100-0 Match-ups

[Dekar173]

Anything 85-15 and up (meaning all the way up to 100-0) can be assumed to mean "unwinnable"

You people are taking the numbers a little too literally, and a lot of the boards that use 90-10 and so on as a description are a bit ********. If the odds are overwhelmingly against you, and you're playing against a player who knows how to utilize the tools given to them in order to shut you down, then you're ****ed.

At mid levels of play, 95-5 is a relevant number. Koskinator v Lain on the other hand- Lain WILL NOT lose. Period.

 

[Tien2500]

I don't know I just thought I heard about it and if any of you knew.

Ganon exists. Sheik exists. Unicorn havent been proven to exist.
Are we rounding off or giving a answer?
It's probobly lower than 95-5, but it's not GUARENTEED to lose. Saying 0% means you WILL lose. Saying 0.1 w/e means the chance is extremely low but it's posable.

I'm not arguing about unicorns any more.

And why are we so fussy about 100:0? Is a 50:50 matchup going to wind up with each character winning half the time? The numbers aren't exact. They're all rounded to the nearest 5 points. (Except for the odd time a board decides to be cute and say something like 51:49).

And they're not even probability.

 

[Red Arremer]

Matchup-ratio numbers are stupid because noone knows what they mean exactly.

 

[Kantō]

the numbers mean nothing much really, statistics is all. if YOU dont know the matchup, those numbers dont mean ****.

 

[Kinzer]

At mid levels of play, 95-5 is a relevant number. Koskinator v Lain on the other hand- Lain WILL NOT lose. Period.

Not even if he's playing with a bullet wound?

...Well, that's irrelevant, ratios are made with the assumption of the capabilities of both characters with next to no mistakes, and of course outside forces like human error will alter that a bit, right?

 

[lloDownedu74]

I don't think there are such things as 100-0 matchups.... That means that no matter what, (I'm gueesing that the players have to be of equal skill), the character with the "0" will never win, even if they millions of matches. That doesn't sound very likely. I'm sure something will happen, like Ganon will spike ICs in match #13, giving him an advantage in the match. Or ICs miss an alt grab, giving Ganon the chance to dair the crap out of ICs...

I'm just saying that it not possible to never win (if the opponents are on the same skill level)

 

[Skadorski]

I'm not arguing about unicorns any more.

And why are we so fussy about 100:0? Is a 50:50 matchup going to wind up with each character winning half the time? The numbers aren't exact. They're all rounded to the nearest 5 points. (Except for the odd time a board decides to be cute and say something like 51:49).

Because that's saying it is guarentied that you will lose. Now I'm not saying Sheik vs. Ganon is 50:50, it's definatly worse that 90:10 (95:5 seems right), absolutely not. But it's not going to be guarentied.
Look at it like this:
If it was 100:0, then Ganon would not be able to even HIT Sheik.
Can Ganon hit Sheik once?

Read this 5 times, think about it and then answer. I'm off to bed.

 

[Tien2500]

Because that's saying it is guarentied that you will lose. Now I'm not saying Sheik vs. Ganon is 50:50, it's definatly worse that 90:10 (95:5 seems right), absolutely not. But it's not going to be guarentied.
Look at it like this:
If it was 100:0, then Ganon would not be able to even HIT Sheik.
Can Ganon hit Sheik once?

No 100:0 means that Ganon would not be able to KO sheik 3 times before he gets KOed unless the Sheik player is awful or ****s up really badly.

Anyway the numbers aren't a probability. There is no chance involved here (except like tripping involved). All the ratios are telling us is how good/bad a matchup is.

 

[Kinzer]

I don't think even tripping is a considered factor.

It's just the one thing making sure that MUs aren't by technical definition absolutely unwinnable.

 

[Red Arremer]

Doesn't change the fact that MU-ratios are still bullcrap and stupid.

What is 55:45 for one guy is 60:40 for the other guy going by the same definition.
Seriously, stop using those god awful numbers, all they do is bringing disagreement and stupidity.

 

[SuSa]

Even, Slight, Strong. Advantage/Disadvantage. Free Win, Impossible.

Only 8 phrases we need, wish more people would use them.

Anything further then Strong could arguably be considered Free Win/Impossible

So make that 6 phrases.

 

[Tien2500]

Doesn't change the fact that MU-ratios are still bullcrap and stupid.

What is 55:45 for one guy is 60:40 for the other guy going by the same definition.
Seriously, stop using those god awful numbers, all they do is bringing disagreement and stupidity.

Well there is always going to be a certain amount of ambiguity whenever you use any type of language. Nothing you can do will get around that.

 

[lloDownedu74]

Do the numbers represent the average amount of times each character wins in the MU? Like in a 35:65 MU, the 35% wins 35 times out of every 100 (usually)?
Or the chance of winning? Like they have a 35% of winning every match?
Because I have no idea... :O

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I use ratios as other fighting games do.

100-0 doesn't exist unless it it impossible to damage your opponent. If you can't hurt your opponent, then you have no possibility to win, thus the MU is 100-0.

Ganon can hurt them, thus the MU is not 100-0.

 

[Dekar173]

Let's just assume you're playing on an anti-trip wii- done!

100:0 exists.

 

[Tien2500]

Do the numbers represent the average amount of times each character wins in the MU? Like in a 35:65 MU, the 35% wins 35 times out of every 100 (usually)?
Or the chance of winning? Like they have a 35% of winning every match?

Well using them like that implies there is some sort of probability involved which there isn't. Really they just describe how bad/good a matchup is.

Personally I think of it as the degree to which you will have to outplay your opponent to win a match. In a 60:40 matchup you have to play a little better. A 70:30 match you have to be a lot better. A 100:0 match you have to be far far ahead of the current metagame.

 

[Rappster]

Doesn't change the fact that MU-ratios are still bullcrap and stupid.

What is 55:45 for one guy is 60:40 for the other guy going by the same definition.
Seriously, stop using those god awful numbers, all they do is bringing disagreement and stupidity.

he has a point.
i say that matchups, in the format of x:y should be defined as "when 2 equally matched players play, character 1 will take x stocks while character 2 takes y stocks"

this would never be accepted, however, because that'd mean everybody'd have to rewrite their mu threads

 

[Red Arremer]

I use ratios as other fighting games do.

100-0 doesn't exist unless it it impossible to damage your opponent. If you can't hurt your opponent, then you have no possibility to win, thus the MU is 100-0.

Ganon can hurt them, thus the MU is not 100-0.

Other fighting games have the matchup ratios as % of wins. And there are 100:0 ratios in some of them.
The difference is that other fighting games are simply better balanced than Smash (unless they're like... noname fighters or Castlevania Judgment), so there hardly are matchups that go beyond 7:3, and even those are rare.

 

[Skadorski]

Look at it like this:
If it was 100:0, then Ganon would not be able to even HIT Sheik.
Can Ganon hit Sheik once?

I use ratios as other fighting games do.

100-0 doesn't exist unless it it impossible to damage your opponent. If you can't hurt your opponent, then you have no possibility to win, thus the MU is 100-0.

Ganon can hurt them, thus the MU is not 100-0.

Hmm that's wierd.

Ganon can win, but it's incredibly rare. Like winning the lottery.

 

[gregWHO]

This thread is stupid. Ideal this, ideal that... bottom line: Ganon has severe disadvantages against Sheik in high levels of play.

But these ARE players playing these characters, not robots. Take any professional sport... you will, on rare occasions, have top tier teams lose to scrub teams. (Does anyone watch basketball? Lakers losing some games to the Rockets in last year's playoffs?)

Case in point: PEOPLE make mistakes. I'm tempted to go deeper into my basketball analogy, but the point is: playing at their full potential, there is NO way the Rockets should've won. (And remember, these are professionals. High levels of play, yes?)

MU advantages help minimize the mistakes the player with the MU advantage can make. They don't prevent the mistakes from happening.

 

[smashkng]

But isn't Sheik's chain a form of stalling just like MK's infinite cape or using HA with Sonic under a stage?

 

[Red Arremer]

Is chaingrabbing stalling?

 

[Tien2500]

But isn't Sheik's chain a form of stalling just like MK's infinite cape or using HA with Sonic under a stage?

No. I don't think so. Or at least its not considered such in the current ruleset. Its a wall that's made to prevent an opponent from approaching. It just happens to be really really really effective. Its practically impossible to approach her. With MK's infinite cape its literally impossible.

 

[smashkng]

Is chaingrabbing stalling?

As of the current ruleset, it's considered stalling if you infinite (like DDD on DK) and don't finish it after 300%.

 

[saviorslegacy]

Hmmmm... -_-
Another new possibility of a close to 0 - 100 is Oli vs Sheik (contradiction).
I recently tested with a buddy and our Chain can kill his Pikmin before the reach us. This includes FSmash, DSmash, Pikmin Throw and many other things.
Also, the chain out ranges his pivot grab.
Needle + Chain= win


I would just like to point out one small thing.
Ganon could have a chance vs the IC's on Norfair. He could utilize his Uair and Dair better + avoid them.
He might also be able to spike them intp lave and then spike again when they bounce back up.
A Ganon can win against an IC if he is extremely smart and avoids getting grabbed.

A Ganon can win against a Sheik.
If he used Wizkick down it is kinda tough to knock him out of it.
So that means even with enough practice our Chain isn't fool proof (unless you are Mang *SDI*).


Nothing in Brawl is fool proof. Dair camping can be beaten, IC's can be beaten and M2K can be beaten (lol).

Does anyone get what I'm trying to say?

But isn't Sheik's chain a form of stalling just like MK's infinite cape or using HA with Sonic under a stage?

It's not stalling since people can still get at us.

 

[Kinzer]

Let's just assume you're playing on an anti-trip wii- done!

100:0 exists.

Not even.

You CANNOT get rid of luck, no matter how much you may try to eliminate it.

How can you be so sure (technically, I know the situation I'm about to present has a very, very, VERY slim chance of happening, but by definition, is still there.) that a random glitch won't happen and it will end up in favor of Ganondorf?

Look at Ness' PKT Jacket in Melee. I don't know how that could've been discovered, but that tells me that even the most ludicrous thing can happen just like that, and suddenly everything has to be revised.

Until that may (or may not) happen, you still cannot assure to me that Ganon (for example, feel free to use any other character in any other fighting game) has a 100% chance to lose.

...Not that it really matters though, being realistic, it may not make a difference... -_-

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Other fighting games have the matchup ratios as % of wins. And there are 100:0 ratios in some of them.
The difference is that other fighting games are simply better balanced than Smash (unless they're like... noname fighters or Castlevania Judgment), so there hardly are matchups that go beyond 7:3, and even those are rare.

MvC2 is a rare example I guess.

I can't see a 100-0 existing unless MUGEN or some other BS is involved.

 

[Mr. Escalator]

100-0's don't exist in Brawl.
They do not.

In fact, the ratios we use aren't *quite* the same as other fighting game communities. We generally use ratios as a nod to the difficulty of a matchup, not the actual percentage of wins you get between equal skilled opponents.

 

[Red Arremer]

MvC2 is a rare example I guess.

I can't see a 100-0 existing unless MUGEN or some other BS is involved.

Uhh... IIRC a version of SFII had a 100-0 MU Zangief vs. Honda, though I forgot which version it exactly was.

 

[Steeler]

Ivysaur v everyone is dangerously close to a 0-100 matchup.

Ivysaur v Ivysaur is simply buffoonery. i did it once and we somehow gimped each other at the same time and it ended in a tie. and instead of sudden death, the wii ****ing EXPLODED.

IVYSAUR IS THAT BAD

 

[Tien2500]

Not even.

You CANNOT get rid of luck, no matter how much you may try to eliminate it.

How can you be so sure (technically, I know the situation I'm about to present has a very, very, VERY slim chance of happening, but by definition, is still there.) that a random glitch won't happen and it will end up in favor of Ganondorf?

Look at Ness' PKT Jacket in Melee. I don't know how that could've been discovered, but that tells me that even the most ludicrous thing can happen just like that, and suddenly everything has to be revised.

Until that may (or may not) happen, you still cannot assure to me that Ganon (for example, feel free to use any other character in any other fighting game) has a 100% chance to lose.

...Not that it really matters though, being realistic, it may not make a difference... -_-

You can't get rid of luck entirely in an actual matchup but you can get rid of it in a matchup ratio. Matchup ratios do not take into account things like drastic human error (I don't think we should assume that either player is playing "perfectly" but we should assume that the Ice Climbers aren't side Bing off the edge), drastic skill difference, random luck (tripping is all I can think of that would be luck in the IC/Dorf matchup, a player having a heart attack in the middle of a match, undiscovered glitches, G-dorf unplugging the ICs controllers or anything of the sort.

As of now there is no viable strategy a Ganondorf can use to beat an equally skilled ICs player at the top of the metagame when you take out all of the factors I mentioned above Ganondorf cannot win (unless he is way ahead of the metagame and knows something the rest of the community doesn't). 100:0 seems right.

 

[CRASHiC]

I'm pretty sure DDD vs. DDD gets like, in the negatives or something.

 

[Kinzer]

Oh man, don't even go into dittos.

It's a pime taradox, all on it's own.

 

[Tien2500]

I'm pretty sure DDD vs. DDD gets like, in the negatives or something.

DDD vs DDD is 0:0. In a D3 ditto there are no winners. Only losers.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

In Lucario dittos, no one gets % advantage everyone kills at the same time.

 

[Sasha]

I use ratios as other fighting games do.

100-0 doesn't exist unless it it impossible to damage your opponent. If you can't hurt your opponent, then you have no possibility to win, thus the MU is 100-0.

Ganon can hurt them, thus the MU is not 100-0.

Pretty much every fighting game in existence besides Smash uses damage meters. Say, for example, that the only move Fox could hit Pikachu with is his jab. Big whoop. He's not ever gonna kill Pikachu by jabbing because he can't be knocked off the stage by it.

So unless you play stamina mode, your argument is invalid.

100-0 MU's exist by rounding.

/thread

 

[CRASHiC]

That's not good argument Sasha. In fact, its more likely here because you can hit someone with your only viable move all day, but if its not going to kill them ever, then its pointless, say if Fox could only safely hit you with his jab. In stamina, it would eventually kill, but here, it will never kill.

 

[Tien2500]

That's not good argument Sasha. In fact, its more likely here because you can hit someone with your only viable move all day, but if its not going to kill them ever, then its pointless, say if Fox could only safely hit you with his jab. In stamina, it would eventually kill, but here, it will never kill.

I think that's exactly what he was saying.

 

[CRASHiC]

Then I misunderstood what she was saying.
EDIT- Yeah, I misread the quote she was responding too.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Pretty much every fighting game in existence besides Smash uses damage meters. Say, for example, that the only move Fox could hit Pikachu with is his jab. Big whoop. He's not ever gonna kill Pikachu by jabbing because he can't be knocked off the stage by it.

So unless you play stamina mode, your argument is invalid.

100-0 MU's exist by rounding.

/thread

Can you do damage despite the practicality of you winning? if the answer is Yes then it's not a 100-0.