To prioritize mindgame or reliable attacks?

[Chrollolith]

Hello everyone.
Lately we received a lot of major tournaments, and i could see in them a bunch of good matches, but there is something that got my attention, and it’s most of players are basing their plays on making safe moves. Obviously always you must make safe moves, but i mean, like the 80% of moves they made is that one which they know it’s safe to spam until they land one. Few plays about risking for a combo or kill. And i want to emphasize that i’m talking principally about known top players.

All this just make me wonder why don’t they trust on their mindgame, reads and stuff, as principal weapon, but they do by making some safe moves as said.

And once again, that made me think about “what would be better?”. In first instance i though: They do that because they don’t feel comfortable enough to make riskier moves.
But maybe, actually in ultimate it’s like a “meta” on playstyle to spam this kind of attacks on neutral.

So, i thought it would be ok to start a thread about how much “percentage” belong to each one, mindgame (analyze, reads and stuff) and secure moves (for example, as marth, zoning with fair, nair, upair), which one should be prioritized, i’m getting a little bit confuse with that, so let’s go with the thread.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

Playing neutral is about understanding your opponent. Think of it like a conversation; you're not just gonna say some wild stuff to a stranger and just hope you guess right and make them interested in you right?

Same concept in smash; you don't throw a falcon punch in neutral unless you REALLY did homework on your opponent. and point in safe moves is to feel each other out and to learn. After that, there may be some kore riskier stuff, but safe loves will still abound since you could die pretty easy off of one hit.

Don't try to put it into blocks or sectors; it's a pretty fluid thing. I use dark pit, and sometimes I use Fsmash. You may intepretate that as. Risky move i read my opponent with, but what you don't know is Fsmash has two hits, with both being fairly long range and not too bad recovery time. If i hit this on shield at the tip, it can be safe. And it's his longest horizontal normal. So is it safe or risky? Sure you can punish it, but you could also punish Ftilt or Fair, which has less lag, but also less range.

Don't worry about if you should go for a safe move here, or risky move there; it's all dependent on your opponent. Judge your opponent first and see what can be done on him/her. I can throw a bunch of Side Bs and Fsmashes against weaker opponents, but if I fight ZeRo, i would have to play a few dozen matches before I "get" him.

Does that contribute at all?

 

[Emblem Lord]

All about set-play.

 

[Chrollolith]

Playing neutral is about understanding your opponent. Think of it like a conversation; you're not just gonna say some wild stuff to a stranger and just hope you guess right and make them interested in you right?

Same concept in smash; you don't throw a falcon punch in neutral unless you REALLY did homework on your opponent. and point in safe moves is to feel each other out and to learn. After that, there may be some kore riskier stuff, but safe loves will still abound since you could die pretty easy off of one hit.

Don't try to put it into blocks or sectors; it's a pretty fluid thing. I use dark pit, and sometimes I use Fsmash. You may intepretate that as. Risky move i read my opponent with, but what you don't know is Fsmash has two hits, with both being fairly long range and not too bad recovery time. If i hit this on shield at the tip, it can be safe. And it's his longest horizontal normal. So is it safe or risky? Sure you can punish it, but you could also punish Ftilt or Fair, which has less lag, but also less range.

Don't worry about if you should go for a safe move here, or risky move there; it's all dependent on your opponent. Judge your opponent first and see what can be done on him/her. I can throw a bunch of Side Bs and Fsmashes against weaker opponents, but if I fight ZeRo, i would have to play a few dozen matches before I "get" him.

Does that contribute at all?

Definitely, it contributed.

Very thanks, it helped me to understand some things.

 

[LightLV]

Playing risky for that "MINDGAMEZ HARD READ" attack doesn't usually work against good players because they typically aren't putting themselves in positions where they get hit like that. Hard reads usually punish bad or unsafe options, and the whole point is to avoid that because it places you at disadvantage.

What you're really noticing here is that good players don't have a generalized neutral. You see them playing safe because the real way they win is by taking note of the mannerisms of the player and building their movements and actions upon that instead. The goal is to put you in a situation where you're forced to make a choice....at which point you don't even have to make a "hard read" anymore.

Of course high-level players make tons of little mistakes all the time....they just aren't the same kinds of mistakes average players make, and so can't be exploited by the same kind of "mindgames" that you're probably thinking about.

Most people you encounter on netplay? They have a more generalized neutral. They do what works against most players, they don't necessarily have a playstyle that's designed to work against all players. They probably get hit and mash nair in hopes that your strings wont be tight and they'll hit you. They'll roll excessively after throwing out unsafe moves because most people let them get away with it. They charge a turnaround smash attack on wakeup because they know most people don't think hard about their wakeup options.

That's not to say that high-level players can't do this either.....it's just that it has a lower chance of working and a much higher chance of being punished....and against a player who's really good at pushing an advantage, you never want to risk possibly losing your advantage or neutral (or the game) because you tried to make an MLG galaxy brain hard read.

 

[MG_3989]

I think the most important thing is focusing on what your opponent is doing and playing your game with them in mind. However there’s no way you can do this unless your BnB’s and tech is second nature. So they’re both really important. I wouldn’t focus on playing mind games though (there’s a time and a place for it but rarely). I’d just focus on your opponents style and playing around them and outplaying them in general and that becomes “mindgames” in itself. There is a time and a place for gimmicks and they do work sometimes in high level play but you have to use them sparingly and know the time to pull them out. Kind of like trick plays in football. But for that your fundamentals have to be so good and you have to be at such a high level that you can actually make those risky decisions that can win or lose you a match

 

[MoZeS]

I agree with most everything said here. Playing safe is neutral is essential certainly until you can condition a opponent so he/she can be read. My question is...eventually will the change to 3 stocks promote a more aggro playstyle than we're currently seeing? Losing a stock off a bad lad may be less punishing. Solid info here.

 

[MoosyDoosy]

You only go for mindgames to close a stock out.

If you go for mindgames right off the bat then your opponent adapts faster to you and wises up too fast.

Larry Lurr is a great player at this. He goes for very safe combos and options then when closing out a stock mixes things up to sneak in a finishing option.

It's why "conditioning" is a thing. You condition your opponent to expect X move out of Y position. Then when you need to you can revert to Q move in Y position which throws them off guard and is a free punish. A lot of good players throw out the same option in most situations then mix it up when they absolutely have to.