Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[Veril]

First of all, if you can't pull off the infinite correctly, you must have two broken thumbs. But that's beside the point.

At high level play, everyone knows who everyone else's main is since they aren't morons and do their research. The simple fact that someone is known as a DK main prohibits him from playing DK, merely because of the threat of DDD. In a best of three set, you want one match determined entirely by double blind picks?

This.

10infinites

 

[CO18]

I dont completely understand your post aeghrur but why is death from an inhale, or tech chase and worse than a grab and is worth of a ban that doesnt make sense to me.

Also I dont get everything your saying about cping but imo its not a logical argument. If d3 could do this to everyone but olimar, you could cp olimar so in your opinion it shouldnt be banned.

Also you could always ban a particular stage just as if you were to cp.

This response was based off what I could make out of that post.

 

[XienZo]

THC or CO18, please answer.
I would like to see your response.

DDDs force those counterpicks to be relied on more than the actual main itself. Remember that they're going to use G&W and such to CP DDD, and G&W already has enough love.

 

[ShadowLink84]

It doesn't make sense because it's not true and he relies on random people, majority of which dont go to tournaments who rely on theory to supply their matchup charts.

I love blanket statements.
They automatically assume a fault on the opposing party even when they aren't true.
Lovely.

N wait in fact, let's flip it around. Most of the people who do not want the ban do not go to tournaments.
See what I mean?

So mario is completely helpless and cannot fight back at all in the matchup?
He can't use FH fireballs, can't do anything to DDD except get grabbed.

DDD just hits Z and its all over.

 

[Remzi]

On a side note: Why are people still calling Marth's release on Ness an infinite? It's a chain grab and it can also lead to a followup dsmash. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[BentoBox]

pure_awesome is right. To have this discussion come down to talking about degrees is shameful.

Hence,

Because I said so.

 

[CO18]

You don't even know who Reflex is, do you? Also, the fact that you just labelled all the character boards as "random scrubs" insults my intelligence. Really? You're going to label most of the people who actually play competitively and don't screw around on the General Discussion board as "random scrubs?" Also, why do I get the feeling that you're tossing the word "scrub" around like some people would n***** just to get a false sense of superiority?

Majority of the people making the matchup charts as ill change are people who are not informed enough to make the decisions and are merely making it off of theory considering 90% of them do not attend tournaments.

Yes, I know who Reflex is and Desu is also considered the best player in Georgia. So a Captain Falcon main beat a so called "Pro MK" main which is impossible according to you.

 

[Cirno]

Ok, forget about the walk-off stage stuff.

New question: D3 has five utterly broken matchups. We can all agree on this, yet many here want those broken matchups to remain in the game.

I'm sure the Fox matchups thing has been brought up more than a thousand times.
One of the things I'm concerned about is how one technique changed the matchups to what they are. Though at the same time moves are what define matchups anyway.

So 5 matchups isn't enough to warrant a ban. How many matchups would it take to warrant a ban?

Bans usually come down to over-centralization don't they?
Which means whenever tourney matches come down to "Pick X character or lose"

Let's say that D3 could standing infinite every character but MK-- I doubt you'd be throwing the counterpick argument around then.

Wouldn't that bring it down to 'Pick MK or lose'? Centralizing character choice solely on MK?

It's kind of sad how when Ness/Lucas we're APPARENTLY (**** Cort) by Marth, no one cared.
Wario infinited by Wario/ZSS? No one cared.

People now caring about D3 infinite seems... unfair to say the list for poor Ness who had to endure 5-6 months of people saying LOLZ COUNTERPIKS TO MARTH AND WIN!

That and Fox's matchups against his 90:10s are what I keep thinking about with a side of IC infinite.

I want to say yes to the ban out of bias as I love watching Boss, Ripple, Tudor, and other great players whose mains are affected by this technique. But the question is should it be banned, not do you want it to be which is where I'm conflicted as the criteria for infinite bans is hazy. Clarifying it or even redefining it has the possibility to limit the future meta game so I want to be very clear before I take sides.

But it should be banned. D3 infinite I mean, if I pick Mario and always counterpick, i'll never get tourney results for him. He will forever be in D/E. Thats not fair imo.

No, what we should do is limit the CG to 5 times per regrab.

AND WE ARE NOT BANNING HIS REGULAR CG!

Unfortunately, the use of "fairness" in game isn't usable as it becomes a slippery slope.
Who's to say what's fair and where do we draw the line?

It is possible to get tourney results with them. You just have to a significant skill gap to make up for the 90:10 matchup. As unrealistic as it may seem "Don't get grabbed" is the strategy that will need to be employed for the victims going into this matchup. It's a main's nightmare to have a 90:10 as it lowers their viability by quite a lot when considering the counter pick system and the way double blinds are run, but I don't believe bad matchups make characters unviable, let alone one...incredibly horrendous match.



I'm trying to keep up with the points brought up in this thread but it went from 13 to 45 to 81 in the few times I checked it.


If anyone has any points that are really good or questions we can ask ourselves to help reach the answer then please share/re-post them if you have the time to do so.

I'd like to hear what other character mains who have or had 90:10s have to say about it as well.

 

[pure_awesome]

So we're completely just going to ignore the important topic here? Yeah?

I'm going to go somewhere and cry over the state of Smashboards.

 

[aeghrur]

I dont completely understand your post aeghrur but why is death from an inhale, or tech chase and worse than a grab and is worth of a ban that doesnt make sense to me.

Also I dont get everything your saying about cping but imo its not a logical argument. If d3 could do this to everyone but olimar, you could cp olimar so in your opinion it shouldnt be banned.

Also you could always ban a particular stage just as if you were to cp.

This response was based off what I could make out of that post.

Not your fault my writing sucked and was messy, lol.

Okay, inhale, tech chase, and CGs made the stages people used as an argument banned because they allowed for deaths due to things aside from simply DDD's CGs.
Now, the thing about CPs is that while CPs should be allowed and CPs should be supported, so DDD's infinite does that as it supports the use of CPs against 5 characters. However, if he could hard counter everyone but Olimar because of one tech, the tech would obviously cause a huge over-centralization of the game. However, this one does not because it simply helps the CP system, yet does not make it over dominant.

You can ban a particular stage, but there are multiple stages you could CP.

 

[da K.I.D.]

That doesn't make sense. I'm sorry, but the D3 v. Mario matchup must be wrong. All D3 has to do is grab Mario and D-throw him until an F-throw can kill. D3 has like the best grab game in Brawl. This is in addition to D3's other options, shuch as waddle-dee spam, aerials, tilts, etc.

this is true, the D3 boards were just trying to be nice basically, the matches are 100:0 with the infinite

Where exactly are you getting these numbers?

The D3 matchup thread, they were under estimating this infinite

You don't even know who Reflex is, do you? Also, the fact that you just labelled all the character boards as "random scrubs" insults my intelligence. Really? You're going to label most of the people who actually play competitively and don't screw around on the General Discussion board as "random scrubs?" Also, why do I get the feeling that you're tossing the word "scrub" around like some people would n***** just to get a false sense of superiority?

a lot of the character boards ARE random scrubs.
if you look through the majority of character boards. the people who are known as being best with those characters dont post on their boards.

Azen rarely posts on the lucario boards.
People like plank and M2K arent on the MK boards as much as you would think
i almost never seen ally or DSF post on the snake boards.
of the, like 10 sonics mainers that activately place high in tourneys, 2 regularly post on the boards.
how often is boss on the mario boards?
how often is NEO on the marth boards?

point is that the top players dont usually post too much in character boards, which leaves the boards to be run by random scrubs

 

[RDK]

pure_awesome is right. To have this discussion come down to talking about degrees is shameful.
Because I said so.

But that's what it comes down to. WastingPenguins called for a criteria, and it's simply a matter of degrees. It comes down to a judgment call.

I still think 26 is better than 6 for no other reason than banning walk-off stages is acceptable because it still allows D3 to perform the infinite. Banning the infinite altogether for the sake of a single matchup with 6 characters is not any better a choice than the first one.

@ Pure_Awesome:

On the topic of counterpicking and bouble blinds, what do you propose then? A change to the system? Because that seems to be the only thing that would appease both sides. The only question is what.

 

[CO18]

Not your fault my writing sucked and was messy, lol.

Okay, inhale, tech chase, and CGs made the stages people used as an argument banned because they allowed for deaths due to things aside from simply DDD's CGs.
Now, the thing about CPs is that while CPs should be allowed and CPs should be supported, so DDD's infinite does that as it supports the use of CPs against 5 characters. However, if he could hard counter everyone but Olimar because of one tech, the tech would obviously cause a huge over-centralization of the game. However, this one does not because it simply helps the CP system, yet does not make it over dominant.

You can ban a particular stage, but there are multiple stages you could CP.

How does his infinite help the counterpick system? I don't understand. Because it makes someone more likely to have to counterpick? Thats dumb.

 

[The Halloween Captain]

THC or CO18, please answer.
I would like to see your response.

Once MK was allowed to stay, I figured the community decision was that the counterpick system was not important. MK really does break the counterpick system, because he really is unconditionally the best choice in every matchup. I think I might contradict myself here, but I'm not sure, because while I formed my opinion, it may be for reasons others than those arguements I find most effective.

Frankly, I dislike the D-throw in this case because it leave the opponent helpless, and it is easy to get grabbed by D3. I also hate the Ice Climbers, and Falco when I play Snake, but I can live with them. In fact, the D3 outcome doesn't affect me at all. I just hate infinities in general.

However, my arguement on the matter is simple - for those 5/6 characters, the counterpick system becomes too dominant, and matchups are no longer determined by skill. The tactic of a standing grab has the sole purpose of infinitely grabbing those 5/6 characters, so its sole purpose is to make the counterpick system overpowered in those situations. If the standing grab had any other purpose than to overpower the counterpick system in those situations, such as a Marth grab release on characters other than Lucas may have a purpose other than infinite re-grab, I would not be arguing.

 

[Fatmanonice]

That doesn't make sense. I'm sorry, but the D3 v. Mario matchup must be wrong. All D3 has to do is grab Mario and D-throw him until an F-throw can kill. D3 has like the best grab game in Brawl. This is in addition to D3's other options, shuch as waddle-dee spam, aerials, tilts, etc.

According to YOU or people like Boss8, Bo X7, FEAR, and Matador who have actually ranked in tournaments with Mario?

 

[CO18]

According to YOU or people like Boss8, Bo X7, FEAR, and Matador who have actually ranked in tournaments with Mario?

Provide me a link of any the above mentioned winning a match vs an infiniting Dedede player.

 

[Birchnatch]

i disagree i do not think it shud be banned, this may be due to the fact that i play falco, but i feel that if this gets banned then dedede players will lose thier grabs almost all together(exageration). but i think banning moves is kind of stupid to be frank... unless it is unavoidable (mks infinicape). now that im thinking more about it i really dont have a strong argument so i dont know...

 

[WastingPenguins]

*shrug*

Fine, so change the number to 30. What the hell difference does it make?

Because I think that 5 is too many for the exact same reason that you think that 30 is too many. If you concede that there could *ever* be a line drawn when the infinite breaks too many matchups, you validate the pro-ban argument. So Guy1 thinks that 35 broken matchups is too many; Guy2 thinks that exactly 1/2 the cast would be the cutoff line; Guy3 thinks that exactly 1/3 of the matchups would be too many and so forth. The number is subjective and doesn't even matter-- all that matter is that you think there be a cutoff line at ALL.

So who gets to decide what that line is? You? And by what criteria do you make that decision?

 

[Overswarm]

i have one thing to say to everyone complaining about infinites


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuhpKT9ySPs


Also, if everyone could copy my comment onto that video I would be incredibly pleased.

 

[BentoBox]

But that's what it comes down to. WastingPenguins called for a criteria, and it's simply a matter of degrees. It comes down to a judgment call.

I still think 26 is better than 6 for no other reason than banning walk-off stages is acceptable because it still allows D3 to perform the infinite. Banning the infinite altogether for the sake of a single matchup with 6 characters is not any better a choice than the first one.

@ Pure_Awesome:

On the topic of counterpicking and bouble blinds, what do you propose then? A change to the system? Because that seems to be the only thing that would appease both sides. The only question is what.

I personally think 32 is better than 26.

 

[pure_awesome]

@ Pure_Awesome:

On the topic of counterpicking and bouble blinds, what do you propose then? A change to the system? Because that seems to be the only thing that would appease both sides. The only question is what.

Honestly? I have no idea. Well I have an idea, but it's not like the SBR would listen to it. I think when you enter a tournament, you should have to register your main and your secondary. And they're the only characters you can use for the tournament. After you win a match, you can opt to switch characters, and then the loser can opt to switch based off your switch.

DDD gets to keep his infinite, and the Unluckys don't become useless since not every can just switch to DDD on a whim.

But like I said, no way the SBR will listen.


So to be real, I think we're just stuck arguing what we think the counterpick system should be about. If we want it to be an intrinsic part of the game, then the infinite stays. If we want it to be a sidenote, then the infinite is banned.

 

[Veril]

On a side note: Why are people still calling Marth's release on Ness an infinite? It's a chain grab and it can also lead to a followup dsmash. Nothing more, nothing less.

Lots of people don't know its escapable.

The "death-grab" hype lives on.

 

[Overswarm]

Because I think that 5 is too many for the exact same reason that you think that 30 is too many. If you concede that there could *ever* be a line drawn when the infinite breaks too many matchups, you validate the pro-ban argument. So Guy1 thinks that 35 broken matchups is too many; Guy2 thinks that exactly 1/2 the cast would be the cutoff line; Guy3 thinks that exactly 1/3 of the matchups would be too many and so forth. The number is subjective and doesn't even matter-- all that matter is that you think there be a cutoff line at ALL.

So who gets to decide what that line is? You? And by what criteria do you make that decision?

Actually, the TO ultimately makes that decision. The smashboards decision is done by the SBR to help TOs make their decisions. The Smashboards decision as of now is to never limit something except to limit stalling. No "only 5 grabs" in an infinite, no "3 tornado per stock", no "3 times to grab the ledge then on the stage". Ending at 300% in an infinite works though.

 

[da K.I.D.]

the reason this debate has even gotten to where it is is becausethe people against the ban have chosen to ignore the "ease of use factor"
if the ICGs were that easy to use than this game would have devolved into all IC dittos by now. if you want to go on theory and say that ease of use is not a factor and ignore the tourney results and eye witness accounts that stand contrary to that idea than so be it.
but the fact of the matter is that the ease of use is what will determine whether somebody chooses to main the ice climbers in order so they can infinite the entire cast, or whether they will spend less than 5 minutes learning a simple string just to make sure that they never lose to those 5 characters ever again

 

[pure_awesome]

Actually, the TO ultimately makes that decision. The smashboards decision is done by the SBR to help TOs make their decisions. The Smashboards decision as of now is to never limit something except to limit stalling. No "only 5 grabs" in an infinite, no "3 tornado per stock", no "3 times to grab the ledge then on the stage". Ending at 300% in an infinite works though.

Well that can't be entirely true, can it? Not if there was such intense discussion on banning MK?

 

[BentoBox]

i have one thing to say to everyone complaining about infinites


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuhpKT9ySPs


Also, if everyone could copy my comment onto that video I would be incredibly pleased.

LOL. How did you find such a gem xD.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Provide me a link of any the above mentioned winning a match vs an infiniting Dedede player.

So one video will magically prove my point? I doubt it because then you'll argue about the creditials of the video, make claims that one side sandbagged or something outrageous, blah, blah, blah... Also, regarding earlier, Reflex is a much more skilled player (who has beaten people like Mew2King) than Desu and, if I remember right, Desu mains King Dedede, not Metaknight and people like Bwett (who is called the best Yoshi in the country) has mentioned in the past that Desu is consideribly better with his main then any other character.

 

[XxBlackxX]

Well that can't be entirely true, can it? Not if there was such intense discussion on banning MK?

no, it's still the TO's choice, though almost all of them follow standard SBR rules.

 

[CO18]

So one video will magically prove my point? I doubt it because then you'll argue about the creditials of the video, make claims that one side sandbagged or something outrageous, blah, blah, blah... Also, regarding earlier, Reflex is a much more skilled player (who has beaten people like Mew2King) than Desu and, if I remember right, Desu mains King Dedede, not Metaknight and people like Bwett (who is called the best Yoshi in the country) has mentioned in the past that Desu is consideribly better with his main then any other character.

Im sure you would consider C.Falcon Vs King Dedede a broken matchup as it is considered worse of a matchup then Metaknight by these "random people".

Yet Desu's King Dedede got 2-0ed by Reflex's Captain Falcon as well.

Also the video will prove that its not an impossible matchup.

 

[RDK]

Honestly? I have no idea. Well I have an idea, but it's not like the SBR would listen to it. I think when you enter a tournament, you should have to register your main and your secondary. And they're the only characters you can use for the tournament. After you win a match, you can opt to switch characters, and then the loser can opt to switch based off your switch.

DDD gets to keep his infinite, and the Unluckys don't become useless since not every can just switch to DDD on a whim.

But like I said, no way the SBR will listen.


So to be real, I think we're just stuck arguing what we think the counterpick system should be about. If we want it to be an intrinsic part of the game, then the infinite stays. If we want it to be a sidenote, then the infinite is banned.

Ideally this is good on paper, but I assume people would be pretty pissed of TO's started utilizing this and throwing the counterpick system completely out the window.

If it were a bit more universalized (I.E., if DK and D3 weren't the only instance of this) I could see it happening, but unfortunately that's not the case.

In fact, if that system were utilized, all it would do is limit you even more. At that point, if someone tries and counterpicks you, you won't even be able to counterpick back in the next set of matches. If someone picks D3 as their main in the beginning of the tourney and is proficient with the infinite, then you're basically screwed from the beginning.

I personally think 32 is better than 26.

At the expense of completely banning a character's technique? I don't think so. But that's the whole point, isn't it?

 

[Nanaki]

the reason this debate has even gotten to where it is is becausethe people against the ban have chosen to ignore the "ease of use factor"
if the ICGs were that easy to use than this game would have devolved into all IC dittos by now. if you want to go on theory and say that ease of use is not a factor and ignore the tourney results and eye witness accounts that stand contrary to that idea than so be it.
but the fact of the matter is that the ease of use is what will determine whether somebody chooses to main the ice climbers in order so they can infinite the entire cast, or whether they will spend less than 5 minutes learning a simple string just to make sure that they never lose to those 5 characters ever again

I think your last part is more accurate. The ease of learning is the bigger deal here than ease of use, I think. Any moron can learn the DDD infinite in 5 seconds and never lose to one of the Unlucky 5 again. It takes some real dedication to be able to infinite the cast with ice climbers on all the stages (I think you said this before, like 20 pages ago).

Ease of use isn't so much of a factor, but the fact that anyone can learn it in 5 seconds removes any tournament viability from those 5 characters, which trickles down into the use of other characters (characters those 5 have favorable matchups against), which trickles to OTHER characters, etc. The effect on the metagame isn't limited to those 5, and it's because it's so retardedly easy to beat the tar out of them with a totally ridiculous technique that anyone can use.

Ban ban ban.

 

[pure_awesome]

So one video will magically prove my point? I doubt it because then you'll argue about the creditials of the video, make claims that one side sandbagged or something outrageous, blah, blah, blah... Also, regarding earlier, Reflex is a much more skilled player (who has beaten people like Mew2King) than Desu and, if I remember right, Desu mains King Dedede, not Metaknight and people like Bwett (who is called the best Yoshi in the country) has mentioned in the past that Desu is consideribly better with his main then any other character.

Can't be that much better with his main.

The third match was Falcon vs DeDeDe, and he still lost.

 

[pure_awesome]

Ideally this is good on paper, but I assume people would be pretty pissed of TO's started utilizing this and throwing the counterpick system completely out the window.

You can still counterpick... you're just very limited as to who you can pick.
Actually, it's one of the things I like about the system. It forces you to main to characters that compliment each other's weaknesses.

In fact, if that system were utilized, all it would do is limit you even more. At that point, if someone tries and counterpicks you, you won't even be able to counterpick back in the next set of matches. If someone picks D3 as their main in the beginning of the tourney and is proficient with the infinite, then you're basically screwed from the beginning.

Right, but in keeping with the "complimenting each other's weaknesses" schtick, if you want to main DK, you keep a back-up character who can't be infinited. Say, one who does well against DDD? *cough*MK*cough*.

The only people who really lose out are those who want to use DK and Mario, or Samus and Luigi, etc.

It's not a perfect system, but it's the best I could come up with shortly that satisfies almost everyone.


EDIT: Huh. Kinda surprised this ended up being a double post. Whoopsies.

 

[Cirno]

the reason this debate has even gotten to where it is is because the people against the ban have chosen to ignore the "ease of use factor"
if the ICGs were that easy to use than this game would have devolved into all IC dittos by now. if you want to go on theory and say that ease of use is not a factor and ignore the tourney results and eye witness accounts that stand contrary to that idea than so be it.
but the fact of the matter is that the ease of use is what will determine whether somebody chooses to main the ice climbers in order so they can infinite the entire cast, or whether they will spend less than 5 minutes learning a simple string just to make sure that they never lose to those 5 characters ever again

The problem with the ease of use factor is that as humans, if it can be done it will be done. Wavedashing, SHFFLing and SHLs were more like a reflex than anything for me. I found Wobbling very difficult, but my brother could do it with even looking at the TV.


I'm quite sure that even if it took more technical skill than waveshining, those who wanted to make those matchups 90:10 would learn how.

 

[da K.I.D.]

I think your last part is more accurate. The ease of learning is the bigger deal here than ease of use, I think. Any moron can learn the DDD infinite in 5 seconds and never lose to one of the Unlucky 5 again. It takes some real dedication to be able to infinite the cast with ice climbers on all the stages (I think you said this before, like 20 pages ago).

Ease of use isn't so much of a factor, but the fact that anyone can learn it in 5 seconds removes any tournament viability from those 5 characters, which trickles down into the use of other characters (characters those 5 have favorable matchups against), which trickles to OTHER characters, etc. The effect on the metagame isn't limited to those 5, and it's because it's so retardedly easy to beat the tar out of them with a totally ridiculous technique that anyone can use.

Ban ban ban.

thanks for noticing

 

[XxBlackxX]

[/color]
You can still counterpick... you're just very limited as to who you can pick.
Actually, it's one of the things I like about the system. It forces you to main to characters that compliment each other's weaknesses.


Right, but in keeping with the "complimenting each other's weaknesses" schtick, if you want to main DK, you keep a back-up character who can't be infinited. Say, one who does well against DDD? *cough*MK*cough*.

The only people who really lose out are those who want to use DK and Mario, or Samus and Luigi, etc.

It's not a perfect system, but it's the best I could come up with shortly that satisfies almost everyone.


EDIT: Huh. Kinda surprised this ended up being a double post. Whoopsies.

you ended your own argument right there. your idea will actually cause more over-centralizion on top tier characters/characters with no/few bad matchups.

 

[BentoBox]

At the expense of completely banning a character's technique? I don't think so. But that's the whole point, isn't it?

I don't think it is unreasonable to ask a player not to CG these characters. It is a rule that would be as easily enforced as the "no IDC" rule. Bum has done it in all his tourneys. It's been done in quite a few others around the states. No one has opposed it afaik. Why do you value this technique so much? What does it bring to the game? What does it bring to the character? Why is centralizing 5 matchups in the game around a grab acceptable?

This can go on forever. I've lost interest in this debate :<.

 

[pure_awesome]

you ended your own argument right there. your idea will actually cause more over-centralizion on top tier characters/characters with no/few bad matchups.

How? Mario mains won't suddenly stop being Mario mains. If they need to second Snake to deal with MK and DDD, then there you go.

Hell, I know if I used this system I'd be going Falco and Ike.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Im sure you would consider C.Falcon Vs King Dedede a broken matchup as it is considered worse of a matchup then Metaknight by these "random people".

Yet Desu's King Dedede got 2-0ed by Reflex's Captain Falcon as well.

Also the video will prove that its not an impossible matchup.

Then that just says more about Reflex's skill level compared to Desu's, now doesn't it? If these players were closer together in skill, then it'd easily be in Metaknight's favor. That's basically what the match up charts do; they assume that the two players are relatively close to each other in skill or else things get heavily blown out of proportion. Earlier, you accused me of using adecdotal accounts to explain matchups but it now seems that your the person that's actually doing it. With the match up charts, it's a collective thing, not one or two people. As said earlier, they can sometimes suffer from bias and be a little outdated but overall they are more reliable then people throwing around "100-0" non-sense.

Add in:

Remind me again why the Ice Climbers are any different when they can 0-death the whole cast with multiple chain grab variations? Again, the whole "cuz they're harder to do, durrrrrrr" is moot for compeitive gaming.

 

[CO18]

Then that just says more about Reflex's skill level compared to Desu's, now doesn't it? If these players were closer together in skill, then it'd easily be in Metaknight's favor. That's basically what the match up charts do; they assume that the two players are relatively close to each other in skill or else things get heavily blown out of proportion. Earlier, you accused me of using adecdotal accounts to explain matchups but it now seems that your the person that's actually doing it. With the match up charts, it's a collective thing, not one or two people. As said earlier, they can sometimes suffer from bias and be a little outdated but overall they are more reliable then people throwing around "100-0" non-sense.

Why does that say more about Reflex's skill level compared to Desu?
They are both the best players in their respective states and are on a similar skill level.
Sure reflex is probably a little better but not by much but since the matchup is so overwhelmingly in Dedede or MK's favor as matchup charts say, there should be no way his 2-week C.Falcon should be beating Desu's mains that hes used for an extremely long time

What 100:0 non-sense? I would guarantee 100% that my Dedede would manage to get 3 grabs vs those character in any match.

Again Ive also challenged anyone near my area or even wifi to prove me wrong and manage to not get grabbed 3 times with those characters or beat me.