"If I play someone five times I will beat them." -Vro
At tournaments I have stopped playing friendlies. If I do, I rarely play my main character. This is because of a recent loss. I lost to one of my friends and one of Chicago's up and comers, Vro.
I consider Vro to be a rival. We go back and forth. Yet if we play friendlies, I will win a few games at first and then lose every single game after that.
There was a tournament about 9 months ago where we sat down and played for about an hour straight. During the course of those friendlies he slowly started adapting and picking apart my gameplan. Later when we met in bracket, I lost badly.
I now try to avoid playing friendlies against Vro at tournaments. Since I've been doing this, I've beaten him the last few times.
This habit of not playing friendlies has carried over to pretty much every person at a tournament. I'll play them, but I'll sandbag. Or I will practice one or two very specific things. I just don't want to give away any information.
The problem here is that I think I'm taking a short-sighted view of playing to win. Playing as much as you can and learning as much as you can seems better than hiding your weaknesses. If someone learns punishes my habits maybe a better course is to be less predictable. If my goal is to be the best player I can, I shouldn't let my own ego stop me from leveling up.
Anyways what I wanted to ask you guys was how much value do you place in playing your opponent?
In friendlies, do you show your true strength? Or do you sandbag all day? If you are the best player in the world playing friendlies against the 2nd best, do you play your hardest? Is there a point where hiding your habits is better than learning to less predictable?
During a match how much do you play to beat your opponents habits? How much risk are you willing to take to punish a 'read'? Or do you just try to play the game?
At tournaments I have stopped playing friendlies. If I do, I rarely play my main character. This is because of a recent loss. I lost to one of my friends and one of Chicago's up and comers, Vro.
I consider Vro to be a rival. We go back and forth. Yet if we play friendlies, I will win a few games at first and then lose every single game after that.
There was a tournament about 9 months ago where we sat down and played for about an hour straight. During the course of those friendlies he slowly started adapting and picking apart my gameplan. Later when we met in bracket, I lost badly.
I now try to avoid playing friendlies against Vro at tournaments. Since I've been doing this, I've beaten him the last few times.
This habit of not playing friendlies has carried over to pretty much every person at a tournament. I'll play them, but I'll sandbag. Or I will practice one or two very specific things. I just don't want to give away any information.
The problem here is that I think I'm taking a short-sighted view of playing to win. Playing as much as you can and learning as much as you can seems better than hiding your weaknesses. If someone learns punishes my habits maybe a better course is to be less predictable. If my goal is to be the best player I can, I shouldn't let my own ego stop me from leveling up.
Anyways what I wanted to ask you guys was how much value do you place in playing your opponent?
In friendlies, do you show your true strength? Or do you sandbag all day? If you are the best player in the world playing friendlies against the 2nd best, do you play your hardest? Is there a point where hiding your habits is better than learning to less predictable?
During a match how much do you play to beat your opponents habits? How much risk are you willing to take to punish a 'read'? Or do you just try to play the game?
.