother playing. I guess Ken in melee was always doomed to lose to sheik. You tellin me that no one was at his level? Haha, not to mention Aniki who played Link. If matchups depend more on players skill and mind games, then most matchups should be regarded as closer, since character choice should be a much smaller variable. Thats the problem with them. There misrepresentative!
 

RDK

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
6,390
There is no criteria, and it varies from person to person.
SBR members have repeatedly stated that there is a criteria.

Most of the anti-ban's most vehement supporters literally want a consistent top 4 of all MKs at a national level and the like. The stuff most of us take to heart as common sense like "there's no logical reason to play anyone but MK" or "MK is played more and wins more at every level of gameplay than any other character and has a points total that takes several characters combined to get close to; that's bad" isn't seen as a bad thing by the other side. They see other fighters with strong characters and just say "So? Only one character is really viable, big whoop". You can't really argue with lowered standards.
Every single fighting game has a "best character", and if players are playing to win then they would do best to play as that character.

This obviously doesn't happen, and it's why MK doesn't completely dominate tournament rankings.
 

Judo777

Smash Master
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
3,627
Why should we ban a character when about 20 of his MU's are 60-40?
Of course 60-40 means one player is at an advantage, but it's not like the other player has slim chances of winning. I've seen plenty of people beat top mks in 60-40 MU's.
Ok firstly most of the matchups lists against MK are very scewed. People say its 60/40 based on personal experience. The issue with this is that most Mk players dont know half of the matchups in the game. This is simply because they dont freaking have to they can not know a matchup and use just basic MK tactics to annilate all of the competition. Most MKs know like maybe 7 matchups (those of the top 7 character) with maybe exception for IC's or whatever but how many MKs know the samus matchup? Sheik boards say its 60/40 and they may be but I have yet to meet and MK that knows the sheik matchup. They just do what MK's do best and they still win cause their character is just so much better they dont need to take time to learn the MU.

@RDK yes because ofc Daigo uses O-Sagat in super turbo right oh wait no he uses ryu............
 

loki15

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
53
Location
WI
Character Rankings List said:
]1 Meta Knight (168 top8, 117 top4, 67 top2, 67 wins, 419 total) - 3699.1
2 Snake (128 top8, 67 top4, 44 top2, 52 wins, 291 total) - 2503.1

A Rank «Overused» 24.28%
3 Diddy Kong (80 top8, 33 top4, 22 top2, 21 wins, 156 total) - 1126.6
I would have to say that's pretty dominant. MK is a whole Diddy above Snake...
 

Col. Stauffenberg

Smash Lord
Joined
Jun 14, 2008
Messages
1,989
Location
San Diego <3
Exactly. Not even if both players play perfectly, but in a standard game with both players around the same level of playing and match-up knowledge, barring a new gimmick or AT or luck with a stage element, the 6 player should almost always win. A mirror match is a much better bet.
....Then why the hell call it 6-4? I didn't think 6 out of 10 was "almost always."
 

Sorto

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
409
Ok firstly most of the matchups lists against MK are very scewed. People say its 60/40 based on personal experience. The issue with this is that most Mk players dont know half of the matchups in the game. This is simply because they dont freaking have to they can not know a matchup and use just basic MK tactics to annilate all of the competition. Most MKs know like maybe 7 matchups (those of the top 7 character) with maybe exception for IC's or whatever but how many MKs know the samus matchup? Sheik boards say its 60/40 and they may be but I have yet to meet and MK that knows the sheik matchup. They just do what MK's do best and they still win cause their character is just so much better they dont need to take time to learn the MU.

@RDK yes because ofc Daigo uses O-Sagat in super turbo right oh wait no he uses ryu............
If what you say is true. Then think about what DDD could do to the characters he 6-4s. Or in that case, what about the ICs and there 6-4 matchups. I doubt these characters know all the low tier/ mid tier matchups either. What moves could their pivot grab outreach? Whats the best way to obtain a grab against said character. Whats safest against said character. Can anthing guarentee them grabs. In terms of DDD how could you end a chain grab combo. For ICs, could the opponent really punish your blizzard down b move and how hard is it for the opponent to resynch you.

F**k Man! Lets ban DDD and the ICs.
Sure they have counters, but they have 90-10 match ups on the mid tiers and low tiers, once they actually try to learn the matchup. Well I mean, who says that cant be true. Rite? Its as true as your statement. You can't prove yours any more then I can prove mine.
 

theunabletable

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 18, 2009
Messages
1,796
Location
SoCal
Just to mention something, Tyrant/DSF lost another tournament to Larry last night.
The stuff most of us take to heart as common sense like "there's no logical reason to play anyone but MK" or "MK is played more and wins more at every level of gameplay than any other character and has a points total that takes several characters combined to get close to; that's bad"
MK is the best character, of course it's logical to only play that. Pretty much EVERY game has a best character which would be more logical to play.

And MK does NOT win at every level of play. At the TOP level of play, you know the level that the point of competition (seeing who is the best) applies to, other character win just fine.
 

Inui

Banned via Warnings
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
22,230
Location
Ocean Grove, New Jersey
Counterpicking exists, but at higher levels...it ceases to matter. Look at top Melee players. Who, besides Mew2King, actually uses counterpicking? And he doesn't even win anymore. Mango uses Jigglypuff or whatever he feels like. People like Hax, Scar, Darkrain, and SS plow through Fox/Falco/Sheik with Captain Falcon even though those match-ups are "bad," and Armada's Peach beats almost everyone (actually, pretty much everyone, including M2K) that uses those characters that "beat" Peach. Once you get super amazing and everyone is super amazing, it comes down to player ability and knowledge.

ADHD goes straight Diddy even on Brinstar/RC and wins anyways against players at or near his skill level. Ally beats top MKs with Snake on RC/Brinstar.

Counterpicking is overrated in high level play.
 

AllyKnight

Banned via Administration
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
10,881
Location
*'~-East Coast/Quebec/Michigan-~'*
It's 60/40 and not 50/50 for a reason. The "40" is at a disadvantage, and has a less likely chance to succeed.


And according to Ally's posts in the SBR, he was "tired of getting gayed". I believe he made an AiB blog to the same effect after losing to CO18.
Overswarm, I think your incorrect. I heard that ALLY picked up MK to prove Snake didnt disserve second on the tier list. He felt that his use of Snake, have scewed Snake tourney results so much, that if he didn't use him, Snake would drop in the ranking list and later tierlist. He chose MK as to not raise any other character, since MK is King and will most likely remain king.
Source: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=261439

2. Matchup ratio are opinion based. They can misrepresent matchups. Also many boards vary in percentages of 10% between each other in regards to the same match up. 10% is a large enough variation and can be use to change a soft counter into decent counter or a decent counter into a hard one. At this moment in time they are very unreliable. There is always room to change. If you believe 4's can never toughen up and beat 6's, then why bother playing. I guess Ken in melee was always doomed to lose to sheik. You tellin me that no one was at his level? Haha, not to mention Aniki who played Link. If matchups depend more on players skill and mind games, then most matchups should be regarded as closer, since character choice should be a much smaller variable. Thats the problem with them. There misrepresentative!
none of you are wrong, MOSTLY For D3, But the Snake part is also true, I still went full Snake this weekend until Grand finals which I used Falcon to beat this MK,D3, Diddy user. 3-0 ;D
 

Chuee

Smash Hero
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
6,002
Location
Kentucky
none of you are wrong, MOSTLY For D3, But the Snake part is also true, I still went full Snake this weekend until Grand finals which I used Falcon to beat this MK,D3, Diddy user. 3-0 ;D
LOL you beat a mk, a D3, and a Diddy with Falcon. lmao
 

loki15

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
53
Location
WI
Loki, if both boards agree to it being 60-40 then it's most likely 60-40.
Did I say something different than that? If so, I didn't mean to. But the match-up ratios that we use on SWF aren't exactly mathematical. The DDD: DK ratio is 90-10. Does that mean that a DK has a 10% chance of winnin at high level play? Absolutely not. That's at best a 99-1 ratio going on win percentage. Not even that. A 60-40 match-up on the boards does not mean a 60% to 40% win ratio.

If I wasn't clear before.
 

Judo777

Smash Master
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
3,627
Man let me get out my flame shield....

Although many other high tier characters dont know the matchups either, the reverse logic can be used because since not near as many people pick the other higher tier characters so the lower characters also dont know the matchups very well. However everyone and their mother knows the MK matchup, why the hell wouldnt you learn it ur gonna run into about 6 at any tournament you go to. In spite of everyone knowing the MK MU and MK's not knowing their opponents matchups they still predominately win tourneys. Even if the MK is for some reason or another struggling from inexperience thats ok i guess ill just time u out and give me a good 8 minutes to think of what im doing wrong.

RDK you said that it is smartest if u want to do good at a tournament to use the best player which is right. You then said that this obviously doesn't happen so MK doesn't dominate tournaments. My response was to point out that many people in other fighting games don't pick the best character because they like another character better and they can outplay most of the competition who use the better character's. That doesn't mean that daigo doesn't want to win he just prefers playing ryu instead.
 

Sorto

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
409
Inui is completely Correct.
- Matchup ratio are misrepresentative!
- If skill depends more on the player, which is what most people believe, then the values should be closer.
- If a tournament of players of completely even skill existed. And one of its players, lets say played Diddy and only had to face MKs, which is matchup of about 55:45. Now for simplicity, lets make the 55:45, the chance of winning the entire set, not per match or anything like that. Now lets say the Diddy only had to win five sets to win first place. That means his chances of winning are .45^5, correct. Assuming the players are all even skilled and the matchup truly is 55:45.

.45^5 = 0.0184528125, which is less then 2%.

Less then 2%? I guess ADHD is a pretty lucky player most of the time.
My point is, MATCHUP RATIOS ARE VERY VERY WRONG!!!!
 

RDK

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
6,390
RDK you said that it is smartest if u want to do good at a tournament to use the best player which is right. You then said that this obviously doesn't happen so MK doesn't dominate tournaments. My response was to point out that many people in other fighting games don't pick the best character because they like another character better and they can outplay most of the competition who use the better character's. That doesn't mean that daigo doesn't want to win he just prefers playing ryu instead.
True. The point I was trying to make is that if players who think MK is overwhelming really wanted to win, they would play as him instead of continuing to play as an inferior character.
 

Inui

Banned via Warnings
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
22,230
Location
Ocean Grove, New Jersey
Inui is completely Correct.
- Matchup ratio are misrepresentative!
- If skill depends more on the player, which is what most people believe, then the values should be closer.
- If a tournament of players of completely even skill existed. And one of its players, lets say played Diddy and only had to face MKs, which is matchup of about 55:45. Now for simplicity, lets make the 55:45, the chance of winning the entire set, not per match or anything like that. Now lets say the Diddy only had to win five sets to win first place. That means his chances of winning are .45^5, correct. Assuming the players are all even skilled and the matchup truly is 55:45.

.45^5 = 0.0184528125, which is less then 2%.

Less then 2%? I guess ADHD is a pretty lucky player most of the time.
My point is, MATCHUP RATIOS ARE VERY VERY WRONG!!!!
Good post.
 

Sorto

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
409
Man let me get out my flame shield....

Although many other high tier characters dont know the matchups either, the reverse logic can be used because since not near as many people pick the other higher tier characters so the lower characters also dont know the matchups very well. However everyone and their mother knows the MK matchup, why the hell wouldnt you learn it ur gonna run into about 6 at any tournament you go to. In spite of everyone knowing the MK MU and MK's not knowing their opponents matchups they still predominately win tourneys. Even if the MK is for some reason or another struggling from inexperience thats ok i guess ill just time u out and give me a good 8 minutes to think of what im doing wrong.

RDK you said that it is smartest if u want to do good at a tournament to use the best player which is right. You then said that this obviously doesn't happen so MK doesn't dominate tournaments. My response was to point out that many people in other fighting games don't pick the best character because they like another character better and they can outplay most of the competition who use the better character's. That doesn't mean that daigo doesn't want to win he just prefers playing ryu instead.
True, but whatever MK they play against will then learn the Matchup. You cant just learn the matchup. You have to play against an opponent. If you play against a bad MK and learn the matchup that way, then you wont be able to beat a good MK. If you train against a good MK, then someone good has learned the matchup. ANd I would say, most people know the snake and DDD matchups almost as well as they know the MK. So the same could be said, if DDD or Snake learned the matchup, it could become more in there favor. I think especially for DDD with his chaingrab.
 

Judo777

Smash Master
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
3,627
Inui is completely Correct.
- Matchup ratio are misrepresentative!
- If skill depends more on the player, which is what most people believe, then the values should be closer.
- If a tournament of players of completely even skill existed. And one of its players, lets say played Diddy and only had to face MKs, which is matchup of about 55:45. Now for simplicity, lets make the 55:45, the chance of winning the entire set, not per match or anything like that. Now lets say the Diddy only had to win five sets to win first place. That means his chances of winning are .45^5, correct. Assuming the players are all even skilled and the matchup truly is 55:45.

.45^5 = 0.0184528125, which is less then 2%.

Less then 2%? I guess ADHD is a pretty lucky player most of the time.
My point is, MATCHUP RATIOS ARE VERY VERY WRONG!!!!
Or that the skill level isnt the same........... Regardless of the skill level total, ADHD definitely outplayed all of his opponents at pound 4 there is no question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom